Jim, though not as convinced as you are of Hussein's "weapons of mass 
destruction," I can imagine him unleashing them if we initiate war. I 
do agree with your point about building a coalition, and yes, there 
are times to realize that innocents will die and military action may 
decrease such death. But I don't think the problem with pacificsm is 
that it excludes such "necessary" action. The problem is with people 
who can't create better ways to resolve problems than shoot at each 
other. We can argue about specific situations still needing military 
might, but how can we evolve as a societies and cultures when who has 
the biggest bombs defines who we are? Is there really a world need 
for a "super power"? Can we really sleep at night knowing Geoge Bush 
could "tactically" use a nuclear bomb if he felt threatened? How does 
our world improve if we accept such power and violence? Americans 
have shown the world over and over again that we can fight and fight 
well. How  this fighting power has "stopped" fighting may be 
intelligently argued, but I'm now arguing that it is the wrong 
strategy because it ultimately leads to more fighting. It takes peace 
to build a peaceful world, will
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Mon Aug 12 11:07:12 2002
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Aug 10 2003 - 20:48:46 EDT