Text 21396, 99 rader
Skriven 2006-01-08 15:08:00 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
  Kommentar till text 21190 av Frank Vest (1:124/6308.1)
Ärende: Editor's censorship
===========================
Hallo Frank,

 Mv>>  Mv>> We have a saying here: "your freedom to wave your fist
 Mv>>  MV>> ends where my nose begins." There are limits to what one
 Mv>>  MV>> may do in following one's beliefs. The USA is not
 Mv>>  MV>> condemned for following up on her beliefs, but for not
 Mv>>  MV>> respecting other's noses when waving her fist.

 >> I can agree with that. The terrorist of 9/11 did not respect
 >> our nose.

 Mv>> True, but that still does not give you te right to wave your fist
 Mv>> around disregarding the noses of others

 > Turn the other cheek? That works well until one runs out of cheeks. ;)

By "others" I did not mean the terrortst. I meant "others", ie: people or
countries that are not involved. Actually I waondert why you drag terrorists in
at all. This subthread started with th US attempting to impose their laws on
other countriers. They have been doing that way before 9/11.

And they are still doing it on countries that have no ties with terrosrists
whatsoever. So what is the connection?

 > Sorry. If one hits you, you hit back. If the terrorists hit
 > you, hit back.

Hit back at whom or what?

Hit back at the person(s) who comitted the suicide attack? That's not possible.
Throw a couple of bombs at the country they supposedly came from? That's a
startegy guarateed to breed more terrorists as the people in that country will
not understand why they got punsished for the actions of people they do not
control.

 > A good way to escalate a difference into a war, but it
 > seems to be the way things happen....

Even with a well defined opponent it is a guaranteed recipe for escalation and
risk of total annihilation of th eweakest party. With a diffuse opponent as
"the terrorist" it is guaranteed.

 > and the only thing the terrorists understand.

It would appear that it is the terrorists that assume that violence is the only
thing that *you* understand.

It seems both are wrong and right at the same time.

 >> but I still would not wish to take a knife to a gun fight. ;)
 Mv>> You got it backwards: it is the terrorists that have the knife.

 Mv>> By fighting the knife with a gun you are only giving the
 Mv>> opponent a reason to want a gun too.

 > Yes, and if you turn the other cheek and you get hit again and
 > again, what then?

You might want to think about why you got hit in the first place.

 > I really don't have an answer. I just know that this radical
 > group of terrorists can't be allowed to win.

Like it or not, they *are* winning. The present startegy does not seem to work.

 > I have no desire to change languages and/or religions... or other
 > such things. By constantly backing up from and "understanding"

You have no choice. You can not win the violent way. You should learn from
Europe. The IRA and the ETA did not stop until we finally started to *listen*
to what they really wanted.

 > world encourages their behaviour and will eventually lead to a
 > global dominance by them. That is their stated goal in their
 > interpretation of their holy book.

By some interpretaion. So says the book of the Christians by some
interpretation.

 > I'll live and let live,

There is the heart of the problem: you (y'all) *say* yoy live and let live, but
in reality you do not. The US foreign plicy is no one of live and let live, but
spread the word of the American Way Of Life.

 > but when someone slaps me, I tend to get a bit pissed.

And the reason your were slapeed was because you pissed of th other.

 > I may have to take it because I'm smaller, but if I'm not smaller,

Than you may want to give some serious thought to the question: "who is the
smaller?" Is it the bear or is it the virus?


Cheers, Michiel

---
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)