posted August 21, 2006 02:15 PM            

Ghandi succeeded in India because he opposed British rule, and
Britian was an open society with a free press that embarrassed
the government into caving in. Had Ghandi tried the same tactics
against a nation like Nazi Germany, he and millions would have
been rounded up and slaughtered.

Dwight Eisenhower saw enough war, and the concentration camps, that
it sickened him. As president, his goal was to do whatever it took
to keep America out of another war. But that meant building the
nucleus of the industrial-military complex and stockpiling an
arsenal with long range delivery capabilites so that America
would be far too strong to invite attack.

America has remained apart from those of other cultures, races,
and beliefs, clinging to its own identity which is not near as
uniform and emcompassing as its commonly taken to be. Look how
many groups have been discriminated against thoughout our
history -- native americans, blacks, chinese, japanese, latinos,
jews, irish, catholics, buddists, mormons, gays, and many others.
The seeds of discrimination grow deep, and though there has been
signs of some process, I don't think you can argue that we have
been entirely successful in bringing parity to all groups.

America is one of a handful of nations that is responsive to its
constituency, meaning a democracy or republic, but the type of
utopia you seem to believe in has not been realized in any of them.
From what I've read, Britian was better at balancing ita mixed
society, but it has now facing dispairity between a muslem
minority and the larger community, and finding that terrorism
grows at home as well as abroad.

Ideas that peace can somehow prevail if we all start thinking
nobly and acting with great restraint fail to hold up in the
harsh light of history. The more concessions made to appease
Hitler, the more determined he became to seize all of Europe.
Under Napoleon, conquered nations had to submit to his family
rule, and give over their armies and resources to his ambitious
effort to subjugate even Russia to his thurst to rule.

It isn't that these individuals were that exceptional, but rather
that some part of our very nature allows us to be manipulated in
this fashion, and forced to become part of something which we are
not really inclined towards.

At what point do you expect lofty ambitions and goals will sway
those who are set upon doing you great harm? It isn't near
enough to sit back and state loudly "I mean no harm to anyone.
Can't you just leave me alone? Can't we just live in peace?"
All you are doing is signalling that you should be an easy
conquest, as you are obviously displaying your fear as you cower
back in your little nitch, trying to be safe from the world.

posted August 21, 2006 04:52 PM            

quote:

---

All you are doing is signalling that you should be an easy
conquest, as you are obviously displaying your fear as you cower
back in your little nitch, trying to be safe from the world.

---

Amen. Perfectly said and clearly understood by those who "get it".

Unfortunately, there are far too many who have not learned history, or learned from it. There are far to many who honestly believe you can negotiate with evil and live. That doesn't happen, plain and simple.

posted August 21, 2006 06:29 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joe Byrne:

Unfortunately, there are far too many who have not learned history, or learned from it.
There are far to many who honestly believe you can negotiate with evil and live. That doesn't happen, plain and simple.

---

yeah we know we've tried to negotiate!

it IS near impossible to negotiate with people dead set in thier ways, how-ever we can stop creating 'new' people who hate
to the extent they are blinded to anything but violence. I know that someday a Great Nation will rise up and prove that 'peace' can
be found without war, I have always hoped that the USA would be that Great Nation, but maybe not.