Quote:
|
Originally Posted by demonrail666
You have a very absolute attitude about it, namely that war is never an option. It provides an absolute answer. My problem is that I do believe in such a thing as a just and necessary war (even if only hypothetically) but that the criteria determining such a war is never absolute. In the end you're right, we are only really dealing with ideals. The dilemma comes with trying to determine which ideals are worth waging war for.
Also, you showed some admiration earlier in the thread for the IRA. Would you not say they were waging a war? They certainly would.
|
Again. I am aware of the contradictions that I am presenting, hence why I called them IDEALS. You can not necessarily reach ideals, but that does not invalidate their worth simply because they are unobtainable. I hold to the standard the WAR is never an option, is NEVER justifiable, and thus I condemn all acts of war BUT...
since this is in truth idealistic, then I also inevitably fall short of the ideal, and offer support for many militant groups and guerrillas, however, I do not universally support acts of war in the name of revolution. With the EZLN or the IRA, I support the cause, not necessarily the military mechanisms to achieve this cause. The IRA is NOT exclusively militaristic, the EZLN builds as many schools as they do militia groups, hire as many teachers as cadres. I would hope that in time, even and especially the militant revolutionaries EQUALLY aim for the IDEAL of true peace.
"There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people."
This applies equally to both the governments and the revolutionaries.