do you want to win the war on terror?

the crabboy threat is real and i'm not sure why the press is ignoring it as much as they do...

i think Nightline had a 5 minute segment on crabboy last year... and i heard Charlie Rose refernece crabboy on a couple of occassions... but the media is essentially silent on this one

every hilljack in west virginia can set their sofa on fire in the middle of the street if they want, but Ricky and Julian aren't just gonna sit by while the crabboy threat is out there

it's not enough that this bugsnot is in the pockets of half of washington, but the resistance to a CFB playoff is the real kicker

i really hope we can stop it before it's to late and america joins the likes of thr greeks, romans, and hittites

Your original question is framed illogically, and cannot be answered in its current form.

The correct question may be: "Do you want to end violence?"

I think, or at least I hope, that the moral majority desires peace, or desires the end of violence. But I could be wrong about that. Perhaps out of a global population of approx. 6.5 billion, 3.25 billion or so prefer violence.

Let's assume for a moment that the majority of the population desires the end of violence. If that's true, then the question must be, "How do we achieve the end of violence?" (If most people want it, we should probably try to achieve it.)

To answer this question, I think we must first analyze the origin of the violence.

Why do people commit violent acts? There are a number of reasons. Vengeance, rage, dogmatic principals, pathology, self-defense, and many others.

The United States, since WW2, has taken it upon themselves to police the entire planet, and to impose their idea of morality on the world, whether the world likes it or not.

(This is the US's ostensible strategy. It couldn't possibly hurt that Americans who are in positions of power -- themselves, or in collusion with lawmakers -- stand to make vast sums of money from this "policing" by being stakeholders in defense corporations. But this is tangential to my main point.)

Could it be that there are those in the world who are motivated to commit violent acts, particularly against Americans, for the simple reason that they do not wish to be policed, and that they object to having someone else's moral code imposed upon them and their fellow citizens, typically by violent means, in their own independent sovereign nation?

I think it's possible.

When those people, who feel oppressed, become motivated to commit violent acts against Americans, people in the world seem to like to brand those acts, "terrorist acts." When Americans commit violent acts against anyone outside of America, it is somehow seen as noble and justified.

Any act of violence, provoked or not, regardless of who commits it, is wrong and abhorrent. (Except for ultra-rare exceptions, such as self-defense against imminent threat of immediate death, though the Christian and Buddhist philosophies would argue even against this as a justification.)

The next question is, "How does one respond when an act of violence occurs?"

The answer is in the law. One investigates thoroughly, locates and arrests the person(s) directly responsible, tries them, and sentences them. (If we were a humane society, we would recognize that it is important to isolate violent criminals, but always try to rehabilitate them if possible.)

The answer is not retaliation with further violence.

It occurs to me that Americans, nor most citizens of the western world, do not consider that acts of violence are triggered by some specific motive, or provoked by some specific act. To avoid this analysis is ridiculous and a logic failure.

Let us awaken from this dream where western cultures are pure and noble and beyond reproach and simply the innocent victims of "terrorist acts". Let us recognize what is more likely the truth: that western cultures are targets of retaliatory acts from people who have been oppressed by our pathological need to impose our military might, and our supposedly higher moral standard, upon them.

We are wrong for policing. They are for retaliating. We are doubly wrong for retaliating back.

In order to end violence, one can begin with this kind of analysis, or something like it.

This kind of process may obviate further retaliation, which by its very nature, does absolutely nothing to end violence, but in fact, achieves the exact opposite. The cycle is perpetuated indefinitely until the species is finally extinct.

HAIL to you "marlinssuperfan"! Couldn't have said it better myself.

As I have never been to Iraq nor have I been in military service, my life or role in life does not fit YOUR demographic. But I am observant and am intelligent enough to grasp the content of what this Non-Western enemy of ours states with their own mouths.

My hearing is not hampered or hindered when I hear their words exclaim that every American is "the great Satan or infidel" and that we should be anihilated for our very way of LIFE. THEY MEAN EVERY WORD OF IT!

As many have realized (those who have their eyes open in any case) as I have, that I would much rather our fight be on soil outside the United States or the continent of North America. And it is critical that we maintain our strength as "one nation, under God, with liberty and justice for ALL".

We must deal with and realize that our enemies, who are non-western, do not see life on earth this way. They view it as quite the contrary.

------By their standards or way of LIFE: There will be NO Life--------------NO Liberty, NO Justice, NO Freedom--------------
------And ultimately (if they had their way through terror)... NO Just Pursuits which lead to: Life, Liberty, & Pursuit of any kind of happiness.

Keep all our troops in prayer DAILY and in conscious thought and meditation. I am grateful for all our troops' efforts, sacrifice, work, lives, etc.

"Speak softly, and carry a big stick."
By: Theodore "Teddy" Roosevelt

[deleted]