As you sit in your ivory tower and cleanly contemplate the sins of those outside its walls, your sanitized soft and clammy hands typing furiously an imagined righteous rage, remember that everything you have, from the electricity to power your computer and air conditioning, to your freedom to spew such entitled foolishness, exists because of those far more capable than you. The lineman that fixes your electric is far more valuable to everyone than you, who can do nothing but whine and complain from the comfort of your sofa. The soldier who defends your rights with skills no one should have to have, but sacrifices his peace of mind to attain - again - worth a hundred of you. The list is long, my fellow American.
Shit, now that I think about it...given all the hate your columns express, what we really need are more of them and less of you. When you look in the mirror, how do you stand yourself?
You think that terrorist are morally superior to solders! What universe are you living in? 😲 I doubt that you have ever been to a place where the Taliban were in complete control! Solders have to answer for any crimes or actions that they take the Taliban don't and encourage their men to rape and control women. WAKE UP!
I am glad that you care enough about this problem to address the issues I raised.
First, I should state that I despise the objectives of the Taliban, and I loathe their barbaric tactics. I think my intense distaste for the Taliban appears in the very title of this essay, "The Taliban is terrible -- and Terrorism has nothing to do with it."
The thrust of my essay is simply this: Soldiers will kill simply because their government orders them to kill. A soldier may know nothing about the issues in contention or the history giving rise to the conflict. He will kill because he is told to kill. I think that anyone who kills on command is morally suspect. No, the word suspect is too weak. I think to kill without any reason to kill other than the orders of one's commander, or one's Fuhrer, is grotesque.
Most or all of the people who are called terrorists belong to organizations that are stateless. Because they are stateless, most of the time they have not been ordered to kill per the State. They are killing because they believe in something, fiercely, fervently and ferociously. Their beliefs may be utterly misguided, However, in this gaudy, vulgar materialistic world in which most people never give a damn about ideas or causes, I have a soft spot in my heart for people who care about something, even if they are bloodthirsty.
And speaking of the bloodthirsty. Of course, terrorists have committed many bloodthirsty deeds. But soldiers are just as bloodthirsty, but they may do their murders from 30,000 feet and with the protection and the patina of false worthiness conferred on them because they kill per state action.
Your comment reminded me of something FDR said at a Madison Square Garden Rally on the eve of the 1936 election. In noting that the captains of industry and economic royalists hated him, he famously said, "I welcome their hatred." (The ground erupted in jubilant applause) I welcome your hatred, if in fact you hate me.
Re the points that you made: I thought I made it abundantly clear that I hated the Taliban. My problem with soldiers, who follow the commands of the State, with ":terrorists" is this: The so called terrorist enlists in his battles because he furiously, passionately, believes in something. He may be a member of the Haganah who fought the British because he believed in a Jewish state. He may be an Arab who believes in an Arab state, etc. The soldier, by contrast, kills only because has been ordered to kill,. He may kill South Vietnamese peasants by burning them alive with napalm. He may not know anything about the underlying conflict, or the immediate conflict. He may be deaf, dumb and blind to Ho Chi Minh's valiant defense of Vietnam from Japanese invaders, the long history of Vietnam's quasi enslavement at the hands of French Imperialists, America's decision to cancel the 1956 elections because America feared the communists would win, and the fascist proclivities of our allies (Vice President Ky said he wished South Vietnam had 5 Hitlers) but he will kill simply because he is ordered to kill.
You miss an important point: The only reason terrorists have a smaller body count is that they have more limited means of destruction - they are forced by circumstance to kill up close. Imagine the death toll were terrorists to have access to a nuke or a bioweapon. Their zealotry would end the world. The Taliban kill because that is what they do and have done, if called by different names, for centuries. Look at the history of the Pashtuns, for example.
Your logic is flawed. And, your title does not indicate the content of your article. Pseudo-intellectual, you are, at best.
As you sit in your ivory tower and cleanly contemplate the sins of those outside its walls, your sanitized soft and clammy hands typing furiously an imagined righteous rage, remember that everything you have, from the electricity to power your computer and air conditioning, to your freedom to spew such entitled foolishness, exists because of those far more capable than you. The lineman that fixes your electric is far more valuable to everyone than you, who can do nothing but whine and complain from the comfort of your sofa. The soldier who defends your rights with skills no one should have to have, but sacrifices his peace of mind to attain - again - worth a hundred of you. The list is long, my fellow American.
Shit, now that I think about it...given all the hate your columns express, what we really need are more of them and less of you. When you look in the mirror, how do you stand yourself?
You think that terrorist are morally superior to solders! What universe are you living in? 😲 I doubt that you have ever been to a place where the Taliban were in complete control! Solders have to answer for any crimes or actions that they take the Taliban don't and encourage their men to rape and control women. WAKE UP!
I am glad that you care enough about this problem to address the issues I raised.
First, I should state that I despise the objectives of the Taliban, and I loathe their barbaric tactics. I think my intense distaste for the Taliban appears in the very title of this essay, "The Taliban is terrible -- and Terrorism has nothing to do with it."
The thrust of my essay is simply this: Soldiers will kill simply because their government orders them to kill. A soldier may know nothing about the issues in contention or the history giving rise to the conflict. He will kill because he is told to kill. I think that anyone who kills on command is morally suspect. No, the word suspect is too weak. I think to kill without any reason to kill other than the orders of one's commander, or one's Fuhrer, is grotesque.
Most or all of the people who are called terrorists belong to organizations that are stateless. Because they are stateless, most of the time they have not been ordered to kill per the State. They are killing because they believe in something, fiercely, fervently and ferociously. Their beliefs may be utterly misguided, However, in this gaudy, vulgar materialistic world in which most people never give a damn about ideas or causes, I have a soft spot in my heart for people who care about something, even if they are bloodthirsty.
And speaking of the bloodthirsty. Of course, terrorists have committed many bloodthirsty deeds. But soldiers are just as bloodthirsty, but they may do their murders from 30,000 feet and with the protection and the patina of false worthiness conferred on them because they kill per state action.
Your comment reminded me of something FDR said at a Madison Square Garden Rally on the eve of the 1936 election. In noting that the captains of industry and economic royalists hated him, he famously said, "I welcome their hatred." (The ground erupted in jubilant applause) I welcome your hatred, if in fact you hate me.
Re the points that you made: I thought I made it abundantly clear that I hated the Taliban. My problem with soldiers, who follow the commands of the State, with ":terrorists" is this: The so called terrorist enlists in his battles because he furiously, passionately, believes in something. He may be a member of the Haganah who fought the British because he believed in a Jewish state. He may be an Arab who believes in an Arab state, etc. The soldier, by contrast, kills only because has been ordered to kill,. He may kill South Vietnamese peasants by burning them alive with napalm. He may not know anything about the underlying conflict, or the immediate conflict. He may be deaf, dumb and blind to Ho Chi Minh's valiant defense of Vietnam from Japanese invaders, the long history of Vietnam's quasi enslavement at the hands of French Imperialists, America's decision to cancel the 1956 elections because America feared the communists would win, and the fascist proclivities of our allies (Vice President Ky said he wished South Vietnam had 5 Hitlers) but he will kill simply because he is ordered to kill.
You miss an important point: The only reason terrorists have a smaller body count is that they have more limited means of destruction - they are forced by circumstance to kill up close. Imagine the death toll were terrorists to have access to a nuke or a bioweapon. Their zealotry would end the world. The Taliban kill because that is what they do and have done, if called by different names, for centuries. Look at the history of the Pashtuns, for example.
Your logic is flawed. And, your title does not indicate the content of your article. Pseudo-intellectual, you are, at best.
See my response, sent a few minutes ago, to another comment on this thread