[MD] sq social - sq intellectual

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting Gene M <boredandunstable at gmail.com>:

> I feel like I should make a point before I begun my rebuttal. You have
> started making near constant references to WWII. This is NOT WWII. The two
> are not even comparable in my mind. WWII was a social level conflict, it was
> to stop fascism and the biological atrocities allowed by that social
> pattern. It was opposed with social and biological patterns of it's own.
> This was just and right. I am down with it.
> 
> This is not about social patterns anymore. This a whole new breed of
> conlfict. This is intellectual patterns that we are fighting. We shouldn't
> want to destroy their culture and society, those things aren't at fault!
> This an intelletual pattern we are at war with. It has no home country, it
> has no bases, it has leaders, but they are replaceable and martyr-able.

At war with intellectual patterns? Were not the Nazis and Japanese intellectuals?
Did they not attempt to impose their intellectual patterns on their adversaries? 
And why isn't the Islamic culture at fault for not eliminating its agressive elements? 

Be assured that the necessity of fighting biology with biology, a necessity you 
agree with, has not changed since WW II any more than human nature has changed since
then. As Pirsig rightly pointed out, you cannot talk crime to death, and the
instrument of conversation between our society and a biological terrorist is a
soldier with a gun. That has not, nor will ever, change. Treating this conflict any
different than similar conflicts throughout the ages is, to borrow a phrase, "the
worst mistake we can make." Appeasing the likes of Iran, Syria, al Qaeda, Hamas and
Hesbollah will result in catastrophe -- a result that Pirsig predicted if amoral
intellectuals continue to appease biological forces by blaming anyone and anything
except the criminals for their acts.  



-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/