Quote:
Originally Posted by Jill
But as a nation, subject to laws that we and the rest of westernized, civilized nations have adopted, we simply cannot resort to diminishing ourselves by behaving like barbarians.
|
How exterminating the savage and the brutal diminishes us in
any moral dimension quite escapes me, Jill. Performing damage control is simply sensible.
We won against Germany, Italy, and Japan by showing the hard visage of war and outfighting them -- outcontending them in the field they themselves chose. Did this turn us into fascists of any description? It did not. There is nothing that would do it now. As Hannity puts it, "Let not your heart be troubled" on that score. Countervailing violence is defensible violence, and I for one defend it, and I think I can overwhelm all your arguments against it. Don't mistake the distasteful for the unnecessary. Remember it is distasteful to be murdered.
The terrs have been choosing their field. It's one rather new to us in some ways, but not wholly new in others, for we remember Vietnam. In some measure, this is a war being fought by advertising, guerrilla theater, whatever you like, along with community services in tattered places, bombs, helicopters, bullets, beans, and bayonets.
I am happy to agree their ability to actually damage us is small in the grand scheme of things. Nonetheless, that does not mean they should be allowed to damage. They are the transgressors thereby.
Their transgressions must be kept bootless and fruitless, that they may cease to transgress. Or become too dead to manage a transgression. This is what those who are clear on the matter want.