Quote:
Originally Posted by Cretaceous Bob
This is a ridiculous statement.
War is a fact of life. War is a product of people wishing to inflict harm on others. Terrorism is a product of people wishing to inflict harm on others, so it is war. Thus, terrorism is a fact of life.
|
I agree, war is a law of society. You sir, don't know the definition of war. It's a state of
open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations. It's not wishing harm on people. That's call psychotic behavior. War has an endpoint, a goal to be reached. By your definition, genocide is war. Wrong. Terrorism IS inflicting harm on people with just that goal in mind. If there's a longer term goal in mind, it's convoluted and basically impossible to achieve, hence crazy talk. As far as your definition is concerned, Timothy McVeigh is a war veteran.
Humans have and always go to war, no question. It's a natural, evolutionary trait built into us. Terrorism is not open and declared, it's backstabbing crazy-person behavior.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cretaceous Bob
Then the only way you can contend terrorism shouldn't be a fact of life is that it is preventable. By your own admission world hunger is preventable, so why is that a fact of life?
|
I never said preventable, I said treated. You need to look up some definitions. Treatment is caring for a problem with the mindset that a 100% recovery may not be possible. If you treat Lou Gehrig's disease, the patient still dies but you can potentially help them live longer and have a better life. Treatment is not curing. I meant you can make the starvation less widespread, but the law is that it will always exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cretaceous Bob
There will always be a lowest rung on the economic ladder; that is a fact of life. That the very same group will starve is not.
|
You are arguing semantics. I was trying to use other vernacular to describe starving people. I'll give you that one I guess.