From: Technotranscendence (neptune@mars.superlink.net)
Date: Sat Apr 06 2002 - 10:23:02 MST
On Saturday, April 06, 2002 9:13 AM Mike Lorrey mlorrey@datamann.com
wrote:
> In the Cold War, all that was at stake was a means of doing business.
We
> could afford to let marginal pissant nations like Yugoslavia and
> Southwest Scrotum, as well as dead weight basketcases like India to
> declare themselves 'nonaligned'. The current conflict is between
> civilization itself and ignorant darkness. Spectators are not allowed.
Actually, though I'm not old enough to remember much, from all I've
seen, heard, and read about the Cold War, the nonalligned nations were
basically looked at by the anti- and pro-Communists as helping the other
side. The talk about not being nuetral extends to almost every conflict
in history. People generally for one side or another want to get
everyone else involved and project it as the deciding struggle in
history -- as well as to take the moral high ground. This seems to be
the case with every war I've studied from the [Second] Peloponnesian War
to the Punic Wars to modern wars.
In fact, I don't recall any modern war where someone said, "Oh, the
outcome really is minor and doesn't matter much and the enemy is not
evil, but we're going to get them anyway. So let's go!" Care to
correct me here?
Cheers!
Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:16 MST