[Vision2020] [CORRECTED LINK] Give Devoted Military a Worthwhile War to Fight

[Chasuk]

On 12/28/06, Tony <tonytime at clearwire.net> wrote:

> Tom, add all your organizations opposed to the war together and you have a minority of vets overall.  My point stands.

Truth has never been decided by the majority, nor by an appeal to
authority.  In other words, no matter how numerous or impressive a
list of Iraqi war opponents Tom conjures, it doesn't make him right.
However, that Tom isn't demonstrably right doesn't make him
automatically wrong, just it doesn't make you automatically right.

This contentious issue can never be decided with infallibility.
History won't even tell us; hindsight teaches different lessons
depending on the agenda/viewpoint of the interpreter.  Sometimes, it
teaches no lessons at all.

I am opposed to the war because I am a pacifist.  My pacifism is not
absolute; I am not opposed to the use of violence under ALL
circumstances, but most of the time.  In this war, I do not believe
that our participation is moral or justified.  The current
administration hasn't persuaded me otherwise, and I have no patriotic
compunction to support our government when I feel it has made the
wrong decision.

I don't think that you are stupid for supporting the war, nor do I
think that Tom is clever for opposing it.  I remain as intellectually
neutral/agnostic as possible on matters than are undecidable.  When
passions interfere, logic disintegrates, and meaningful dialogue
becomes an impossibility.  I know, I am frequently incapable of
reigning my passions, but I do try, honestly.

I will tell you a true story that is perhaps relevant.  Years ago, I
became friends with a Baptist minister who was willing to discuss
anything dispassionately, even the validity of his faith.  We politely
argued for about 18 months, nearly every day, with me championing the
non-theistic side.  I wasn't interested in persuading him, these were
mere intellectual games.  However, I finally, and quite accidentally,
converted him to atheism.  He cried a lot.  I felt bad, and tried to
turn him back to Christianity.  He had a nervous breakdown shorty
afterwards, and we lost contact, so I've never known whether his faith
was ever restored.

I respect that type of Christianity.  Not because he "converted," but
because of his intellectual integrity.  It is the type of intellectual
integrity to which I aspire, but have sadly seldom achieved.  Still,
even though this level of integrity is often beyond my capabilities, I
still expect it of everyone.  not that they have achieved it, of
course, but that it is a goal to which they aspire.

When I say "everyone," I am engaging in hyperbole.  I don't really
mean everyone; not everyone has any intellectual aspirations or
pretensions at all.  Some, even with the aspirations, aren't
temperamentally capable of it.  Some are just stupid.  I am NOT
suggesting that you, or Tom, or even most people on this list fall
into the latter category (yes, there are a few).  In your case, you
demonstrate the intellectual ability, but I genuinely don't see the
intellectual integrity.  You seem more keen on winning the argument at
all costs than on seeking a facsimile of truth.

So, I ask you this: do you value intellectual integrity?  If Tom's, or
someone else's, argument persuaded you that the war in Iraq was wrong,
or that abortion was the woman's choice, would you ever admit it
publicly?

This question is sincere.  I am not baiting, trolling, or insinuating
anything.  I ask because I consider Vision2020 an important forum, but
I only enjoy participating if I believe that my adversaries and allies
are participating as honestly as I am.

Chas