Pacifists

[Didymus]

catholicinsd, what do you propose we do with Al-Quaeda and Bin Laden and even Ahmadinejad, especially if he is creating nuclear weapons and has expressed hostility towards the USand the innocent around him?

[catholicinsd]

2 wrongs have never made a right, Didy.

[Maggyie]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1259386' date='Apr 29 2007, 12:50 AM']2 wrongs have never made a right, Didy.[/quote]

You are certainly right about that! But a just war is not a wrong - it is a tragedy, like all war, but it is not sinful, according to the Catechism.

Notwithstanding your own personal pacifism, do you admit to at least the theoretical possibility that a [i]state[/i] could wage a just war? Even if in the modern age that situation might be quite rare? Or do you belong to that camp that finds war intrinsically evil? Just trying to get a read on where exactly you are on this

I'm not suggesting that any wars against Al Qaeda or Iran etc etc would be just or not, of course.

[jckinsman]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1258009' date='Apr 27 2007, 02:11 PM']Don't turn your head too fast or you'll whack someone with that huge frikking beam sticking out of your eye and that would go against your pacifism.[/quote]
I think that the word "Frikking" was way out of line! You could have used the word "oversized!" or "giant" or "LARGE" or "mondo-huge"*snickering* I spose that your non-pacifism, wants to fight now!????????? *snickering,bordering on laughter* JC

Edited April 29, 2007 by jckinsman

[jckinsman]

Bring it on......................your dealing with a non-pacifist also! So this should be a good battle!

[catholicinsd]

[quote name='Maggie' post='1259407' date='Apr 29 2007, 12:31 AM']You are certainly right about that! But a just war is not a wrong - it is a tragedy, like all war, but it is not sinful, according to the Catechism.[/quote]

And tragedy should be avoided, unless of course you're a sadist.

[Guest T-Bone]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1260857' date='Apr 30 2007, 02:27 PM']And tragedy should be avoided, unless of course you're a sadist.[/quote]

Sometimes war cannot be avoided.

[Maggyie]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1260857' date='Apr 30 2007, 05:27 PM']And tragedy should be avoided, unless of course you're a sadist.[/quote]

Of course, one should avoid war and all other tragedies, but sadly they are not always avoidable at all... What I am asking is, do you consider it theoretically possible for just wars to exist? I understand you wouldn't want to fight in them yourself. I was just wondering about your position vis a vis the state's responsibility for prosecuting war.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1260857' date='Apr 30 2007, 03:27 PM']And tragedy should be avoided, unless of course you're a sadist.[/quote]
Sometimes we are called to accept suffering and tragedy. It is incorrect to state that tragedy should be avoided. It shapes and changes who we are, and gives us an opportunity to become more like Christ in his suffering.

[catholicinsd]

In our global, modern world war- as we typically define it- is not nessecary. While there are sitiuations such the one in Darfur, (which the Right has ignored) which do require military intervetion, dilomacy is much better option than bloodshed.

[Knight of the Holy Rosary]

[quote]dilomacy is much better option than bloodshed[/quote]

That's for sure. But what happens when diplomacy is not an option? Unfortuanately, there are some folks who are dangerous, violent, and will not listen to reason. Bad combination.

[Domine ut Videam]

I can be....but if i feel passionately abou something i will stand up and let my voice be heard and i will not be afraid to take action if that is the course that needs to be pursued for change to come about.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1261062' date='Apr 30 2007, 06:03 PM']In our global, modern world war- as we typically define it- is not nessecary. While there are sitiuations such the one in Darfur, (which the Right has ignored) which do require military intervetion, dilomacy is much better option than bloodshed.[/quote]
No one is saying that diplomacy isn't the best way to handle things.

But, there are times when war is necessary. Not necessarily in our current military action, but there could be a possibility for a just war even in this day and age.

[catholicinsd]

[quote name='Terra Firma' post='1261645' date='May 1 2007, 11:25 AM']No one is saying that diplomacy isn't the best way to handle things.[/quote]

Well ya'll seem very trigger-happy.

[cathoholic_anonymous]

[quote]Well ya'll seem very trigger-happy.[/quote]

Most people on here support the Just War Theory of Thomas Aquinas, which states that war is a last resort as one of its guiding principles. That is not being trigger-happy.

[prose]

This thread is making me feel violent....

I generally don't go wild and start hitting people, and I am opposed to people who do. I don't like violence, but I believe that it is necessary sometimes.

[Winchester]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1261062' date='Apr 30 2007, 07:03 PM']In our global, modern world war- as we typically define it- is not nessecary. While there are sitiuations such the one in Darfur, (which the Right has ignored) which do require military intervetion, dilomacy is much better option than bloodshed.[/quote]
Which the right has ignored. Yeah, Alec Baldwin and the Leftist millionaires are busily arming themselves to go help. They're really breaking their backs to deal with it. We use diplomacy quite often. Iran--not a smoking crater. S. Korea, still a peninsula, not an island.

And a few pages back, I see the same attitude of shifting blame. If "we" hadn't screwed up, the Nazis wouldn't have been a problem. You mean if we had attacked sooner, or helped them ship out the unwanted peacefully? Do you ever blame the actor, or do you always shuffle it to those around? The Nazis were the fault of the Nazis. They didn't seek justice or the betterment of Germany, they sought pure power for themselves.

[ruso]

Catholicinsd, you are a good kid, a little wild, but good person, you do not change, And you never leave the church, we needed "crazy people" like your

[catholicinsd]

Thanks Ruso.

[Didymus]

[quote name='catholicinsd' post='1259386' date='Apr 28 2007, 11:50 PM']2 wrongs have never made a right, Didy.[/quote]

but that still doesnt answer my question. You mention how we're in an age where diplomacy theoretically is the end all. But radical islam is not in our age. There are groups bent on killing us, and diplomacy has not solved it, as they dont want us on their 'side' so much as they want us dead.

btw, you mention our own disputes with Iran as being 'wrong' even so much as to make it equal to Iran's deliberate aggression towards us. Can you not see the difference between the US's weapons threat (as we are a democracy looking to establish peace in parts of the world) and Iran's weapons threat (as Iran has already made it obvious that they want to take innocent lives and contribute to those likeminded)?

On Darfur, I believe their is much fault in the authority figures of this country (regardless of stance and party) for neglecting the state of aggression there, but that really does not add or subtract from anyone's arguments on this particular thread as to whether or not we are pacifist.