Posted by panch from customer-148-233-78-77.uninet.net.mx (22.214.171.124) on Wednesday, September 18, 2002 at 1:58PM :
In Reply to: Re: Sons of Ashur... don't we need more of these? posted by ashuroyo from qn-212-58-162-221.quicknet.nl (126.96.36.199) on Tuesday, September 17, 2002 at 7:08PM :
I have nothing against killing on principle...and several people deserve to die...slowly. But only after every possible and conceivable alternative to getting your way has been tried...really tried! When you kill...you lose, in the long run you lose because you affirm murder as a way of dealing with you as well..and your day WILL come.
Any military victory of ours would be a passing thing and earn us far more violence than we could mete out. If killing others really solved ones problems...Iīd be all for it. But it doesnīt...it wins you a few years a few centuries and then itīs your turn to be dealt with in the same fashion.
There is only one thing to do with guns...and it doesnīt take any brains...guns are for killing people you are in disagrement with. This way of taking care of business has to stop. Look to what absurd lengths Bush is going in order to solve his personal and political problems. We have all become insane with constant murder for centuries...so that we now kill children born into a conflict who never had the chance to offend anyone. How can we claim our own children are dear to us and then kill and starve other children? How can their be "enemy children"? Itīs because children too have become a commodity, a status symbol...the thing you simply MUST have. Their value is all tied up with their belonging to US...it is OUR property that we coo and blather over...not children as such. And the proof of that is not only in the way we kill children who are NOT our property...but how easily we neglect and then let go of our own children...if once they cease to service US and OUR sense of what we have coming to us for this major "investment" weīve made.
You canīt help to kill a child anywhere and love your own...not possible.
In Cheīs Bolivian diary, towards the end, there is a telling entry. He watched from ambush as a truckload of regular government soldiers went by. He was the one to start the ambush...his men waited on him to fire first. He wrote later of how he hadnīt been able to do it...because heīd caught a glimpse of the young boys in uniform...the one he would have killed. He knew enough to know that these boys were afraid...hadnīt many options...that to them military service meant beans and tortillas to send home. He couldnīt do it...and he broke the first law of guerilla warfare...to kill from the lowest to the highest...to terrorize and instill fear and loss of morale in the opposing forces...boys or not.
I often wonder if it was the same young soldier...plied with liquor, who stood Che up against a wall and executed him. I think he wondered about it too.
-- signature .
Post a Followup