I've just figured out how to wipe out Hezbollah...

[rooboy]

Put the Republicans in charge of it.

[EFerrari]

1. That would take care of our domestic terrorism problems, too. nt

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. There is only one way to destroy an enemy

and that is to make him your friend.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

3. Cute, but wrong. n/t

[lonestarnot]

4. Way wrong.

[lonestarnot]

5. very way fucking wrong.

[Lerkfish]

6. actually, he/she is correct

as long its an eye for an eye, it will continue until both sides run out of eyes.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

8. Enough with the hyperbole.

The idea that there is only one way to defeat an enemy is historically incorrect and intelectually cheap. Fascism in Europe was not defeated by becoming friends with the fascists. France and the United States were not defeated in Vietnam because the NVA made friends with them. The list goes on and on.

[Lerkfish]

9. actually, I don't think I'm being hyperbolic at all.

I think I"m being accurate of the current situation, unfortunately.

and, in regards to your arguments, I disagree. EVENTUALLY we became friends with fascist countries after defeating them. But in no historical instance where no overtures of cooperation were seriously made has a conflict ever ended. As long as it remains tit for tat, it continues indefinitely.

I find your view of history does not coincide with mine, as its a bit too simplistic. But that's ok, we can disagree.

However, next time DO try to understand words before you hurl them at others. Hyperbole means an exagerration. Characterizing this present exchange as an eye for an eye is not exaggeration. It is about revenge.

[lonestarnot]

10. Destroy the enemy by creating more until all parties are destroyed.

I would like to think that it will be stopped before total annihilation occurs. So still way wrong.

[Lerkfish]

15. If you do not arrive a treaty at some point (making friends), then

what stops a war except continual attrition until no one is left, right?

Even a surrender is a treaty. What are you suggesting is "right"? you haven't said.

[cigsandcoffee]

7. That depends on the enemy.

I wouldn't want to be chummy with a Hitler or Pol Pot.

[TahitiNut]

12. Agreed. (Contrary to the knuckle-dragging idiocy of M.A.D. advocates.)

"Man's enemies are not demons, but human beings like himself." - Lao Tzu

"To know your enemy, you must become your enemy." - Sun Tzu

"If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat." - Sun Tzu

"To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting." - Sun Tzu

"It is easy enough to be friendly to one's friends. But to befriend the one who regards himself as your enemy is the quintessence of true religion. The other is mere business." - Gandhi

"The only safe way to overcome an enemy is to make of the enemy a friend." — Gandhi


And then there's ...
"We need a common enemy to unite us." - Condoleezza Rice
:puke:

[cigsandcoffee]

14. Please explain this philosophy in the context of Hitler or Caligula

Cheers in advance.

[TahitiNut]

16. If you're actually interested

... then I suggest you follow your own path of learning, perhaps reading "Gandhi And Beyond: Nonviolence for an Age of Terrorism" by David Cortright and "Non-Violent Resistance" by M. K. Gandhi . You could also try "Way of the Peaceful Warrior: A Book That Changes Lives" by Dan Millman but I suspect you wouldn't be able to bring yourself to read it all. After some reading and contemplation, you might be inclined to ask more meaningful/fruitful questions.

If you're not actually interested, then no answer is worth anyone's time. :shrug:

[cigsandcoffee]

18. If I read the books...

...you'll then tell me how we could have made Hitler our friend instead of blasting him off the map?

Put your money where your mouth is, and defend your assertion. Explain in a short paragraph how this philosophy would work with a tyrant like Hitler. Otherwise, I'll have to believe it's just so much wishful thinking, and the result of Gandhi dealing with a declining British colonial regime instead of a fascist organization like the Nazis (or Hezbolla).

[TahitiNut]

19. No... YOU "put YOUR money where YOUR mouth is," Sir.

As my reply indicated, the "answers" you pretend to seek are probably book-length, not some glib one-paragraph post in some nonsense pissing match that you seem to invite. You say, "I'll have to believe it's just so much wishful thinking." No... that's what you already choose to believe and have no apparent interest in learning otherwise.

Go find another monkey. :shrug:

[cigsandcoffee]

21. And go find someone who will fail to recognize your cheap dodge, Sir.

"If you want an answer, go read these books." Please...

It's painfully obvious that one can't be "friends" with a Hitler, and that passive resistence won't do a damn thing when confronted with militant fascism. One needs to destroy leaders like him before normal relations can ensue. Even Gandhi would have known that.

[cynatnite]

17. Do you want to make friends with bush? n/t

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

20. If a friendship meant he would change also

in my belief system, we are all interconnected, which means, like it or not, there is a connection between Bush and me and you.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. They already have a symbiotic relationship with Israel.

Without Israel the fundamentalist movements and the governments of the Middle East would have to face restive populations who want something other, or more, than prayer rugs and backwardness.

Without the fundamentalists, Israeli politicians would have a helluva a hard time justifying the seizure of lands, water conflicts, and a secular state.

They are, in effect, each other's raison de etre.

[enigma000]

13. Why would Israeli politicians have to justify a secular state?

Israelis tend to be a secular and progressive people. If Israel was a US state, I think it would be a blue one.

Besides, they had an election in March; the two parties that advocated withdrawal from the West Bank came in first and second place & formed the government.