It is bad.

[bogie]

Well, being that I came outta the gun safe a LONG time ago, I've gotten into a few cafeteria discussions, generally with academics (I work in an R&D lab) who at one point or the other in the conversation, will ask me how I can be violent.

I tell them I'm a pacifist.

They look sincerely puzzled. I then explain that being a pacifist is a lot easier when one possesses the capability of intense violence, in that the bad guys do not bother you.

I think about the only fellow who "got" it was an Israeli...

So many "non-gun" folks (as opposed to the political antis...) see "gun" people as something between Elmer Fudd and Charlie Bronson... The media seems to think that we're all spoiling for a fight - that's the first hurdle we've got to cross.

Nothin' wrong with being an armed pacifist, is there? You gotta problem widdat?

 

[GT]

Iapetus, my apologies, you are absolutely right about Ghandi and I was absolutely wrong.

G

 

[QuickDraw]

Here at ground zero of the lefty,pacifists,
it seems everybody and their brothers Volvo has a
Free Tibet bumpersticker.
Now how can you free Tibet if your:
A.12,000 miles away in the most free country in the world
B.A pacifist?

Thing that make ya go hmmmm.

QuickDraw

 

[Double Maduro]

QuickDraw,

Now how can you free Tibet if your:
A.12,000 miles away in the most free country in the world
B.A pacifist?

You take most favored nation status away from China until they free Tibet.

You don't let our retailers buy from Chinese companies. WalMart alone did $85,000,000,000 in business with China last year.



Two good places to start and not a shot fired or soldier deployed.

DM

 

[Koobuh]

Pacifism is the philisophical first resort of those who lack the ability or fortitude to do violence on their own behalf. Given the ability to do violence (i.e., as part of a mob of protestors), many a pacifist will often strike out at the target of their ire- usually authority figures, the ideologically opposed, etc.
It is only when they are at swordpoint that they say 'violence is bad'.

This is of course a gross generalization.

Silverlance, sir, I am afraid you are grossly mistaken.
Have you examined the numbers that are available for the amount of aid the U.S./Western countries send to our enemies? The volume of governmental aid is staggering, and is often overwhelmed by the amount of charity aid (in the case of African nations).
Our enemy is little different from the Nazis and Imperial Japanese. They wish to dominate, not coexist. Osama Bin Laden wishes to have the world under his feet, not just his own region. Therefore he and his 'followers' make war with the entire world, including those he is proscribed from harming (Muslims, no matter their sect, are supposedly immune from Muslim violence- yet they even have been targeted in Saudi and elsewhere) by Islamic Law, which they claim to be upholding.
The enemy is not Islam, it is not Iraq, it is not a group of oppressed people wishing simply to go on living if the Great Satan America will simply leave them alone. It is violent Wahhabi followers, inspired by Bin Laden and others, wishing to destroy the present world and everyone in it that is not them- thereafter to install a worldwide Caliphate peopled only by Wahhabists.

And you say we must 'understand' and 'try to reach' these people? They want you and your entire family to convert or die, not necessarily in that order. They want my family and me to convert or die, more likely in reverse priority. They want everyone in the U.S., Canada, Britain, Saudia Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Polynesia, Malaysia, and Africa, to convert to the Wahhabi sect or die, preferably the latter if they can manage it.

Good luck on that whole windmill charging thing, sir. I'll keep my weapons and wits about me, and support the ones who are working to destroy these people.
I'll say this for the communists; at least they simply wanted to rule us all to eventual worldwide ruin (and coincidentally their enrichment) rather than cut our heads off with dull woodsaws today.