On my exchange with New Liberty Creation. If Matt decides to respond again, I’ll leave him with the last word and let it rest.
No analogy is perfect and the 90 year old crippled guy analogy is no exception. I used that analogy to illustrate two specific points:
1. In some cases, under the right circumstances, threats from even the most unlikely of sources should be taken seriously.
2. Defending oneself against a weaker opponent does not a bully make.
In order to make that analogy work for the further question of the validity of a preemptive attack, we should make sure we are defining things in the same ways. For example: when you ask if I would have the right to attack the threatening 90 year old cripple “first” I must ask: First before what?
If he points the gun at me, do I have the right to defend myself, or must I wait for him to take a shot and hope that he doesn’t kill me before I’m justified in acting? If he points the gun at one of my children, must I wait until the child is dead before I can act in their defense?
I would submit that if we feel it necessary to wait until the first bomb goes off, we waited too long. I’m not personally willing to sacrifice my family, or yours…or even to risk their sacrifice for that matter…so that I can feel morally superior.
Besides which, as you well know, even after an attack, there would be camps that argue against any counter-attack on the grounds that such an attack would be nothing more than “retribution” or “vengeance” and would be morally wrong.
So, we are morally bankrupt for acting to prevent an attack, but we are likewise morally bankrupt if we react to an attack after it occurs. Sounds like a lose-lose to me.
Our choices are to submit to being slaughtered or be considered morally bankrupt. I will never submit to the slaughter of my fellow countrymen; therefore, if I’m going to be considered morally bankrupt, it may as well be for doing something preemptive and perhaps saving lives than for taking vengeance after many lives have already been lost.
To the next point:
Is our hatred and animosity of Islamic terrorists “understandable”?
Hatred does not come from God, and as such, as a Christian, harboring hatred is not understandable.
I honestly feel no hatred toward anyone. I believe that the acts of Islamic Terrorists, tyrants like Saddam Hussein, or a common criminal are evil, sinful and to be condemned…but that does not mean that I “hate” the perpetrators of those evil acts.
I will act, with violence if necessary, to prevent evil from being perpetrated, to defend the innocent either on an individual level or at the level of advocating national action, but I have no malice in my heart. Only a desire to see evil stopped. I would prefer to be able to accomplish that without violence of any sort, but sometimes that simply is not possible.
For that reason, I find your statement that you can “understand” hatred toward Israel to be a little disturbing.
The next topic…i.e. that Ahmadinejad has no power, he will surely be voted out in the next election, the Iranian people don’t support his actions and that it’s all our fault anyway.
But RIGHT NOW, we are facing the fact that there is a madman in control of a government that is actively seeking weapons of mass destruction, who has declared both the US and our allies to be the enemy and has demonstrated a willingness to equip, supply and support terrorist activities against us and our allies.
We must face the world as it is TODAY. Not the way it might have been had we not done the stupid things we did in the past (I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt, I’m not so certain that all of our actions of the past were unwarranted, but I simply don’t know enough about the details to make an unequivocal statement about it), not the way things might be if the Iranian people get rid of the madman and elect someone a bit more reasonable…the way things are. Right now. Today.
We have not yet attacked Iran and I don’t think we’ve come to that point yet. I sincerely hope that it doesn’t come to that. But I’m not willing to dismiss the necessity of such an attack out of hand as Ron Paul and you seem so quick to do.
I have nothing against the Iranian people and I don’t even hate Ahmadinejad, Bin Laden or any of the other players in this little drama. But that doesn’t mean for a second that I don’t believe that they are a danger to us as a nation and our allies. I’m not willing to risk the safety of my family, your family or some Israeli family on the hope that if we leave them alone, they will return the favor. I don’t think they will, and even if I thought they may…it still wouldn’t be worth the risk.