>I can't name a single pacifist on this list, nor can I think of anyone who
>has used a pacifist argument to oppose the war in Afghanistan.
My apologies Gordon :-)
>There is endless repetition of news about casualties, death, and
>destruction,
>as if that made the case. I agree that such information belongs in a
'just
>war'
>analysis, but as Luke points out, that is not what we see.
Maybe we're reading different people. Most of the critics I've come across, on this list and elsewhere, have made this evidence as part of a larger argument against the war. Basically arguing that it is unjust, even if they don't use that terminology, that is the sense of their arguments.
>Finally, there is the idea that the use of violence "never solves
anything,"
>to quote MP verbatim. More generally, the presumption that using violence
>is a losing game because you create more enemies than you kill. I would
>call
>that a pacifist argument too.
I missed MP's post. I can't argue with you here.
Brett