I have been thinking since for a little bit now on the title of this post. I suppose I should say that my thoughts about it might just barely crystallize here as I write them, or maybe not. It's an interesting thing to think about, and has meaning and importance, and it's about time for the monthly post here on my blog so here goes.
I think my idea here is what drives reformation. What drives one to become better? To leave bad habits and grow to be better. This is similar to my previous post on the idea of a PGF. My question here though focuses more on bad habits, or vices. I've been struggling with some of my own lately. Perhaps it may be better to say that a particular struggle has been highlighted recently, as I hope to be continually struggling with my vices and weakness always. Getting to the point, I see the poor decisions I make and I decide that they're not excusable, but sometimes understandable.
This means I seek to understand what drives me to do what my better judgment tells me not to. I look for the conditions and the reasons behind bad decisions, internal and external. I usually find them. I usually find a good explanation for why I don't do what I think I should. Knowing this empowers me to be better, to avoid those pitfalls in the future, and to build situations around and within me that will propel me to good rather than away from it.
Knowing what caused my iniquities, though, doesn't mean that they don't exist. It doesn't mean, to use my hated phrase, "I'm a good person." On the other hand, weeping and feeling sorrow for what I've done wrong won't help either. I can't live in the past, wishing I hadn't done what I've done. I can only accept my previous faults, and strive to make sure they do not become present faults.
Showing posts with label justify. Show all posts
Showing posts with label justify. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
War is Hell which brings Heaven
Wow, just the title and I already know I'm stepping on some serious toes. Please, just bear with me a little, take in my ideas, and hopefully you'll see that I'm not quite the warmonger I'm sure you've assumed I am.
Obviously the question I'm trying to tackle here is: Under what circumstances is war justified? Simplified thusly, the answer is easy. I take it from the Book of Mormon: "Inasmuch as ye are not guilty of the first offense, neither the second, ye shall not suffer yourselves to be slain by the hands of your enemies."[Alma 43:46] The principle is clearly taught and widely recognized by most, violence is justified when necessary for self defence. This goes for large states, governments, and organizations. One must be attacked before having legitimate reason for striking back. Thusly, addressing the current war in which the United States is involved, the "Preemptive Strike" is not justifiable. That's right, I want to go on record that I don't believe that a preemptive strike, an attack for the purpose of preventing one, is a valid reason for going to war. Moreover, therefore, that the Iraq war's declaration is justifiable.
Unfortunately, though, there is a however. However, I believe at least some deal of good has come, or at the very least could have had the political and sociological ends been pursued like they should have. A brutal dictator was overthrown and a peolple freed from his tyranny and torture. Remember those first days of whatever the P.R. label for this war is now? Iraqis celbrating in the street, hitting posters of Hussain with their shoes, which gesture as a military interrogation specialist our family knows says is one of such disdain, hatred, and malice that it's akin to saying, "if you ever are able to obtain the resources and opportunity, please hunt down and kill me and my family." That same specialist said that when some Iraqis were questioned upon being released to go back home they broke into tears and were overjoyed, because they were used to the fact being that if you were taken for questioning, you would never be seen again. Did this atmosphere last? Sadly, it seems not to. Perhaps it's just hopeful on my part, but I think that if the Iraqi democracy agenda had been pursued as hard as either candidate's campaign it might have.
The point I've wanted to make here is thus: Was the war justified? No. Was the war evil? No. Or, at the very least it's certainly on a level higher than the parade of sorrows and atrocities that folk like Micheal Moore would have you believe it is. And I think war in general must be recognized for the good that it brings. Of course the suffering brought on by the flood of violence which sweeps a land called, "combat zone" during a war is terrible. But the destruction of Nazis, unjust monarchs, or terrorists (I want to make sure it's pointed out I mean those who'll kill anyone regardless of...well anything but most importantly the worth of human life) brought forth through that sadness is important.
So, I supppose maybe I should sum up my opinion on the Iraq war, as that's where all the ire tends to lie. I think we should never have gone there. I think the reason for the war was not justifiable-though I believe Saddam's threat of W.M.D.'s was real, if only like someone brandishing a gun in your face is real even if it turns out the weapon wasn't loaded. I think the efforts going on now, though, are at least understandable and maybe honorable. And perhaps what I really want to say is just that the best way to honor those soldiers who fight on our country's behalf isn't to show disdain for the venture they're currently engaged in and wish it over, but to hope that the great deal of good which is possible does come from it, and a people learn to live for themselves instead of in fear of a soul crushing government.
War is hell, but as Dante had to pass through hell on his way to heaven, so must some communities pass through times of war to become places where goodness and happiness can abound.
Obviously the question I'm trying to tackle here is: Under what circumstances is war justified? Simplified thusly, the answer is easy. I take it from the Book of Mormon: "Inasmuch as ye are not guilty of the first offense, neither the second, ye shall not suffer yourselves to be slain by the hands of your enemies."[Alma 43:46] The principle is clearly taught and widely recognized by most, violence is justified when necessary for self defence. This goes for large states, governments, and organizations. One must be attacked before having legitimate reason for striking back. Thusly, addressing the current war in which the United States is involved, the "Preemptive Strike" is not justifiable. That's right, I want to go on record that I don't believe that a preemptive strike, an attack for the purpose of preventing one, is a valid reason for going to war. Moreover, therefore, that the Iraq war's declaration is justifiable.
Unfortunately, though, there is a however. However, I believe at least some deal of good has come, or at the very least could have had the political and sociological ends been pursued like they should have. A brutal dictator was overthrown and a peolple freed from his tyranny and torture. Remember those first days of whatever the P.R. label for this war is now? Iraqis celbrating in the street, hitting posters of Hussain with their shoes, which gesture as a military interrogation specialist our family knows says is one of such disdain, hatred, and malice that it's akin to saying, "if you ever are able to obtain the resources and opportunity, please hunt down and kill me and my family." That same specialist said that when some Iraqis were questioned upon being released to go back home they broke into tears and were overjoyed, because they were used to the fact being that if you were taken for questioning, you would never be seen again. Did this atmosphere last? Sadly, it seems not to. Perhaps it's just hopeful on my part, but I think that if the Iraqi democracy agenda had been pursued as hard as either candidate's campaign it might have.
The point I've wanted to make here is thus: Was the war justified? No. Was the war evil? No. Or, at the very least it's certainly on a level higher than the parade of sorrows and atrocities that folk like Micheal Moore would have you believe it is. And I think war in general must be recognized for the good that it brings. Of course the suffering brought on by the flood of violence which sweeps a land called, "combat zone" during a war is terrible. But the destruction of Nazis, unjust monarchs, or terrorists (I want to make sure it's pointed out I mean those who'll kill anyone regardless of...well anything but most importantly the worth of human life) brought forth through that sadness is important.
So, I supppose maybe I should sum up my opinion on the Iraq war, as that's where all the ire tends to lie. I think we should never have gone there. I think the reason for the war was not justifiable-though I believe Saddam's threat of W.M.D.'s was real, if only like someone brandishing a gun in your face is real even if it turns out the weapon wasn't loaded. I think the efforts going on now, though, are at least understandable and maybe honorable. And perhaps what I really want to say is just that the best way to honor those soldiers who fight on our country's behalf isn't to show disdain for the venture they're currently engaged in and wish it over, but to hope that the great deal of good which is possible does come from it, and a people learn to live for themselves instead of in fear of a soul crushing government.
War is hell, but as Dante had to pass through hell on his way to heaven, so must some communities pass through times of war to become places where goodness and happiness can abound.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)