Ralph Peters isn't saying anything in the passage I quoted that hasn't been said by several others I've read. He is more impassioned than most, and has a better way with words. He's a better writer. The passage I quoted is from the end of one of his chapters - a sort of summing up of the arguments he presented in the chapter. I presented logical arguments of various sorts in the past and you had problems with those. I thought summing-up sort of passage might better appeal to you - obviously not. Peters doesn't have Iran specifically in mind here. You are in error to think that. He is writing about the war against Militant Islam. You must know we are in such a war. Even Leftists recognize that. They are just rooting for the other side. Lawrence _____ From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andy Amago Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 10:36 AM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Ahmadi-Nejad's Letter to Bush Well, Annie Mylroie gave us conspiracy theories on which to invade Iraq, now Ralph Peters is giving us all kinds of reasons to start yet another, even more horrible war, urging us to open a can of worms that we will never close. Not only do you not trouble yourself to question what he's saying, you swallow the whole thing hook, line and sinker and regurgitate it as proof positive that we need madness and mayhem. And I don't abhor logical arguments. I abhor using them to start a nuclear war. I also asked you to apply logic to what happened in Iraq, and you declined. ----- Original Message ----- From: Lawrence <mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Helm To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: 5/11/2006 1:22:28 PM Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Ahmadi-Nejad's Letter to Bush I dont think you have a very accurate idea of whats at stake. Since you abhor logic arguments, here are some impassioned words that may appeal to your understanding: For many years to come the most consistent threat to the West will arise from Islamic extremists. We will not eliminate this millenarian movement in our lifetimes, but can only tamp it down to a bearable level. The conditions the Middle East has created for itself will continue to generate terrorists. We can only hope that the impulse to embrace the new Islamic death cult doesnt spread exponentially. Of course, hope alone is insufficient. We also must act. It is nonsense to claim that American displays of resolve only create more terrorists. The terrorists are already in the pipeline. There is no alternative to killing them unless we wish to establish vast prisons over the gates of which we write Abandon all hope, ye who enter here. It may be correct that we cannot kill our way out of this problem, but we can make the problem much more manageable by killing the right people. The terror war against us is a knife fight to the bone. We shall nor relish the prospect, but we must display an absolute determination to confront and defeat our enemies wherever we find them. Especially in the face of mass murderers who believe theyre on a mission from God, our resolution cannot waver. As we Americans continue to expand humanitys frontiers we will have to fight proponents of blood sacrifice as morally primitive as any examples we might summon from history. In the age of digital wonders we are at war with demons. Pp 163-4 from New Glory by Ralph Peters Lawrence _____ From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andy Amago Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 10:08 AM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Ahmadi-Nejad's Letter to Bush Lawrence, we've been around this block. It's hard to imagine that a country with the firepower of the U.S. is worried that another country is going to add its name to an already long list of countries that have the bomb. If that's the case, what's the point of this stunningly huge military and nuclear arsenal? BTW, what does your logic tell you about how people would have responded to 3.5 million pounds of bombs dropped on them? Would logic tell us the results would be merely 'progress' three years later? What's the logical next step, nuclear bombs? What if that doesn't obey the laws of logic either? Think there's any possibility of that happening? What's that old saying, do unto others as you would want them to do unto you? If Eric doesn't feel safe now, wait until we set an example for the world that it's okay to use nuclear weapons. ----- Original Message ----- From: Lawrence <mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Helm To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: 5/11/2006 12:46:51 PM Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Ahmadi-Nejad's Letter to Bush I really thought (before I realized who I was reading) that you were going to say something else, Irene, namely Lost in all of this is that these people are facing the building of nuclear bombs in their country despite Iran having signed the non-proliferation treaty. Read the brief excerpt from the Iran NPT nuclear safeguards compliance report [IAEA]. It will describe the concern many of us have: <http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2006/05/iran-npt-nuclear-safeguards-comp liance.php> http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2006/05/iran-npt-nuclear-safeguards-compl iance.php Lawrence -----Original Message----- From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andy Amago Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 9:21 AM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Ahmadi-Nejad's Letter to Bush Lost in all of this is that these people are facing nuclear bombs being dropped on their country if not their heads. Somebody remind me what a peace loving religion Christianity is?