It's curious that Hanson says that war has been the mainstay of > mankind and peace the interlude, yet peace comes from war. That's like > saying a play comes from the intermission. What am I missing about his > premise, other than he likes a nice bloody war to end all wars? > > Thinking and breakfast don't go together. I got it backwards. War leads to peace the way a play leads to intermission. That does work, but not in the way Hanson is suggesting. Peace then becomes not the fruit of a decisive war but only a regrouping for the next act. Especially since history is ongoing. It has no tidy ending the way a play does. That's why I don't do syllogisms. On the other hand, all the world's a stage ... ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html