<ot> At the risk of being a armchair analyst, I don't see anything wrong to call a spade a spade. No, I don't support the usual war technique of dehumanizing thy enemy; however, if they are fanatics and zealots, they are fanatics and zealots. Incidentally, I think George S Cole is right, they are not cowards. They are fanatics and zealots. Some may be shaped and molded by their circumstance and some are so w/o reasons. I mean, of all the psycho history done on Hitler and the like, can anyone explain why? Regardless of reasons, I don't suppose pacifism works very well.
Rather, the real danger is to paint a certain group of people with a broad brush. My fear is any unjustified backlash against the whole race and/or religion. The zealots with a negative mindset believe Allah's reward when they kill innocent people for the cause. (Incidentally, there are also True Believers [a la the late Eric Hoffer] with a positive mindset, say the early Christians willing to lie down with the lions [literally!]) These zealots [-ve ones] know nothing about the 5 pillars of Islam etc. Therefore, it may not be a bad idea to encourage the yet to be indoctrinated to understand the true faith of their beliefs.
So, what is the world supposed to do with the zeolots and fanatics? How do you resolve the conflict if there is no conflict in their heads and in their hearts? No, they have no conflict because they are filled with unadulterated hatred. I don't have any answer [otherwise, I would not be such an average joe wondering aloud!] However, sometimes a surgeon does have the duty to cut out the cancer to save the patient. The essential question is to recognize the malignant tumor
best, Bosco |
