"If the answer to any of those questions is "no", at what point, if any, is military action justified?"
I have no time to research those questions and I will not answer them off the cuff.
"On the part of certain Muslims, yes. The majority, no"
Islam has the authority to control the behaviour of all adherents. I have spoke to people from Iraq, Iran, Turkey, etc. They are happy to have escaped from a situation where constant coercion and force is used. Where the State is a Fundamentalist RELIGION, there is an everpresent danger for all of humankind. When the Holy HEAD of the religion sentences people to death for not obeying precepts in the "Book" and they must hide throughout the world...you KNOW the future of freedom is solely guaranteed by maintaining sufficient power and containment.
"By "other side:, I presume you mean Muslim. I don't know. Are there? And I refer to the fanatics here, not the great majority who, if left alone, will leave us alone."
Again, Islam Must strive to dominate all States to represent Allah, or it is not Islam. Islam controlled States WILL forcibly convert or murder all those who do not voluntarily convert. I have not travelled to many Islamic countries, but I have talked to many and the expression of this point has so far been unanimous.
In my mind, ALL religious States or countries (where a representative of some cultural "God" is the HEAD of STATE), must be contained from FORCIBLY expanding their religious imperialism. With WMD's so available and accessible to modern methods and groups, and considering the vulnerability of large populations of innocent people to such weapons...the ethics which have governed in the past are no longer adequate to safeguard civilized interests.
There must be a world effort to cooperate in disarming and capturing madmen. To lose such cooperation would be unwise, IMO...
Economic levers (as always) are great persuaders... |
