To: The Philosopher who wrote (56766 ) 9/3/2002 8:55:27 PM From: cosmicforce Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486 There is still little direct evidence of the claims of generalized involvement by anything more than fragmentary, minority, zealot actions by a small set of particularly (fundamentalist) Islamic groups. We have no intelligence that has been made public that indicates otherwise, but if our previous intelligence gathering activities in this regime are a model, then we have no intelligence that is useful . If we frame this conflict in terms of a binary litmus test (Christian/Muslim, Infidel/Faithful, Atheist/Theist/Monist, etc.) then we are doomed because the only solution I would see as being acceptable is a pluralistic one. As I said in a previous post, the very nature of relativism prevents an absolute solution of any kind. Policies enforced by massive killing give rise to identical ones by the other side. Our window of peace is an aberration in terms of history. Unless the paradigm of "peace" changes from one of force or cultural dominance, then only conflict can arise. You have to admit that if you are a medieval tribal culture that has existed for 1000+ years by religious hegemony and totalitarian centralized government, that anything that looks and acts like America has got to scare the pants off you. I'm not surprised that my opinions are consistent because they are derived from observable principles in nature. Four billion years of evolution of complex systems can't be wrong. Here is a philosophical question: What if you could infect humans with a biological agent that killed their belief in an absolute god? The introduction of this agent would give world peace but eliminate organized religion. How would you feel about such a solution?