Your Maximum Leader (and mine) offers up his thoughts about the Muslim/Benedict flap here. The question he poses in his post re: the goal of interreligious dialogue was something he and I discussed more than a year ago-- see here.
One reason to hold out hope for irenological dialogue is that, failing such a hope, we doom ourselves to the only other plausible course: war. I say "war" because radical Islam will have it no other way. If that's where we're truly headed-- toward war-- then we had better stop wasting time pretending to want dialogue at all and get on with the slaughter. Following the same logic used after World War II to justify the reasonableness of having bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki-- that those bombings brought a halt to the war and therefore saved countless lives-- it would seem that launching immediately into war now with the Muslim enemy would be the most prudent and ethical course of action. Does this sit well with you, Dear Reader?
_
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
dialogue and conflict
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
READ THIS BEFORE COMMENTING!
All comments are subject to approval before they are published, so they will not appear immediately. Comments should be civil, relevant, and substantive. Anonymous comments are not allowed and will be unceremoniously deleted. For more on my comments policy, please see this entry on my other blog.
AND A NEW RULE (per this post): comments critical of Trump's lying must include criticism of Biden's or Kamala's or some prominent leftie's lying on a one-for-one basis! Failure to be balanced means your comment will not be published.