Originally posted by: 2-25
I agree with Nai that fighting violence with violence isn't the best answer. By all means, I'm not saying that one shouldn't defend themselves.

But if some stranger comes up to you and hits you in the face, do you punch him right back? I was taught not too. You can bitch at him, spit in his face, make a scene and all, but never lower yourself to the level of hitting him back.
What? Were you taught to contradict yourself too? I'm not sure where you get the idea that you shouldn't punch that person back if they randomly hit you in the face. How can someone defend themselves if they can't retaliate back? How are they gonna defend themselves? Are they going to say "please stop, I don't want to fight" to some nut who punched you in the face out of nowhere? That's insane. Explain to me how one can defend him or herself against another in a situation you brought up. And no, that person isn't going to stop punching you.

I hope you guys see the connection I'm trying to make here.
You can kill an ideal by replacing it with a bigger ideal and setting a better example, not necessary shooting people until blood spats out all over. Though education/brainwashing might be slower/more expensive, the result is probably better than war.
Wait... so you're agreeing that our ideal (or any others') is ultimately better since it's what you think they should follow it... okay, too bad no terrorist organizations like to sit down and have a formal debate. And 'brainwashing'... haha, yeah. We should just turn them into slaves if we're going to make them believe what we want them to believe.

Honestly, if you believe that war so far is the best solution, would you believe in it so much that you would join the army yourself? (if you had the choice)
Irrational and illogical reasoning. Not even gonna bother.