No just wars?

[Michael Eisenstadt]

Roger Baker wrote:

> No wars are "just" wars -- unless they maybe have the rulers who make
> the policies that lead to war fight it out out in person, or something
> like that. Otherwise wars tend to affect innocents and children
> disproportionately, as all modern wars do.

Your "maybe..." remark is facetious and not serious, as modern 
military action is incompatible with one on one jousting
like in the Middle Ages. I think your self-proclaimed 
humanitarianism is totally bogus and in bad faith. 

We will just have to agree to disagree. My starting point is 
that there are just wars -- 2 examples (for the non-Rogers) 
would be WW II and the recent Kosovo intervention. There are 
many others.

Your view that we should NOT have reacted to 9-11 is thankfully 
confined to the ranks of those like yourself whose main focus of 
life it is to protest, being otherwise disassociated and 
alienated from normal pursuits.

This is NOT to say that the operation in Afghanistan will ever 
succeed. It could perhaps have been conduced in a more cunning
way rather than immediately into action. Your observation that 
this is an unwinnable war may well be correct. (If it were winnable 
it wouldnt make any difference to you anyway). On the other hand 
we are merely 3 weeks into it and lots of unanticipated events 
will doubtless be reported on the nightly news. I still hope for 
the best: lots of Al Quaida dead or captured.

It seems best to let our discussion cease.

Mike