At 5:45 PM -0500 10/22/01, Steven Walter wrote:
>On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 09:34:28PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>> > On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 01:29:14PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>> > > "Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after
>> > > they have rebelled they cannot become conscious."
>> >
>> > While I've been generally saddened by Alan Cox's and others
>> > anti-America attitude, I am somewhat surprised to find that
>> > Alan believes the US bombing of Afghanistan is justified and so
>> > is the collateral damage as they call it.
>>
>> That quote is rather older than the US bombing of Afghanistan. You read
>> totally inappropriate things into it.
>
>Certainly, it is not. This statement applies to Afghanistan, in that
>the fact that they have not rebelled means they imply consent to
>everything their government does, and therefore are just as guilty as
>the Taliban. Therefore, killing civilians (collateral damage) is no
>worse than killing terrorists or Taliban officials. This is a stance I
>can easily subscribe to, not just with Afghanistan but with any people,
>nation, state, or country.
That seems like a willful misreading of the original. Where did you
get "consent"? Alan suggests that non-rebellion implies lack of
consciousness, which doesn't imply consent.
-- /Jonathan Lundell. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 23 2001 - 21:00:34 EST