Should I Become more Pro-War?

[pbrower2a]

(02-09-2021, 08:11 PM)Einzige Wrote:

(02-09-2021, 05:49 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(02-09-2021, 03:03 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(02-09-2021, 02:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I'm wondering, right now. Must freedom always be attained with blood? The cost of freedom is high, but Americans have always paid it, said JFK.

I have long said that non violence works better in democracies, where leaders have some sense of conscience, where the vote hangs heavily on those that ignore the people.  The autocracies, it works less well.  You look at places like Russia and China and you wonder what could crush an autocracy.  I don't see it ending always the same way.  Sometimes too many people protest to arrest.  Sometimes you have to turn to revolution.  Sometimes, like the old Soviet Union or recently with the floods and coal buying fiasco in China, you get yourself in financial trouble trying to compete financially with the west.

But I am in no hurry.

Note that Gandhi made a similar point about his methods of achieving independence for India.  He argued that it worked because, at heart, the British were a fair and decent people.  He said he would never have used those methods with the Nazis.

Gandhi tried allying with the Nazis, so...

He didn't align himself with the Nazis. A cadre of traitors, the Azad Hind, established a puppet state aligned with Thug Japan during WWII in Japanese-occupied parts of British colonial India  and Mohandas Gandhi had nothing to do with this. He called off nationalist agitation during the Second World War, stating that the nationalist struggle for India would have more credibility against a strong Britain than a weak Britain. 




Subhas Chandra Bose, leader of Azad Hind, in meetings with Heinrich Himmler (above) and Adolf Hitler (below)



Enough said. Gandhi was never "pro-murder" as were the allies of Azad Hind.