Mistreatment of prisoners violates international conventions.
War does not?
There must be rules about war. It probably goes back to having champions. Each army chooses a champion to battle the other army's designated champion, while both armies watch. No one else is supposed to get hurt. It's almost entertainment.
OK, we can have rules for war. But if we can agree on the rules for war, why can't we increase our agreements? What else can we agree about, you and I? We and they?
(I've even made my pronouns agree in case, and I think I got that right. Agreeing about oil and religion ought to be relatively simple.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
You're so right about agreements in war and how "civilized" it really is if you think about it. Why not be more civilized and cancel the idea of war entirely?
Thanks for the new perspective.
Post a Comment