Reminds me of this, I apologize for the length but worth reading:


On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs - Dave Grossman
By LTC (RET) Dave Grossman, author of "On Killing."

Honor never grows old, and honor rejoices the heart of age. It does so because honor is, finally, about defending those noble and worthy things that deserve defending, even if it comes at a high cost. In our time, that may mean social disapproval, public scorn, hardship, persecution, or as always,even death itself. The question remains: What is worth defending? What is worth dying for? What is worth living for? - William J. Bennett - in a lecture to the United States Naval Academy November 24, 1997


One Vietnam veteran, an old retired colonel, once said this to me:

"Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident." This is true. Remember, the murder rate is six per 100,000 per year, and the aggravated assault rate is four per 1,000 per year. What this means is that the vast majority of Americans are not inclined to hurt one another. Some estimates say that two million Americans are victims of violent crimes every year, a tragic, staggering number, perhaps an all-time record rate of violent crime. But there are almost 300 million Americans, which means that the odds of being a victim of violent crime is considerably less than one in a hundred on any given year. Furthermore, since many violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders, the actual number of violent citizens is considerably less than two million.

Thus there is a paradox, and we must grasp both ends of the situation: We may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep.

I mean nothing negative by calling them sheep. To me it is like the pretty, blue robin's egg. Inside it is soft and gooey but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers, and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful. For now, though, they need warriors to protect them from the predators.

"Then there are the wolves," the old war veteran said, "and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy." Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.

"Then there are sheepdogs," he went on, "and I'm a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf."

If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen, a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath, a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? What do you have then? A sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero's path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed

Let me expand on this old soldier's excellent model of the sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. We know that the sheep live in denial, that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids' schools.

But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kid's school. Our children are thousands of times more likely to be killed or seriously injured by school violence than fire, but the sheep's only response to the possibility of violence is denial. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their child is just too hard, and so they chose the path of denial.

The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.

Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn't tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, "Baa."

Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.

...

Gavin de Becker puts it like this in Fear Less, his superb post-9/11 book, which should be required reading for anyone trying to come to terms with our current world situation: "...denial can be seductive, but it has an insidious side effect. For all the peace of mind deniers think they get by saying it isn't so, the fall they take when faced with new violence is all the more unsettling."

Denial is a save-now-pay-later scheme, a contract written entirely in small print, for in the long run, the denying person knows the truth on some level.

And so the warrior must strive to confront denial in all aspects of his life, and prepare himself for the day when evil comes. If you are warrior who is legally authorized to carry a weapon and you step outside without that weapon, then you become a sheep, pretending that the bad man will not come today. No one can be "on" 24/7, for a lifetime. Everyone needs down time. But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself...

"Baa."

This business of being a sheep or a sheep dog is not a yes-no dichotomy. It is not an all-or-nothing, either-or choice. It is a matter of degrees, a continuum. On one end is an abject, head-in-the-sand-sheep and on the other end is the ultimate warrior. Few people exist completely on one end or the other. Most of us live somewhere in between. Since 9-11 almost everyone in America took a step up that continuum, away from denial. The sheep took a few steps toward accepting and appreciating their warriors, and the warriors started taking their job more seriously. The degree to which you move up that continuum, away from sheephood and denial, is the degree to which you and your loved ones will survive, physically and psychologically at your moment of truth.


--------------

Again I just think it's over simplistic to say things like 'war is not the way to peace.' Fine to say, but that's not the point - the point of fighting for most of us is to protect the ones we love from being visited by a small minority that would murder the defenseless.

Uh...last time I looked self defense was not a crime...killing innocent life is...

That's the short of it...

that plan took almost 10 years to come to pass...dont think there arent a few more in the making...just because one dumb-a$$ Texan has taken credit for "protecting the US" doesnt mean he actually did anything..well, except invade a sovereign country, put your country into debt and quietly shave away at your rights..but hey, no planes have crashed into any buildings in 7 years..right, right...?

Gods commandment is "thou shall not kill", I dont see any loop-holes...

I dont think religion belongs in either!!!!!

I have not read this string. So I have no idea where it has gone.

I pledged aliegance to the Kingdom Under God...

My faith only is in the Kingdom OF God...

Which OF this earth but beyond it.

Don't worry everyone. Big Brother will take care of us. INSOC here we come. Big Brother is watching you...

WORD TIMES A MILLION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Self-defense? Going into someone else's home with guns blazing is self-defense? I'd think the self defense is on the other end, in many many cases over there.

What topic are you on? Where is 'over there'? I thought for one, the topic was about terrorism; and two, that it was mainly about terrorists killing US civilians.

But in any case...

Many people make the mistake of believing the Bible says, “You shall not kill,” and seek to apply this command to war. However, the Bible actually says, “You shall not murder” (Exodus 20:13). The Hebrew word literally means “the intentional, premeditated killing of another person with malice.” God often ordered the Israelites to go to war with other nations (1 Samuel 15:3; Joshua 4:13). God ordered the death penalty for numerous crimes (Exodus 21:12; 21:15; 22:19; Leviticus 20:11). So, God is not against killing in all circumstances, but rather only murder. In a world filled with sinful people (Romans 3:10-18), war is inevitable. Sometimes the only way to keep sinful people from doing great harm is by going to war with them.

What Bible do you read?

Thought this was interesting as well...

Not only has God commanded war in the past according to the bible - God will bring war upon us in the future according to the bible:

Revelation 19:11-21 proclaims, “I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron scepter." He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, "Come, gather together for the great supper of God, so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and mighty men, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, small and great." Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to make war against the rider on the horse and his army. But the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who had performed the miraculous signs on his behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped his image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. The rest of them were killed with the sword that came out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.”

Because fighting terrorist is good against evil.There is little question these terrorist are evil to the bone.The core of the bible is really how we as Christians deal with evil people,Satan,and temptation of this world.Was the soldiers who fought Hitler wrong in killing Germans?As Christians we are not supposed to kill,but I also believe God does not want us to stand around and get slaughtered in mass murder because we do not fight back.God also gave Moses power to kill as he saw his people suffering.The abortion issue is a no brainer as what can be more pure and innocent than a baby?

Thank you. There's the important part of this discussion that needs grasped first. People take terms and apply them incorrectly then start attempting to get ideas based on their falsely interpreted terminologies.

Since the passing of the unread (un)patriot act, we've seen attacks on several parts of the Constitution, 1st and 4th come immediately to mind. Also, we've seen it and the others, like the John Warner defense authorization act and the Homegrown Terror prevention act used as a pretext to end basic recongnized legal workings, such as, the Posse Comitatus act and Habeus Corpus.

The Patriot act makes it clear that if I violate one of those unconstitutional free speech zones, while expressing my own political views, I am in violation of, I believe it's section 501 of the Pat. act, which states that if I'm committing a "crime" while seeking to change the direction or scope of Government, I can be declared an enemy combantant and treated just like the Gitmo crew or Jose Padilla.

On to the initial question posed: You cannot claim to be prolife and be prowar, just like you cannot be Fiscally Conservative and claim the Prowar mantel, Fiscal conservativism and Prolife run in opposition to being prowar.

A person still can be pro-life and pro-war, in that pro-life is referring to killing fetus' not Iraqis. The term "pro-life" is used to refer to the issue of abortion and not life in general. Christians are quite fond of being "pro-life" in that aspect, but history shows us that christians have also been fond of killing things since their inception(see crusades).

I see, so the prolife point of view is: We'll be your warriors...until you're born, but then you're on your own.

I think the idea of abortion is a very complicated issue, I don't think it should be so readily available and should be used only in cases of rape,incest or to protect the mother.

Then again, what do I know, I've don't have ovaries!

I believe that if you bleat for the bombing of one set of people, but push to protect another set, the unborn in this case, at all costs... whose lives and the effect they'll have on the world are unknown, then that makes that person a hypocrite.

What if you knew that you could talk Hitlers mommy into an abortion, would you do it?

I don't disagree that people can be hypocrites though. That just means they are 3 things and not just the previously mentioned 2.

I wouldn't talk hitler's mom into aborting. I have no personal beef with hilter. He is no more at fault than anyone who could have stopped him and didn't, actually many of those people are worse. But besides, I'd have to guess as to the nature of the changes in history if hitler hadn't been around before I'd know if I wanted him gone.

On the other hand I'm pro choice, and pro war (not passionately so).

Well, the one thing, being a hypocrite, leads to the collusion of the other 2 things inside someones mind.

I'm not prochoice or prolife, I think abortion is just a contreversial medical procedure that is being overblown in some circles and overused in others, so I don't really have a pony in this horse race.

I just don't view it any different than I do Stem cell research.

I'm severely antiwar, mostly because I'm a fiscal conservative who sees these stupid wars against tactics and markets: The wars on Terror and Drugs, as being expensive, uneffective and for the most part manufactured... meaning Fake.

To me, the last time we had a war to involve ourselves in, with appropriate reason was WW2, after Japan attacked us on our own soil.