Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id QAA00151 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Thu, 4 Oct 2001 16:19:03 +0100 From: Philip Jonkers <P.A.E.Jonkers@phys.rug.nl> X-Authentication-Warning: rugth1.phys.rug.nl: www-data set sender to jonkers@localhost using -f To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: RE: Questions for Martin E. Marty, a Scholar of Religion Message-ID: <email@example.com> Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 17:14:26 +0200 (CEST) References: <20011001163210.AAA15328@firstname.lastname@example.org> In-Reply-To: <20011001163210.AAA15328@email@example.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.6 X-Originating-IP: 184.108.40.206 Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
Quoting "Wade T.Smith" <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> On 10/01/01 10:31, Richard Brodie said this-
> >We have commandos in Afghanistan right now who would gladly give their
> >to protect America. No promise of paradise necessary, just the right
> >of view.
> Is there not a slim chance of a difference in attitude from someone
> willing to lose his life in the defense of his country (imagined or
> whole), and someone willing to expend his life on an offense by his
> country (imagined or whole)?
> Or am I just splitting hairs here?
Without choosing sides, I believe you are Wade, as attack
is usually considered the best defense. This meme is all
the more true, if subsequent terrorist attacks are possible.
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 04 2001 - 16:27:19 BST