The first casualty of war is not truth, but intelligence.
For the sake of our intellects, consider the INTELLIGENT points of the OTHER side.
Intelligent pro-war arguments: Saddam has flouted the 687 ceasefire for 12 years, he's an evil dictator that must be removed, it can secure a volatile region and democratize it, etc.
Intelligent anti-war arguments: the pre-emptive strike policy can be abused, the action can lead to greater anti-american sentiment and actions, the war's nationalistic fervor can threaten the democracy of our nation (patriot act),etc.
You needn't agree with these arguments. The exercise of one's intelligence lies in the admission of the validity of an argument that differs from your own.
Of course, in the process of listening to the other side, one must scour through the massive influx of UNINTELLIGENT arguments (e.g. nationalism for pro-war, pacifism for anti-war). These vulgar arguments are humorous at best, and utterly divisive at worst. Regardless, the mouths that spout such arguments, pro (remember 9/11!!) or anti (no blood for oil!!) are truly the first casualties on the assault on our intelligence. Even if your side "wins"...you're a loser if you're dumb.
More important than your right to speak freely is to THINK freely.
Expand your intelligence, and consider the other side.
For the sake of our intellects, consider the INTELLIGENT points of the OTHER side.
Intelligent pro-war arguments: Saddam has flouted the 687 ceasefire for 12 years, he's an evil dictator that must be removed, it can secure a volatile region and democratize it, etc.
Intelligent anti-war arguments: the pre-emptive strike policy can be abused, the action can lead to greater anti-american sentiment and actions, the war's nationalistic fervor can threaten the democracy of our nation (patriot act),etc.
You needn't agree with these arguments. The exercise of one's intelligence lies in the admission of the validity of an argument that differs from your own.
Of course, in the process of listening to the other side, one must scour through the massive influx of UNINTELLIGENT arguments (e.g. nationalism for pro-war, pacifism for anti-war). These vulgar arguments are humorous at best, and utterly divisive at worst. Regardless, the mouths that spout such arguments, pro (remember 9/11!!) or anti (no blood for oil!!) are truly the first casualties on the assault on our intelligence. Even if your side "wins"...you're a loser if you're dumb.
More important than your right to speak freely is to THINK freely.
Expand your intelligence, and consider the other side.
Comment