I think your closing questions are of greater value if being left as they are, technically unanswered in this phase of our talking. Because that way they force everybody noting them to think himself, and always new. I tend to not believe in blueprints for answers to questions like this. What is the right thing to do in times of peace and civilised orders, jmight be the wrong thing to do in times of war and chaos, might even cause more chaos and "evil" then. I tend to see both times, peace and war, by totally different set of rules. Judging the one by standards used to describe the other, for me makes little sense. A pacifist might do that, and by doing so even refuses to fight against an obvious evil. a notorious militarist might do so as well, and by that even in times of peace threatens to impose rules basing on the logic of war, in the name of protecting freedom and peace. Seeing war by moral standards of peace, and seeing peace by the standards of war, does not seem to work. The killing I do in peace, is illegal and is a crime. The killing of the same person in war, is called legitimate, and "duty". I may even get rewarded for it. Context is all.
I have little to add or reply to what you said, I agree with too much of it and we seem to be not that much apart in our views on these things. And if we would start on religion again, Takeda's two heads probably would explode.
Thanks for a decent talk done! I appreciate that.
