Comment: I agree that intelligence doesn't guarantee high moral standards

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I didn't predict the (see in situ)

I agree that intelligence doesn't guarantee high moral standards

I never claimed so either.

As I said, Man is still relatively young. We have a lot to learn as a species, and most of the lessons will likely come through the School of Hard Knocks. For instance, discovering the inherent flaws of central banking schemes has been and continues to be very painful.

Nonetheless, as Man becomes more intelligent (more informed) as a whole, successfully carrying out plans in opposition to the prevailing moral code will become more difficult.

I would like to address this statement:

You say "ideas are more mighty than the most advanced military." Well that statement would have more credibility if it was demonstrated by the reality of the world. Clearly not, as it is the militaries of the world who's advancement has depended on every step of the way on the cooperation of top intellectuals.

First, you try to persuade that militaries are more powerful than ideas by disagreeing with my statement. Then, you proceed to say that without ideas, militaries would not be as powerful as they now are. The contradiction should be apparent.

What was the kill ratio in Vietnam? Was Vietnam a win? Although the US military was far more advanced than theirs, the ideas trying to be imposed upon the people never succeeded in penetrating the culture. The battle of ideas was loss - regardless of how many kills Americans recorded.