[TigersEye]

I agree that the Western Judeo-Christian civilization is far more realistic in its approach to dealing with its enemies than the Buddhist culture that is totally clueless about evil nature of humans and always assumes that everybody is capable and/or equal to enlightenment/nirvana.

With all due respect that's pure nonsense. That is not the Buddhist view but a twisted, westernized misconception of it. Buddhist view is not passivist in nature, far from it, but holds to a view of non-aggression which is a much different thing.

[Quix]

Anyone who speaks against the Buddha or Buddhism in Thailand can quickly find out Buddhist’s perspective on violence in certain contexts.

[sagar]

“That is not the Buddhist view but a twisted, westernized misconception of it. Buddhist view is not passivist in nature, far from it, but holds to a view of non-aggression which is a much different thing.”

My point was that Buddhism died out from South-Central Asia due to it being too passive when facing aggressive enemies. Buddhism was wiped out of existence in places... why? Where was the resistance?

I remember when the Taliban blew up Buddha statues in Afghanistan, many non-Buddhists were outraged, but Buddhists were just calm as usual facing that enemy. Since they aren’t attached to that statue, they can take a moral high ground. After all, those statues mean nothing to a TRUE Buddhist.

It is that attitude in ancient times(not modern western interpretation — which is btw more closer to the original Buddhist philosophy) that caused the downfall of Buddhism in areas that it originated.