War, the whole picture, political or religous

[hrbib21]

Most of the turmoil in the mid-east has been caused directly, or indirectly by our actions. And now that they've finally struck back, we're stunned and can't understand why. 9-11 was a motivated attack to avenge the deaths of thousands of their own people.

Completely ridiculous. How about if I murdered your mother and told you that she acted in such a way that I finally struck back and killed her? I wonder how well that would hold up in court.......

 

[unclemeat]

Dont forget about the cursades. The muslim world has somehow connected our desire to disarm and remove saddam as a 500-year old holy war. Ignorance sucks.

 

[lonestar]

Re: Here are my thoughts, unpopular as they might be;

Originally posted by woodychitwn
Most of the turmoil in the mid-east has been caused directly, or indirectly by our actions. And now that they've finally struck back, we're stunned and can't understand why. 9-11 was a motivated attack to avenge the deaths of thousands of their own people.

What are you talking about? Sounds like you think it is justified. 9-11 had nothing to due with our actions in the Mid-East. It was a direct terrorists attack stemmed from the hatred of Al-Queda towards America. 9-11 had nothing to do with the Mid-East, Iraq, or Sadam. They are two seperate wars. The war on Terrorism is not associated with the War on Iraq(Sadam). However, we may find there are money ties.
The war on Sadam is much like the war on Hitler during WWII. (and we had no problems with war then, Americans even supported it) He is a dictator. Look how he treats is own people. If we let him build power, he will then try to overtake the world. Desert Storm confronted Sadam when he tried to invade Kuwait and Iran. The war in Isreal is about land.
I'm not way off here, am I..

 

[cdsl227]

Not way off at all, I think we should have let him take over the mid-east then we'd be drilling for oil in Anwar right now and there'd be no need to look to the mid-east other than containment.

People supported WWII because they considered themselves Americans, the shift in population has this country to a point were too many vocal immigrants have poisoned the thinking here with their stories of how bad things are in their homelands.

Of the course easily influenced "can't we all just get along" liberally diseased minds fall so easily for the song and dance. Which is probably why there are so many opposed to the war in this country.

People have this need to show how "good hearted" they are by taking a stance against the war.

Well being good hearted isn't going to help when they launch another attack in country, our country- the USA.

I'd prefer not to wait, I say hunt the radicals down WHERE EVER they are.

I don't particularly care if that leads us all through the mid-east, through france, germany...I don't even care if it leads to US world domination.

Hell the world would be a better place.

 

[hrbib21]

That is exactly the point of this "war on terrorism" as Bush said: to hunt down terrorists wherever they are. You would think that a country like France, with it's own terrorism problem (the Basque seperatists) would support us wholeheartedly. Australia was against the war until a hundred (?) Australians were killed in the Indonesia terrorist attack. Funny how that changed their minds and they now support us.

As for the liberals in this country, like I said before, they're only against this war for political reasons, not humanitarian reasons. They didn't protest when Clinton bombed Bosnia but they protest now because a Republican is in office and that's the ONLY reason. I fail to see how Milosevic was any worse than Saddam. They both have attempted ethnic cleansing in their respective countries. They both have tortured their own citizens. They both have fought wars against other countries. They both have violated UN resolutions. So, knowing this, you can quite clearly see that the liberals are simply playing the same partisan game they always play: liberal Democrat do or die. I don't know what Democrats are so proud of anyway. Their last president, Willy, cut military spending his whole 2 terms and didn't support our troops. He also is to blame for the breakdown of intelligence that lead to Sept. 11. People always want to blame Bush, but I don't see how any president could be to blame for something like that happening within his first 9 months in office. Personally, I don't blame anyone but the terrorists themselves but the fact remains, Clinton spent too much money in the wrong places: welfare and social services. He should've been spending more on the military, on intelligence, and on immigration control. If he had, Sept. 11 would've never happened. Remember that the 19 terrorists were in this country for 5 years prior to Sept. 11. That was all Clinton.

 

[aldive]

Why not both political AND religious?

Nuke em all ( political ) and let God ( religious ) sort em out.....

 

[Robb]

..........or maybe act like civilized human beings.

 

[cdsl227]

The only thing wrong with being civilized is- that's what's put us where we are today.

Civilized solutions only work when the opposing sides are "civilized".

Something many of the mid-east governments prove time-after-time that they are not.

israelis and palestinians were close to a resolution of their problems, well maybe not a resolution, but some sort of peace.

Then what happened next- the palestinians started with suicide bombings.

In some instances, this being one, the "civilized" solution is war.

Solve the problem then move toward a "civilized" future.

 

[glfredrick]

Thought that I'd log on with my .02 just for some of you hungry for answers.

I am an active Baptist pastor, but what that means in the Baptist world is that I speak for myself. One of our chief articles of faith is that each believer stands alone before God. We call it the priesthood of all believers so if there are other Baptists that disagree with me, that is OK.

Now, on to the war issue...

First, the Bible does allow for one NATION to war agains another. It is not quite so specific when it comes down to the individual. The Letter of the Apostle Paul to the Romans has a chapter where Paul addresses the issue of national leaders, kings and the like. What is said there in a nutshell is that God places leaders in control of nations, and that the leaders have rights with their people that individuals do not. The can war, protect their people, make laws, etc. It is up to the people to respond to these leaders as if they were responding to God.

In the case of evil leaders, they are to pray that God might remove those leaders. (remember, in biblical terms, good or evil almost always has to do with following the God of the Bible) For good leaders, the people are to pray that God will continue His grace and mercy.

Because of the distinction between war of nations and individal faith issues, some people can support war and some cannot. That is (or at least should be) understandable. God WILL judge a nation that rises up against Him, and I belive that He is and has judged plenty of nations throughout history for their stance. Also remember, that with God, there is always an already, but not yet thing going on that is difficult to describe until after something happens.

That means that God will always vindicate Himself and His followers, but that vindication might not happen in our lifetime or even in our history. That God WILL judge is a surety, but when or how is entirely up to Him. I hope that this makes sense because it is a difficult doctrine. Some of the fall out from this doctrine is that people thumb their noses at God and then say, "look, nothing has happened, no God!" That is entirely untrue, and the people doing that, be they individuals or nations will one day understand more fully the error of their ways.

Now, for my personal veiw of this war...
I hate war. I do not want us (or anyone) to EVER have to go to war, BUT... Sometimes the only possiblility for peace is to remove the enemy. There is no true peace with a tyrant stading ready to produce unprovoked terror or anhiliation on innocent people. We should have learned this with Hitler and Stalin, but we have failed to learn this message through history. The world tried to appease Hitler and the experiment failed miserably. We also tried to appease the communists, but again it only cost millions their lives. Dictators and tyrants do not play by the rules of civilized societies. They have a blood lust and thirst for power no matter what. The only effectve way to stop them is to eliminate them.

The UN (messed up bunch that they are) has voted on a resolution that says if there are undeclared weapons of mass destruction, Iraq must be stopped. This was a unanimous vote. He has the weapons and is laughing at the world's feeble attempt to find them. He is merely waiting for whatever trigger he needs to begin using them. His track record is poor. He has killed many of his own citizens with exactly the weapons that we are supposedly trying to find. He is buying raw materials to build more and better weapons of this type. We have tons more intelligence material than that shared with the UN last week. We have an intelligent president and military that has had a serious wake up call in the 9/11 incident. This is not a joke or a feeble attempt at a land grab. It is real and Iraq has declared war on us. I belive we must act or pay serious consequences for years to come.

This does not come easy, but it is reality. Killing is always a last resort, but sometimes it is the only answer, so prayerfully for God's mercy, I pray that He will protect our men and women and ask that as many of you who are believers join with me in this task...

Thanks for giving an open forum on this issue...

 

[hrbib21]

The only thing wrong with being civilized is- that's what's put us where we are today.

So true. Like Michael Savage says, ""If the price of liberty is eternal vigilance, then only a more savage nation will enjoy these liberties."

 

[cdsl227]

Originally posted by hrbib21
So true. Like Michael Savage says, ""If the price of liberty is eternal vigilance, then only a more savage nation will enjoy these liberties."

I always say pay'em back 10 fold...

 

[PghBill]

Amen!

Originally posted by glfredrick
. . . The UN (messed up bunch that they are) has voted on a resolution that says if there are undeclared weapons of mass destruction, Iraq must be stopped. This was a unanimous vote. He has the weapons and is laughing at the world's feeble attempt to find them. He is merely waiting for whatever trigger he needs to begin using them. His track record is poor. He has killed many of his own citizens with exactly the weapons that we are supposedly trying to find. He is buying raw materials to build more and better weapons of this type. We have tons more intelligence material than that shared with the UN last week. We have an intelligent president and military that has had a serious wake up call in the 9/11 incident. This is not a joke or a feeble attempt at a land grab. It is real and Iraq has declared war on us. I belive we must act or pay serious consequences for years to come.

This does not come easy, but it is reality. Killing is always a last resort, but sometimes it is the only answer, so prayerfully for God's mercy, I pray that He will protect our men and women and ask that as many of you who are believers join with me in this task...

Pastor - Another Amen! I'm no expert on the theological aspects of your post but it makes clear to me that most of Europe and especially its leaders have their collective heads in an anatonomically impossible position!

We seem to have a great aversion about studying and learning the lessons of history. Maybe it takes a shock to awaken us . . . German tanks rolling under the Arch de Triumph, Japanese planes dropping torpedos at Pear Harbor.

Maybe it will take a nuke exploding in a shipping container in Baltimore Harbor to open eyes. But then it will be too late.

Ignoring the bully will not make the bully stop. And, at least for our enemy, this is a religious holy war - we ar the Infidel!

All those who think Irag will comply with Resolution 1441 if we only allow more time or hire more inspectors please raise your hand. All those who think Neville Chamberlain brought "Peace in Our Time" in 1938 please raise your hand. Study history. Its a lot easier than calculus or physics.

 

[lonestar]

Did anybody watch "The color of War" on history channel SAT. It was like a 10 episode series covering WWII. I didn't get to see all of it, but one episode "Why We Fight" was interesting.

It was mentioned that most (60%) of the soldier's where drafted and were unaware of the reason. The military began informing soldiers using propoganda. A letter from Goerge W. Bush (college educated) to his parents read something like, "The military is using unhuman propaganda techniques to brainwash soldiers into fighting, any informed person should know why we are fighting".

Then it went on to say although many soldiers may have started patriotically, after a couple of days of war, they didn't care about their country, didn't know why they were fightiong, they were just trying to stay alive. Soldiers from diffenrent countries expressed the same experience.

 

[glfredrick]

? ein sprechen sie deutch

Someone must have understood some of the reasons we fought then, tough I readily admit that the soldier in the trench does fight to stay alive...

 

[lonestar]

Some people do know why we are fighting. Mostly educated, (historically) and higher authorities. It's the people that don't understanfd that cause the biggest problems by misquoting, taking things out of context and starting big rallies. This is where I beleive the freedom of speech is being overly excercised. Then for some reason things get twisted and distorted and people believe it.

 

[Rick]

Originally posted by woodychitwn
Actually, I was referencing ZNET, the on-line version of Z magazine, which is completely American. And although I consider them to be a bit too extreme, they nonetheless have valid reference material.

Very biased reference material.
"2000: Israel uses U.S. arms in attempt to crush Palestinian uprising, killing hundreds of civilians."

NO WHERE in your time line were the hundreds of Israeli casulties mentioned. You know, the ones caused by the suicide bombers... the same ones the Israelis were trying to kill when they went to "crush the Palestinian uprising"...

Oh and about those "hundreds of Palestinian deaths caused by the Israelies... maybe you weren't watching the news, but NONE of the human rights watch dog groups found ANY evidence of an Israeli massacare against the Palestinans. The Palestinains FABRICATED the story to sway world opinion.

 

[Rick]

Question...

How many who are for war in Iraq are "pro-life"?

 

[lonestar]

Me, this leads me to another thread I'm about to create that I had on my mind.

 

[aldive]

Rick, why not put that ? as a poll?

I am for war and abortion rights.

 

[glfredrick]

I expect that your question is intended to touch off a firestorm, but here goes anyway.

I am pro-life. I am especially pro-life for the people that do not have the strength or wherewithall to defend themselves; children (preborn and born) elderly, mentally deficiant, and those under the rule of tyrants such as the people that inhabit Iraq and other dictatorships.

I have stated in an erlier post my aversion to killing and to war, but that in no way negates the possibility that there are times when removing a cancer is the only way to true life and peace.

I believe history bears this thought out well.

What of the lives of the Iraqi children that have to kiss the pictures of Saddam each day at school, or the lives of the women held in degradaion and lower class? Do they not deserve the right to live?