RE: War in Iraq

RE: War in Iraq (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events

[Poll]

War in Iraq

We are in Iraq because of oil

27% (116)

We are in Iraq to liberate the less fortunate

8% (36)

We are in Iraq to protect Israel

4% (18)

We are in Iraq to stop terrorists

33% (144)

We are in Iraq for some other reason

26% (113)

Total Votes : 427

(last vote on : 9/26/2008 12:04:25 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

MeetingPeopleIsEasy -> RE: War in Iraq (7/29/2005 5:53:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Walker311 Yes it worked for Ghandi and I understand your thoughts here very well. However, I've always believed that during the time of Christ when he used the whip on the money changers (thieves) in the temple, if one of those guys had tried to stand up to Jesus, He would have beat the snot out of him. That's just my opinion! My opinion on that is that Jesus' action in the temple was one of nonviolence, such as Gandhi's burning of the passes. I agree with this article on the matter: http://jesusradicals.com/essays/theology/temple.html

MeetingPeopleIsEasy -> RE: War in Iraq (7/29/2005 6:04:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stephanos I am sorry but appesement has never worked. PM Chamberlin said "We have peace in our time!" when he got off the plane from a summit with Hitler and Nazi Germany. Less then a year later we saw that peace go to waste as Hitler marched his war machine through the Netherlands and Belgum and into France taking Paris. We saw in the Far East efforts by American and European nations to negotiate a free trade policy with China (Open Door Policy) and a peaceful existance with the Empire of Japan. Yet the thurst for power by Japan could not be quenched and in the 30's Japan took by force much of Eastern Asia, and on December 7th 1941 stuck most of the Allied bases in the Western Pacific including Pearl Harbor in one swift and devistating blow. We look at the Cold War, and see that it was not won, that Soviet Russia colapced and Germany was reunited, by apeasement. No but rather by the policys of Mutual Assured Destruction, and the steadfast nature of the American people. No where in history has so called "peaceful resistance" stopped wars. You can not name one place, one instance where that is the case. In the Old Testament, God, Creator of the Heavens and the Earth, commanded that the Isrealites kill every living creature when they went to take the land that had been promiced to Abraham. He told them to go to war. And so I ask does God change? Does He change His mind at will? Or is He never changing? You see Jesus did not give us a NEW comandment when He said "Love you enemy", for that has always been in Gods commandments and will. If you can not see that mercy in the Old Testament is to say that God is changing and thus not all powerful, not the God of infinent wisdom. No rather those teachings of Jesus have always been with us. What He, our savior said, was not to reveal new stuff to man. But rather to reawaken a fallen people to Gods will. God is a God of Love, and that is something that the Jewish people around the time of Christ had forgoten. But let us also not forget that God is also a God of Justice and Vengence. In Romans 13, Paul tells us the power given to Governments by the will of God. It says that Governments are not given the sword for nothing. And in this text, the sword means Justice. The right of the Governments to punish those who do wrong. Sometimes that is an indivudual guilty of a crime. But other times it is a nation guilty of larger crimes. This fact is undeniable. So does this mean we should jump at the chance to fight and kill and go to war? No! No one is saying that. What people do say, and say with the authority and wisdom of Gods word, is that if all else fails and we must fight, we can and should. And yes it is possible to love and respect the people you must fight. To think that our solders are mind dumb robots with no hearts is frankly pure stupidity on anyones part who believes such. When one is forced to kill, in most cases (taking away the few people who love killing) they regret what they must do. Some solders are even known to pray for the souls of those they killed. Tell me, is that the action of a heartless killer? Or someone with a heart of love who was pressed by the circumstances to take a life. Peaceful resistance hasn't stopped wars? Augusto Pinochet was taken out of power through massive boycotts and labor struggles. Nonviolence has worked, it has prevented "neccissarry" violence. God is never changing, I agree. He instructed them to go to war in that circumstance for that time. That does not contradict Jesus' nonviolent teachings of "love your enemies." Can you kill someone and still love them? I do not believe so. You can't bomb someone with love. You cant put a metal bullet through someones skull with love. That is contradictory. No matter what the mindset of the soldier is, you can't both love someone and destroy them at the same time. I simply cannot agree with your thought on that. In regards to Romans 13, check this out -- http://www.jesusradicals.com/essays/theology/Romans13.htm God is a God of justice and vengeance? Yes, I agree. But justice and vengeance are God's job, not ours, for we are not the ones to judge - but God is the ultimate and final judge. Not us, as mere humans.

StephK -> RE: War in Iraq (7/29/2005 6:47:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rrtt11 Goodwill You should setup a poll at the begining of the thread. I am for the war as strategically a democracy in the middle of the middle east would have a great impact. I do not believe Bush lied about wmd's as the whole world thought saddam had them as he had used them in the past. There were terrorists camps in iraq. Saddam was paying palestinian families for people who killed israelis. Just plain old freedom for a very oppressed people. If it was for oil then why didn't we just take over the oil fields and leave the rest of the country to itself. Leaving the country early would also be a humanitarian disaster. It would be like the killing fields after leaving Vietnam. 2 or 3 million dead. Things are going great in Iraq despite what the media says. Thats only a few reasons. It is a complex issue Ditto to what you said.

StephK -> RE: War in Iraq (7/29/2005 6:59:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JesusLivesInYou I just want to know what happened to the search for the person behind 9/11 (Osama bin Laden). We're still in Afghanistan. Just because it's not on the news every night doesn't mean the military and CIA is sitting on their thumbs.

Walker311 -> RE: War in Iraq (7/29/2005 8:21:33 PM)
quote: My opinion on that is that Jesus' action in the temple was one of nonviolence, such as Gandhi's burning of the passes. I agree with this article on the matter: http://jesusradicals.com/essays/theology/temple.html I don't! But if in fact He had struck someone it would have changed everything. His purpose was not to be remembered as a violent savior.

Bernie109 -> RE: War in Iraq (7/29/2005 10:45:02 PM)
Invade to impose democracy? Show me anywhere in the Binble where democracy is called for. Show me anywhere in the Bible where the will of the people is even spoken of favorably. - In the Garden of Eden, God was voted out 2-0 - The entire world was in rebellion against God, only Noah and his family "Voted" for God - Moses never had a high approval rating, there are at least two incidents where the people rebelled and tried to "Elect" a leader who would take them back to Egypt. - After Joshua, Isreal fell into a period "Where everybody did what was right and wrong in thier own eyes". - Pilate, who had absolute authority, one time listemed to the polls and sent Jesus to the Cross. - How about the NT? "Be respectful to those who are in authority, for there is no government that does not come from God' Nero was King when Paul preached this! - What do we have to offer Iraq? Abortion on demand? Condoms for kids? Same sex marriage? It would appear that we have one hell of a log to remove from our eye before we point to the spec in others. As far as Sadam's cruelty, We set criminals free to rape, rob, and kill again and again. I would like to put Saddam back in power and contract him to take some of our worst criminals off our hands.

Leon_Figg3 -> RE: War in Iraq (7/29/2005 11:52:31 PM)
quote: My opinion on that is that Jesus' action in the temple was one of nonviolence, such as Gandhi's burning of the passes. I agree with this article on the matter: http://jesusradicals.com/essays/theology/temple.html MeetingPeopleIsEasy, It appears to me that you are selectively interpreting and using Scripture to support a weak arguement. Also, I have heard very little of this person whose writing you have sited, but it appears to me that he not only is doing the same, but is using obscure translations of the Bible to support his beliefs and interpretations. The fact is tha Jesus appears to have lost His temper in the temple and showed uncharacteristic anger for someone who preached love and non-violence. I am at a loss to understand your view of violence and non-violence.

Leon_Figg3 -> RE: War in Iraq (7/30/2005 12:24:39 AM)
quote: Can you kill someone and still love them? I do not believe so. You can't bomb someone with love. You cant put a metal bullet through someones skull with love. That is contradictory. No matter what the mindset of the soldier is, you can't both love someone and destroy them at the same time. I simply cannot agree with your thought on that. In regards to Romans 13, check this out -- http://www.jesusradicals.com/essays/theology/Romans13.htm God is a God of justice and vengeance? Yes, I agree. But justice and vengeance are God's job, not ours, for we are not the ones to judge - but God is the ultimate and final judge. Not us, as mere humans. Meeting People IsEasy, I take it you've never been in the military. The arguement you propose is complex. It is one that I believe many soldiers have wrestled with and continue to wrestle with. There is an answer, though. You can kill someone with love once you realize and accept that he is in the same position that you are in. You are both subject to forces and decisions beyond your control. While I was in the military the passage that guided me, though I usually did not have to deal with the life and death question, was "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's" Again I have trouble with the writings you refer to. This one was a little better than the last. However, I still detected the writer's bias and own interjections into what the verses were saying. I am glad that you agree that God is a God of justice and vengeance, but would you agree that God uses people and countries to exact His justice and vengeance? Keep in mind that God has used talking animals to convey a message to man. If you say He does not, please explain Revelations to me. If that isn't an illustration of God's justice and vengeance, I do not know what is.

Bernie109 -> RE: War in Iraq (7/30/2005 12:30:39 AM)
One does not have to be a pacifist to oppose this war. Being a 26 year veteran I wouls not consider myself a pacifist. In the months following 9-11, We were on harbor security and I myself would not have hesitated to kill any enemy frogmen or suicide boat bombers that woulad have attacked on my watch. Killing attackers is one thing, going after the ones who actually did it in Tora Bora is one thing, but invading a country to "Liberate them" from a dictaotr is quite another. Who are we to sit on the Throne of David" Is that not reserved for Christ himself? Jesus was not just the Son of God, he was God himself in the flesh. The same god who wiped out the entire world sparing only Noah and his family The same God who destroyed Soddom and Gomorra The same God who commanded Joshua to wipe out the Philistines Jesus warned of Hell more than he ever spoke od Heaven. Anybody who thinks Jesus is totally non violent has never read Revelation

wing2000 -> RE: War in Iraq (7/30/2005 11:12:37 AM)
quote: take a look at that and tell me what you think about us leaving him in power ...ah, we left him in power for over twenty years...through two Republican and one Democratic adminstration. So here is what I think. The United States has always acted to defend it's interest. Moral reasons are only used to rally the American people to the cause. Unfortunately in this case, it was a collossal mistake as Iraq presented no threat to our national security. Even with CW capability, Sadaam could not have presented a viable threat to our country even if he wanted to...[meanhwile the an extremist Iranian government move forward with a nuclear program]. ...and invading Iraq did absolutely nothing to weaken Al Qaeda. Instead, the country has become a rallying cry for Islamists everywhere to oust evil infidels...(aka did we learn nothing from the Soviet experience in Afghanistan?) You can't fight terrorists with coventional armies... ...so now we find ourselves committed to a multi-year effort to "bring democracy to the Midle East"...it's going to be a very long haul [...and no, we can't pull out now].

Jhud -> RE: War in Iraq (7/30/2005 9:19:39 PM)
quote: ...ah, we left him in power for over twenty years...through two Republican and one Democratic adminstration. Are you saying this is a good thing? You seem to be ignoring the Gulf war and continually broken conditions for the cease fire. quote: So here is what I think. The United States has always acted to defend it's interest. Moral reasons are only used to rally the American people to the cause. Unfortunately in this case, it was a collossal mistake as Iraq presented no threat to our national security. Even with CW capability, Sadaam could not have presented a viable threat to our country even if he wanted to...[meanhwile the an extremist Iranian government move forward with a nuclear program]. This is an over-simplified analysis of the causes of the war; and incidentally we always should go to war primarily to defend our interests. But the war occurred for a number of reasons: 9/11 - though 9/11 may not have been caused directly or indirectly by Saddam; it demonstrated that we couldn't ignore looming threats as we did in Afganistan for over a decade. Saddam's continual unwillingness to abide by the cease fire agreements following the Gulf War. The reality is America can't afford to have a Middle Eastern dictator continually flaunt his unwillingness to abide by the controls set up after a war we supposedly *won. Saddam's desire for WMDs - though Saddam may not have had WMDs at the time of our invasion, he had maintained both his chemical and nuclear science teams (why would he do that?) and never accounted for the WMD he previously had. To say he "could not have presented a viable threat to our country even if he wanted to" is of course absurd in light of the fact that 14 terrorists presented an incredible blow to our country on Sept. 11th. Saddam had many more resources available to him than Osama, was acquiring more cash through the corrupt oil for food, and hated America every bit as much as Osama. quote:* ...and invading Iraq did absolutely nothing to weaken Al Qaeda. Instead, the country has become a rallying cry for Islamists everywhere to oust evil infidels...(aka did we learn nothing from the Soviet experience in Afghanistan?) You can't fight terrorists with coventional armies... Actually, anyone who compares the Soviets in Afganistan to us in Iraq didn't learn anything from that experience; we beat the Soviets in Afganistan, not terrorists. And the opposition there was a popular revolt comprised primarily of native peoples, unlike Iraq which is primarily outside insurgency opposed by the majority of native people. quote: ...so now we find ourselves committed to a multi-year effort to "bring democracy to the Midle East"...it's going to be a very long haul [...and no, we can't pull out now]. You are right; we can't pull out now; but what is happening is not unusual. The aftermath of every war we have ever fought was a multi-year effort to bring stabilization.

jgarden -> RE: War in Iraq (7/30/2005 9:47:09 PM)
If support for the war continue to nosedive, the greater the pressure for the Bush Administration to declare victory while heading for the exits. The polls will drive Bush's assessment of the war, not what's actually happening on the ground. While Iraq may be glad to see the end of Sadaam, the imposition of a Western style democracy may play well back in America but is it what the people want?

Jhud -> RE: War in Iraq (7/30/2005 11:14:42 PM)
quote: If support for the war continue to nosedive, the greater the pressure for the Bush Administration to declare victory while heading for the exits. The polls will drive Bush's assessment of the war, not what's actually happening on the ground. When was the war ever 'popular'? Did Bush go there because he thought it would help him win polls? quote: While Iraq may be glad to see the end of Sadaam, the imposition of a Western style democracy may play well back in America but is it what the people want? You think they would prefer another dictatorship? Why did the majority of them turn out to vote, if not to support democracy?

Goose -> RE: War in Iraq (7/31/2005 12:22:02 AM)
quote: quote: While Iraq may be glad to see the end of Sadaam, the imposition of a Western style democracy may play well back in America but is it what the people want? You think they would prefer another dictatorship? Why did the majority of them turn out to vote, if not to support democracy? the thing is, you can't decide for a country what they would prefer. You don't live there, you don't have the same religion (at least the majority), and its a completely different culture. Why is the States able to choose whats best for a country thats not even remotely similar to their own?

Jhud -> RE: War in Iraq (7/31/2005 9:20:19 AM)
quote: the thing is, you can't decide for a country what they would prefer. You don't live there, you don't have the same religion (at least the majority), and its a completely different culture. Why is the States able to choose whats best for a country thats not even remotely similar to their own? I agree, we can't choose for them; but neither can they choose for themselves if dictators dominate.

Dancre -> RE: War in Iraq (7/31/2005 4:27:31 PM)
Ah there's that selective liberal memory at work again. Hello , people!! For you folks out there who have trouble remembering, let me refresh your memories. WE WENT TO WAR BECAUSE ALMOST EVERY NATION ON THE PLANET SAID HUSSAIN HAD WEAPONS AND WANTED TO USE THEM!!!!!! We didn't go to war so bush could get better polls, we didn't go to war for oil, we went to war BECAUSE WE WERE THREATENED!!!! For those of you who forgot, and there seemes to be alot of you, hussain REFUSED to let the UN inspectors do THEIR JOBS!!! he also BROKE, remember this?? 16 reselutions, remember???? And also remember the UN taking kickbacks from Hussain so the UN would drop the rest of the reselutions?? and why?? mmm . . . lets think about this, shall we??? why would hussain want the UN to drop resrictions on his country?? to make new weapons, according to his own men??? gesh!! come one, folks!! it's not that hard!!! and this is my favorate: What do we have to offer Iraq? Abortion on demand? Condoms for kids? Same sex marriage? It would appear that we have one hell of a log to remove from our eye before we point to the spec in others. As far as Sadam's cruelty, We set criminals free to rape, rob, and kill again and again. I would like to put Saddam back in power and contract him to take some of our worst criminals off our hands. I'm very suprised that you're saying you want Hussain back in power. but to give you the benefit of the doubt, i'm guessing that you've forgotten the rape rooms, tortured people, citizens living in fear, massive graves, etc. Ask any soldier or missionary working in Iraq and they say the same thing over and over. The Iraqis are more than grateful for setting them free. In fact many of them don't want us to leave. And if they are upset for us setting them free then why do hundreds of them sign up for the miliatary, police, and political positions, knowing they WILL die???? Because THEY want a democracy, they want to be free to send their kids to school, own a business, live as free people. As for what do we offer Iraq?? No same-sex marrage, but how about opening business, farming, sending their kids to school, freedom???

mrsgoose -> RE: War in Iraq (7/31/2005 5:38:28 PM)
I will always support the soldiers who sacrifice there lives for us. But I do not completely agree with the decision to go to war. I would get into further detail, but it will cause a migraine... it's a soar subject for me.

Leon_Figg3 -> RE: War in Iraq (7/31/2005 10:15:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jgarden If support for the war continue to nosedive, the greater the pressure for the Bush Administration to declare victory while heading for the exits. The polls will drive Bush's assessment of the war, not what's actually happening on the ground. [(quote] I think you have your presidents mixed up. It was Bill Clinton who let polls decide what decisions to make.

Goodwill -> RE: War in Iraq (8/1/2005 9:47:08 AM)
Clinton... went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent. Bosnia never attacked us. He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions. In the two years since terrorists attacked us President Bush has ... liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist (Saddam) who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people. The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but... It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation. We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records. It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Iraqi Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick. It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!! George W. is doing a GREAT JOB! The Military morale is high! The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to focus on the facts.

Goodwill -> RE: War in Iraq (8/1/2005 9:57:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dancre Ah there's that selective liberal memory at work again. Hello , people!! For you folks out there who have trouble remembering, let me refresh your memories. WE WENT TO WAR BECAUSE ALMOST EVERY NATION ON THE PLANET SAID HUSSAIN HAD WEAPONS AND WANTED TO USE THEM!!!!!! We didn't go to war so bush could get better polls, we didn't go to war for oil, we went to war BECAUSE WE WERE THREATENED!!!! For those of you who forgot, and there seemes to be alot of you, hussain REFUSED to let the UN inspectors do THEIR JOBS!!! he also BROKE, remember this?? 16 reselutions, remember???? And also remember the UN taking kickbacks from Hussain so the UN would drop the rest of the reselutions?? and why?? mmm . . . lets think about this, shall we??? why would hussain want the UN to drop resrictions on his country?? to make new weapons, according to his own men??? gesh!! come one, folks!! it's not that hard!!! Stands and applauds Gosh how I thought I was the only one who remembered any of thatThank you for pointing that out and just incase you forgot what kind of destruction Saddams renime brought....then visit massgraves.info

AmericanCeasar -> RE: War in Iraq (8/1/2005 10:02:28 AM)
We, the Falconist Party supported the war in Iraq. However, we were unhappy with the way this enterprise was carried out. To begin with, we should have rebuilt our military before going into Iraq. We should have implemented Universal Military Training of all Americans as well as the military draft and Manadatory National Service. We should have put this nation's economiy on a wartime production level and expanded our military to 20 million active duty personnel. As we were rebuilding our military, we should have "borrowed" troops from other nations that were indebted to the USA. In exchange for forgiving the debt of Third World nations, the Third World nations should have provided one million troops to fight in and rebuild Afghanistan. We could also have stationed another million Third World troops in Korea giving us two more divisions to fight in Iraq. Once we rebuilt our military, we could have gone into Iran, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, every nation ruled by tyrants as well as engaged in terrorism or the drug trade. And instead of an exit strategy, we should have incorporated Iraq and Afghanistan as US Territories and put them on the path to US Statehood.

Goodwill -> RE: War in Iraq (8/1/2005 10:04:18 AM)
quote: Can you kill someone and still love them? I do not believe so. You can't bomb someone with love. You cant put a metal bullet through someones skull with love. That is contradictory. No matter what the mindset of the soldier is, you can't both love someone and destroy them at the same time. I simply cannot agree with your thought on that. In regards to Romans 13, check this out -- http://www.jesusradicals.com/essays/theology/Romans13.htm God is a God of justice and vengeance? Yes, I agree. But justice and vengeance are God's job, not ours, for we are not the ones to judge - but God is the ultimate and final judge. Not us, as mere humans. The bible tells us that there will be a time for peace and a time for war...that ends your sacreligious way of thinking right there

Goodwill -> RE: War in Iraq (8/1/2005 10:05:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Goodwill In the two years since terrorists attacked us President Bush has ... liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist (Saddam) who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people. The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but... It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51 day operation. We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records. It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Iraqi Republican Guard than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick. It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!! George W. is doing a GREAT JOB! The Military morale is high! The biased media hopes we are too ignorant to focus on the facts.

JustaChristian -> RE: War in Iraq (8/1/2005 10:09:53 AM)
You can argue as to the quotes during the Clinton administration. But all the Democrat quotes in 2002 were based on the intelligence given to them by the Bush administration. They believed it at the time. But later found out that intelligence was misused. The Plame affair is part of all that. I think everyone here has heard of Joseph Wilson.

Goodwill -> RE: War in Iraq (8/1/2005 10:15:49 AM)
Missused? How

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>