Decision to attack

[nyj]

Whats the difference between that and what we did?

The difference? The difference is that, as an upstanding nation, we've promised (through treaties and self-imposed sanctions) to never do things of a such covert nature. With great power comes great responsibility and the USA does things "out in the open". Just imagine the chaos that would result if the nations of the world suddenly suspected that we would wipe out their leaders covertly. Rather, we told the world what was going on, we told them to help us rectify the situation and we told them that if it persisted we could and would take further action. If Saddam truly had no WMD, he could have simply said that and opened up his doors and the case would have been closed. But, if you need to be reminded, he didn't do that. So we went to war. The world knew what was going to happen, we made no bones about it, and we did it. Out in the open, with plenty of warning.

How you can't see the difference baffles me.

 

[Christy4Christ]

Ok you got me I am a guilty murderer! I say murder murder murder! No I am not against war but for murder, I would choose that neither had to happen but that is unrealistic. If I had to choose who would be the one killed and it was between the little tiny babies with the tops of their heads blown off and Suddam I would say KILL SUDDAM!!!

Poor babies! Did you happen to have seen the photos? My father lives in London and my Aunt in Germany and do you have any idea what news THEY got that WE didn't? Ask anyone in Europe how horrible some of the things that happened were.

 

[geocajun]

They pose a bigger threat than Iraq did, and yet by the logic presented by the government, they should have been invaded. Are there not more humanitarian abuses in China then there ever have been in Iraq? No, we make China a trading partner thanks to Bill Clinton.

again, this war had humanitarian aspects to it, but its main objective was to protect the USA. The humanitarian portion is more accidental than causative.

I do not remember China high jacking any airliners and killing thousands of civilians and you know how it goes.. the squeeky wheel gets the grease.

I think if Bush had shown proof, not speculation, not testimony from some people, but pictures, reliable intel, then I can see our invasion, otherwise, we have no justification without invading many countries in the world.

What he did show was what he and the entire government considered "reliable intel" and now conventiently it is being called unreliable due to the elections, but that is mostly political spin.
Pictures where presented to our government, and the UN, and both agreed to go to war.
Is your objection that nobody mailed the pictures to you so you could voice your opinion on it? These guys are the folks who get to make that choice. if you want to do it, then run for congress.

 

[Christy4Christ]

I do not remember China high jacking any airliners and killing thousands of civilians and you know how it goes.. the squeeky wheel gets the grease.

umm now I am totally confused. I was truly under the impression that Bin Laden and Afganistan were the ones we were going after for that.

 

[nyj]

Ok you got me I am a guilty murderer! I say murder murder murder! No I am not against war but for murder, I would choose that neither had to happen but that is unrealistic. If I had to choose who would be the one killed and it was between the little tiny babies with the tops of their heads blown off and Suddam I would say KILL SUDDAM!!!

Poor babies! Did you happen to have seen the photos? My father lives in London and my Aunt in Germany and do you have any idea what news THEY got that WE didn't? Ask anyone in Europe how horrible some of the things that happened were.

Christy, and you do know that Saddam murdered thousands of Kurds and Iranians with mustard gas... that included innocent women and children.

 

[geocajun]

umm now I am totally confused. I was truly under the impression that Bin Laden and Afganistan were the ones we were going after for that.

yes, you are right that is the war on terror - are you against that war too?
And there is resonable evidence coming togther which shows that saddam conspired with bin laden in the 9-11 attacks.

 

[nyj]

umm now I am totally confused. I was truly under the impression that Bin Laden and Afganistan were the ones we were going after for that.

That's what geo just said.

 

[Christy4Christ]

There isn't any easy answer to any of this.

One thing can't be right while another is wrong. I guess what I am saying is that I can't be a Christian and be for all of this violence at the same time.
It's like mixing oil with water.

I thought we were supposed to turn the other cheek and all of this loving stuff? Where on earth do we draw the line? When do we follow the teachings of Jesus and then when do we decide not to?

I thought God said "Vengeance is mine" !! How are we supposed to live like this and claim to follow scripture? I am sad and I am lost because how can I be both? How can I be a good follower of Christ if I am not really following Him at all?

How could I agree with this and see your point and still say I agree with what Jesus said? I cannot divide myself like that. This is why I choose not to vote because I just don't know what to do!

Can anyone tell me how I am supposed to react as a Christian to all of this? Quite honestly I am stuck.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Hi C4C!

Here are my questions,
Did Bush really go to war because he was worried about WMD?

I believe he did... but that was not the only reason. It as definately the top one. HE believed there were WMD. His intellegence told him there were. They may have been wrong, but what choice did GWB have? What if they were right and did nothing? They happend to be wrong. So the question now is this: did the weight of the other reasons justify the war? Did he support terrorism? Was he a ruthless dictator that gased his own people? Did he have a propensity for starting wars with his neigbors? Was he dedicated to the destruction of Israel?
I think these as well as other reasons justify the war.

How many children did die as a direct result of OUR attack on Iraq?

Far far fewer than the number of children he gased in those towns and communities that opposed him. There would have been fewer if the Iraqi military had not attempted to use schools and hospitals for shields. What if Sadam was making a stockpile of gas, bio, and bombs? How many children are in NYC at noon? How many American children would die from such an attack?

Did oil have anything to do with this war?

It it did we certainly are not getting any of it. Seen the price of gas lately? Proof is in the pudding. The vast majority of the oil profits are being used to rebuild their country and pay their debts.

Is there another way Bush could have handled it?

Of course. It is easy to be an monday morning quarterback and second guess the prez after it is all over. Thing is, GWB IS the prez, and he was acting within the power and authority we gave him to defend us. If he had failed to do so and a Iraqi nuc found it's way into LA or NYC... then we would all be calling for his head.
The question is not "could bush have handled is another way?" The question is "why did Sadam handle it the way he did?" He was not forthcoming in his dealings with the UN, the US, or the coallition. He was a loser of the 1991 war, and had no choice but to give in to our demands. It was his error in judgement that brought about the war. He really gave Bush no choice.

Is there any other place you can think of which has a dictatorship killing it's people on a daily basis?

Yes, and they all have children, are all potential resources for things like oil, and can be handled another way.

 

[ProCommunioneFacior]

War is never an easy topic. However, we do have the right to defend our nation, and to defend the innocent. I believe that when there is a reasonable assurance that a war is just, then it is up to our leaders to weigh the intel and make the decision. Do I believe that this was a just war, I am not sure. However, I can tell you this, I am still voting for Bush. I do not believe that he lied and put our men and women in danger for oil. I do believe that he had the best intentions in mind when going to war.

There are some things that I do not agree on with Bush, however, the issues of abortion and marriage are the most important to me, and are the most important moral issues currently in this country. If these things continue to degrade, our country will self-destruct.

There will probably be some vacancies in the Supreme Court over the next 4 years, I want a Republican president to be in there to fill those vacancies with pro-life judges.

 

[PeterPaul]

And our President can be trusted to also consider getting involved with globalization as well I'm sure. And the Patriot act keeps me warm at night, until one day, when someone wakes me in the middle of the night and sticks a bag over my head.

 

[Christy4Christ]

Peter,

Don't worry just trust God. I have been thinking about this all day and you know what conclusion I have come to? The same as always, God will sort everything out.

Christy

 

[brewmama]

Geo,

I guess I would say that there probably would be a reason for "Just War" I don't know about that but I am so glad I don't have to be the one to decide!

As far as me saying we should be jumping around going to war in other places. I am so sorry you took it that way, that is not what I meant at all! I only meant to show an example of other countries we could have targeted but did not. My question was WHY?

As I said I don't expect anyone to agree with me on this. I am just glad to have the freedom here to express my opinions no matter how controversial they may be. I also do not hate my country and I recognize how our forefathers have fought for that very freedom. I have a tough position. To agree with one war and disagree with another really makes no sense at all, I am aware of that. I just cannot help but feel there is a lot about that war we do not know.

Now for the statement that will hang me for sure..

In my opinion Mr. Bush is USING his position as an alleged Christian to gain the votes of the many Christians in the US. Ofcourse I cannot say that for sure because that would be very judgmental. I must make clear that I SEE it that way but I am in noway saying it is a fact. Perhaps he is a Christian indeed, I guess only time will tell. In truth only God knows his heart. I just think we should use caution with him because his actions have been contrary to his words.

My, you are certainly buying into the liberal spin that our country (and certainly Europe) is awash in.
Bush is the only one lately with enough integrity to follow his words with exactly what he said he would do. Certainly not the Democrats who were all in favor of getting Saddam in 1998 when Clinton proposed it. Or those same guys (Clinton administration) who went into Kosovo for "humanitarian purposes" only, and without the blessings of the UN, who bumbled around, overestimated by far the atrocities going on, and ignore the current situation (do you ever hear about it?) in which the Muslim Albanians are frequently massacreing Serbs (Christians), and the country is overrun with crime, the Mafia, poverty. It may be considered to be worse off than it was. Funny how the media never reports on that. Anyway, Bush is not going to let that happen in Iraq. Thank goodness he means what he says.

How do you manage to overlook the fact that Iraqis in this country (and their relatives in Iraq) WANTED us to invade? They supported Bush. Or that an Iraqi official recently chastised the UN and liberals for ignoring Saddam for so long and for refusing to help the US? Or the even more recent communication from an al quaeda member bemoaning the fact that they can't get support from the Iraqi people against the Americans? Maybe the people of Iraq are glad to be free and realize that the war was not against them, but their corrupt leaders, something liberals seem totally unable to grasp.

 

[brewmama]

And our President can be trusted to also consider getting involved with globalization as well I'm sure. And the Patriot act keeps me warm at night, until one day, when someone wakes me in the middle of the night and sticks a bag over my head.

Please, give us one example of anyone whose rights have been trampled on by the Patriot act, since Diane Feinstein was unable to come up with one. It certainly doesn't begin to compare with what FDR came up with in WWII, and which was dismantled as the need for it subsided, (as they always have been). And of course you must be aware that many of the accusations made against the Patriot act are totally unfounded and blatantly false.

 

[Christy4Christ]

brewmama,

I can't speak for him but I think he meant in the future. He said globalization which is not a step in the right direction I assure you.

I myself have been kind of worried about allegations of this thing called TIA -Total Information Awareness. It is supposed to be a proposal for anti-terrorism use. In this program people would have to have micro-chips inserted. I am not saying this is true, I have heard an awful lot about it and supposedly Bush is all for it. If that is the case then I am frightened.

Actually if anyone has any info on that I'd like to know..

 

[brewmama]

brewmama,

I can't speak for him but I think he meant in the future. He said globalization which is not a step in the right direction I assure you.

I myself have been kind of worried about allegations of this thing called TIA -Total Information Awareness. It is supposed to be a proposal for anti-terrorism use. In this program people would have to have micro-chips inserted. I am not saying this is true, I have heard an awful lot about it and supposedly Bush is all for it. If that is the case then I am frightened.

Actually if anyone has any info on that I'd like to know..

I'm sure this is not something real. Please rest assured. It is the liberals who want to turn everything over to the UN and give up our sovereignty.

Did you see my post directed to you, Christy?

 

[PeterPaul]

Really? So is Mayor Bloomberg a rogue Republican who decided to conjure up N.Y.'s first homosexual public school?

Even if you think it can't be used against you by a Republican, think about it when Homosexual "hate speech" is directed at you for being a Christian and the Patriot Act comes after you. Think of the long term implications not just the short.

In addition, if you think Globalization and One World Order is a good thing, you scare me as well.

 

[Christy4Christ]

brewmama,

I don't know what to say anymore, I saw the post but I just don't know what to think anymore, if you look up and see my post about my confusion as a Christian then you'll understand where I am at with all of this.

Thanks,
Christy

 

[brewmama]

Really? So is Mayor Bloomberg a rogue Republican who decided to conjure up N.Y.'s first homosexual public school?

Even if you think it can't be used against you by a Republican, think about it when Homosexual "hate speech" is directed at you for being a Christian and the Patriot Act comes after you. Think of the long term implications not just the short.

In addition, if you think Globalization and One World Order is a good thing, you scare me as well.

I really have no idea what you are talking about. Yes, Bloomberg is a liberal, what is your point?

There is already plenty of hate speech towards Christians, plus some Christians are being prosecuted for hate speech by speaking out against homosexuality, especially in Canada and Europe. Very liberal places. And it has nothing whatsoever to do with the Patriot act.

Where did I ever say I thought globalization and one world order is a good thing????? It is not Bush pushing us toward that but the liberals.

 

[brewmama]

brewmama,

I don't know what to say anymore, I saw the post but I just don't know what to think anymore, if you look up and see my post about my confusion as a Christian then you'll understand where I am at with all of this.

Thanks,
Christy

I can understand your confusion. I have found the writers at Touchstone magazine to be very helpful. Here are 2 articles:


http://www.touchstonemag.com/docs/issues/16.3docs/16-3pg45.html

http://www.touchstonemag.com/docs/issues/15.8docs/15-8pg31.html