Is war ever right?

[Dracil]

Loving one's neighbor may mean having to shoot the crazed loony who broke in that wants to rape and murder them before the police arrives. Of course, if there are alternative means readily available to incapacitate them, by all means, use it.

 

[JVAC]

I also want to suggest that one should never take up any violence for oneself, for as a Christian we are to bear all things. However, when it comes to our neighbor we should let love abound, we should do everything we can for our neighbor if our neighbor is in peril. That includes taking away the peril if necessary, by force if necessary.

 

[Anti-Fear]

jeffthefinn, what do you do if you see someone attack your friend and killing them? do you not stop the killer? should you not stop the killer? answer YES or NO.

 

[Reader Nilus]

You offer to take your friend's place and be killed.
Jeff the Finn

 

[Xen_Antares]

Sure instead of one dead body (the murderer) there will be two, you and your friend. That doesnt seem right to me

 

[Injured Soldier]

Joseph Stalin probably killed more of his own people in all of history and yet he was the United States ally. Compared to Stalin, Saddam was a pretty run of the mill ruffian, why didn't we ally with him?

Short answer is the US did. Saddam only became US enemy #1 in 1990. Before that, Saddam fought a war against Iran under the pesky Ayatollah, so he was out ally and was provided weapons and aid. Anyone know how to post a pic here, I've got a shot of Donald Rumsfeld shaking Saddam's hand and presenting him with a token of appreciation from Washington (pre-1990 of course).

Japan had invaded Indonesia and seized control of their oil fields in 1940 or 1941, I have to look up the exact date when I get home, but Japan had control of oil fields there before they bombed Pearl Harbor.

It was 1941 that they took the Dutch East Indies, but it cannot be viewed in isolation, it was part of the massive drive for the Pacific. America couldn't be left alone, due to the fact it had the only fleet that could rival the Japanese, and also it had interests in a little place called the Phillipines. So Tojo thought it would be better to attack and disable the Pacific fleet first, rather than face the wrath of an America with all of it's fleet. In the long run, Yamamoto proved correct.

Yet when we won the war we stopped supporting Chang and the commies took over, thus we provoked Japan to keep a commie free china only to have China become communist and be required to protect Taiwan till this very day

No one stopped supporting Chiang between 1945 and 1949. The fact is that regardless of the support, Chiang was even more repressive than Mao at the time, and Mao had more popular support. Even Chiang of back then would have made a Saddam or Osama of today seem like Boy Scouts.

And what do you mean provoked Japan to keep a commie free China? Japan didn't need any provoking on that one. And protecting Taiwan wasn't always a requirement. In 1949-early 1950, Truman was ready to leave Chiang without aid to the mercy of the communists.

War is not wrong if its for noble and righteous reasons. Just think of the story of David and Goliath. God gave David help to fight the monster, he didnt say "David stop where you are and let Goliath do whatever he wants"

Ah, an old covenant quote. I prefer to live under the new covenant, which has less wars. Ephesians 6:12 - "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms".

In the old testament, God tells the Isrelites when to go to war and that he is with them in war. Sometimes for the right thing to be done you have to go to war.

Another OT quote? OK, OK, I'll bite. There is a BIG difference between wars fought by the Israelites then and wars fought now. Even America's military may be big on God as propaganda to sell a war to the public, but what God wants is rarely considered when a war is begun. The only time the people in power in America considers a war "wrong" is when they lose, and even then Reagan called Vietnam "a noble war" when he was President. Whereas the Israelites, unless they were under the rule of a bad king, sought God before a war was fought, listened to his guidance through prophets and priests, and gave him the glory at the end of it too. When we see a Gideon following God's command and cutting an army of 22 thousand down to 300 depending on how they drank water or if they were scared or not in a modern day US army, then we could make the comparison.

what about the spiritual war that CHRISTIANS are suppose to be fighting?

You should have put spiritual in capitals, not Christians. It isn't "Let's go grab our M16's and have us a spiritual war in Kazakhistan this year!", a spiritual war is fought alone in your room on your knees before God, totally humbled.

JefftheFinn, I like your style. Even when Calmius and Xen Antares twist your argument from follwing a nation-state to war into a much more personal attack on your friend, you don't back down. Well done.

And my view on war and being part of the military? "Fighting and dying for your country is about as smart as fighting and dying for your phone company".

 

[JVAC]

And what do you mean provoked Japan to keep a commie free China?

We provoked Japan by Embargo, and financing thier enemy all in effort to keep the communists out of china. The US didn't care how repressive a system was they just wanted them anti-communist! China was sort of our pre-vietnam, whereas instead of getting our but kicked, we let others get thier but kicked, a lot like the bay of pigs and other like disasters, that we learn little about. The US isn't so clean in thier foreign dealings and that is the main thing I am pointing out.

 

[Xen_Antares]

JefftheFinn, I like your style. Even when Calmius and Xen Antares twist your argument from follwing a nation-state to war into a much more personal attack on your friend, you don't back down. Well done.

WHEN DID I DO THIS? GOOD GRAVEY, IF THERE IS ONE THING I HATE ITS BEING ACCUSED OF SOMETHING I DIDNT DO. I ONLY RESPONDED AFTER THE SUBJECT HAD BEEN CHANGED FROM NATIONS TO FRIENDS, AND ONLY ONCE DID I RESPOND.

JefftheFinn didn't reply after that,s so how did I twist his words? I responded to what he said, I had to twist nothing. The idea might be noble to ask to take your friends place, but in reality it doesn't work that way. I think an apology is in order Injured Soldier, I really dont like being accused of things I didn't do. I screw up enough to have to put up with things I didnt do being put on me.

 

[Injured Soldier]

WHEN DID I DO THIS? GOOD GRAVEY, IF THERE IS ONE THING I HATE ITS BEING ACCUSED OF SOMETHING I DIDNT DO. I ONLY RESPONDED AFTER THE SUBJECT HAD BEEN CHANGED FROM NATIONS TO FRIENDS, AND ONLY ONCE DID I RESPOND.

Maybe that didn't sound how I meant it. I apologise profusely Xen Antares for and misunderstanding. I just get annoyed when one person brings it back to the hypothetical *what if someone took your mother's cousin's dog hostage and refused to let them go until you commit an act of violence to prove pacifism is untenable* argument and then when someone answers it as best they can, everyone else decides to pile in on top. I didn't mean you said the question, but your reply seems to accept it is a valid comeback to the problem of war, which it rarely is.

Again, I'm sorry, there was no harm intended Xen Antares.

 

[gaijin178]

I wouldn't call them innocent unless you knew every one of the two million. Saddam sure thought they were guilty, however, were they guilty by your standards, my standards, US standards, no one knows because we didn't know those people.

Hmmm, how do you go judge if those people were innocent or not? Did some of those people in Iraq and other wars deserve to die based on their faith? I guess that I don't understand.

 

[Xen_Antares]

I apologize as well, the holidays always puts me in a mood. I was taking him more literally than figuratively, it is very noble he'd give his life so his nieghbors could live, and I admire him for hoping this is what he'd do (none of us know until were in that situation), however if someone is going to kill your neighbor offering to take his place wont spare your neighbors life.

I try to avoid the figurative speaking since there is no possible way of knowing our reactions until we are in that situation. I like to think if Im ever in a war, Id be a brave soldier, but most likely Id soil myself.

 

[JVAC]

Hmmm, how do you go judge if those people were innocent or not? Did some of those people in Iraq and other wars deserve to die based on their faith? I guess that I don't understand.

It isn't always just faith. What I am trying to get at is it isn't always so cut and dry as:

Saddam was evil

Saddam killed many people

Thus the people Saddam killed were innocent

it seems that this logic happens a lot in history. We keep trying to make it that whoever fights against 'the evil person' is A ok. I am so tired of hearing this biased stuff, based on the logic above.

I am very guilty myself in my many sins, and as Adam did, I deserve to die. Thank God Christ is there.

When we go to war we defend what we have known in our country, yet we don't know the other country, we only know our life here. We don't know the guilties and innocents. Many of the wars fougt are because of "imperial thought" which is if it is good for us it must be good for them. Such a war is baseless and you can't justify it. You can justify protection of your neighbor but you can't justify liberation of an alien people. It is not our choice, it is thiers.

 

[Haethurn]

War is never necessary.

You might say that during World War II the Allies had to defend themselves against the Axis, and you would be right.

But did Hitler have to start the war? No! Therefore the war was unnecessary. It might be necessary for one side to defend itself, but it is never necessary to actually start a war.

 

[JVAC]

Technically Hitler declared war on Poland, and the World declared war on him.

 

[Haethurn]

That is right. But did Hitler have to attack Poland? Was this absolutely necessary? No! Then the war itself was not needed.

 

[Xen_Antares]

Its cause the world knew Hitler wouldnt stop at Poland. Britain and France originally used an alliance in hopes of keeping Hitler in line and keeping him from invading anymore countries. When he ignored this and invaded Poland, Britain and France were obligated by treaty to declare war. Hitler easily defeated France and had Britain limited to their own island and their territory in North Africa. For some reason he invaded the Soviet Union, then without reason and against the wishes of his Generals he declared war on the United States.

 

[Haethurn]

Its cause the world knew Hitler wouldnt stop at Poland. Britain and France originally used an alliance in hopes of keeping Hitler in line and keeping him from invading anymore countries. When he ignored this and invaded Poland, Britain and France were obligated by treaty to declare war. Hitler easily defeated France and had Britain limited to their own island and their territory in North Africa. For some reason he invaded the Soviet Union, then without reason and against the wishes of his Generals he declared war on the United States.

And yet the fact of the matter is that Hitler did not need to start the war. Therefore the war was unnecessary. War can be necessary for one side, but never for both sides.

 

[Adam Russell]

Right, the points are interesting, yet we have been blinded by what war was originally about --> death for liberation. Some people may disagree, but I must tell you I disagree with all forms of violence, except in self defense. People may see the new war, that was americas form of self defence, yet too many died in Afghanistan for that cause.

We must also think about the millions of Indians that died in America, as Anti-Flag's song stars and stripes has informed me. And another thing Hiroshima, although not a war, was fateful and nuclear weapons kill all life, not just the intended target.

Negotiations there were none, that were formal enough. Plus the problem stretched to England - particulairy with the Iraq dossier that was "sexed-up." All the UN inspectors found was capability, yet I bet most countries have capabilities too, especially america and England.

I finally would like to thank the people who actually argued for and against, and I will remember your points before I make a sinister remark.

 

[LiberalChristian]

Two Books:

1) Just and Unjst Wars by Michael Walzer.
2) War: Four Christian Views. Edited by Robert G. Clouse

I also plan to publish a book of my own before the summer. This will be my fourth. The others did not discuss war, however.

 

[Mike_41786]

Judges 3:2 He did this only in order to teach each generation of israelites about war, especially those who had never been in battle before.

For me, that explains a lot...Praise be to our Holy Holy Holy God...