Me-What's the real reason I oppose war?

[Susan]

http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=PS+68:30&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on

http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=PS+140:1-3&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on

http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=PROV+16:32&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on

http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=ECC+9:18&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on

http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=MATT+5:9&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on

http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=ROM+12:18&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on

http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=GAL+5:22&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on

-^.^-

 

[coastie]

I don't see how any of these verses condemn war itself, but some motives behind war. In a situation where peace will come through war, the verses do not appear to admonish it.

While even our marauding gunslinging cowboy of a president* dislikes war, it is, at times, neccessary for peace.

Si vis pacem para bellum

*denotes satire

 

[Susan]

But are you sure peace will come through THIS war? From even a glance at the possible consequences, it looks more like the powder keg for World War III. If any one of a great number of things goes not according to plan, then the "war on terror" has become WWIII.

I also think that Shrub suffers from a SEVERE inferiority complex and that he wants war to make himself look good.

 

[coastie]

WWIII is quite a stretch.

It's amazing that with Sadam and President Bush standing head to head, people call President Bush the warmonger.

But I thought that you were against all war, not just this one.

As with any war, there will be long term ramifications. That's why an attack is a last resort. Sadam shoudl be the one under all of the pressure right now, it is all determinate on whether or not he steps down peacefully on whether more people have to die.

It seems to me that Sadam is digging his own and many others' graves right now.

 

[coastie]

I also think that Shrub suffers from a SEVERE inferiority complex and that he wants war to make himself look good.

it's sad to see you give a leader of this nation such little respect by referring to him as a "shrub".

 

[Angel75]

Susan, if the administration wasn't planning on going to war or decided now to cancel all plans, and months or a yr from now, Saddam dropped a few lovelies from his arsenal on large cities....Would you be upset that we didn't do anything? I mean what do you expect...us to ignore it???....If Bush has evidence of what he believes is a danger to our country and us, he has an obligation to take care of it. I just keep thinking that everyone who keeps crying peace and damning bush, calling him names, claiming to know him personally enough to accuse him of "inferiority complex" are the same people who will be accusing Bush of not acting on appropriate "tips" when another 9-11 happens...this time much worse. I understand wanting peace. I do. We all do. I am expecting a baby in 8 weeks, and I have a husband in the national guard in florida. Many units have already been shipped out. Do I want my husband to miss out on the birth of his child? me to be alone at a time that is supposed to be one of the most special of my life? No. I don't want war, but by golly if the powers that be believe that if they don't act, we could possibly be at risk of serious attack, then it is what must be done.
Your religion requires faith, Trust without any evidence. You need to have faith that your country is doing what is best for you.

 

[crazyfingers]

Today at 08:18 AM coastie said this in Post #5

it's sad to see you give a leader of this nation such little respect by referring to him as a "shrub".

 

I can't say that I see anything in his character or his actions that are deserving of respect.

The man's values as they manifest themselves in his official actions are repugnant to me. 

 

[Evangelion]

About this:

Saddam dropped a few lovelies from his arsenal on large cities....

What arsenal? Which "large cities"? And how is he even managing to reach them?

Meanwhile, North Korea remains unchallenged...

 

[Angel75]

first of all that was a what if....second...arsenal...If you don't believe he is hiding weapons, that is your choice. I on the other hand do believe that his behavior has indicated he has weapons he wouldn't hesitate to use. And also in my opinion he is unstable and shouldn't be allowed to have them. I am wondering what is on those 3 tankers roaming the water right now too. But that is just my opinion.

As for you saying what large city?? maybe i am confused, do you not know what a city is? or how to decide if it is large? again... that is a what if, i could have said "what if he decided to use his telepathic powers to hypnotise all americans into believing he is God. and we knew about it ahead of time, shouldnt we do something about that??"

And you dont know what we have in mind for N korea. Maybe Iraq is practice.

BTW "how is he managing to reach them" what exactly do you mean by this??? do you mean, how is he going to get his weapons on us soil??? Do you really think it will be that difficult? if so you may be a little naiive.

 

[Didymus]

no matter how you feel about Bush we are told to pray for leaders. He sure needs prayer. Is everyone forgetting that there will always be war and rumors of war. There will be no lasting peace until Christ comes again.Aren t we also told not to speak evil of our leaders whom God has appointed. God is still in control folks and He sets up leaders and disposes them to suit Himself.

 

[Evangelion]

Ummm...

first of all that was a what if....

That's the point, though, isn't it? It's all a "what if" until you can show some evidence which turns it into a potential reality.

second...arsenal...If you don't believe he is hiding weapons, that is your choice. I on the other hand do believe that his behavior has indicated he has weapons he wouldn't hesitate to use. And also in my opinion he is unstable and shouldn't be allowed to have them. I am wondering what is on those 3 tankers roaming the water right now too. But that is just my opinion.

Fair enough.

Still no evidence, then.

As for you saying what large city?? maybe i am confused, do you not know what a city is? or how to decide if it is large?

I am asking "Which large city do you think he's going to hit?"

again... that is a what if, i could have said "what if he decided to use his telepathic powers to hypnotise all americans into believing he is God. and we knew about it ahead of time, shouldnt we do something about that??"

I have no idea what this was supposed to mean.

And you dont know what we have in mind for N korea.

I don't think you do, either.

And I don't think the current administration does, either.

Maybe Iraq is practice.

I'll take another "maybe" to go with your "what ifs..."

BTW "how is he managing to reach them" what exactly do you mean by this???

I mean...

do you mean, how is he going to get his weapons on us soil???

Never mind. You just answered it.

Do you really think it will be that difficult?

Yes.

if so you may be a little naiive.

Why?

Don't you understand that ICBMs are actually quite tricky to make? You can't just turn 'em out on the lathe in Grampy's toolshed, you know.

 

[My Higher Self]

Today at 08:09 AM Susan said this in Post #3

But are you sure peace will come through THIS war? From even a glance at the possible consequences, it looks more like the powder keg for World War III. If any one of a great number of things goes not according to plan, then the "war on terror" has become WWIII.

Not doing anything could just as easily spark WWIII at some point as well....

Origianlly posted by Evangelion

What arsenal? Which "large cities"? And how is he even managing to reach them?

The arsenal is the one that our government claims that Saddam has or has had in his possesion. He may still have them, they may be on the boats, or they may be elsewhere. Though it does not necessarily make it true, our government seems to think that he does in fact have them. If our government does know that, it is not their responsibility to comprimise those sources so that they no longer have access to that info, but if its true, they do have a responsibility to take action in the interests of our people. I don't feel its necessary to wait until half a million people die in an large city of your choice to justify action.

If you knew anything about chemical or biological weapons you would also know that asking how he is gonna reach our major cities is really not a difficult question. Millions of pounds of narcotics makes its way into our country through dozens of different methods and routes...chem/bio could be done easily the same way...then a little crop duster, or a private cesna could easily spread contamination over large areas...its not a difficult nor impossible scenario.

Its also not the threat of Saddam alone or his country but the dozens of terrorist groups they'd be more than happy to help.

Originally posted by Evangelion

Meanwhile, North Korea remains unchallenged...

I think the main difference here is that N. Korea has responded well to diplomatic solutions in the past and can reasonably be expected to do so in the future, until they prove otherwise, as Iraq has done on mulitiple occasions.

 




 

 

[Annabel Lee]

Today at 10:34 AM Didymus said this in Post #10 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=665275#post665275)

Aren t we also told not to speak evil of our leaders whom God has appointed. God is still in control folks and He sets up leaders and disposes them to suit Himself.

Leaders are not God appointed. And I do not see anyone here speaking 'evil' of them.

 

[My Higher Self]

Today at 01:35 PM Evangelion said this in Post #11 Don't you understand that ICBMs are actually quite tricky to make? You can't just turn 'em out on the lathe in Grampy's toolshed, you know.

Posted before I saw your new response...ICBM's are also not the only form of delivery....a missle fired from a sea going vessel could easily get within range of many large US city's along the coast. For that matter, a decent sized vessel could probably just release chem/bio weapons into the air off the coast and let the air currents carry it in.

On top of all that, they don't even have to attack the continental US, they could settle for military installations abroad.

 

[Didymus]

speaking disrespectfully of them--is that better. If god is in control of the world then He choses who will rule governmnets on earth Dang I wish I could remember the scripture reference. I just read it this week too.

 

[My Higher Self]

Today at 01:47 PM Annabel Lee said this in Post #13 Leaders are not God appointed. And I do not see anyone here speaking 'evil' of them.

Rom 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

 

[Blindfaith]

Romans 13:1-2

Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established.  The authorities that exist have been established by God.  Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgement on themselves."

{italics mine}

 

[strathyboy]

Today at 06:59 PM blindfaith said this in Post #17 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=665350#post665350)

Romans 13:1-2

Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established.  The authorities that exist have been established by God.  Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgement on themselves."

{italics mine}

The problem with that verse is that almost everyone can think up circumstances under which it no longer applies. The American Revolution is an obvious and relevant example. I don't argue that the Am. Rev. was wrong, only that it seems to contradict the above verse.
The same applies for many other revolutions and rebellions. For instance, there are few Christians who argue that the Jews would have been wrong had they revolted against Hitler. There are few Christians who argue that the Iraqi's will be wrong if they rise up against Hussein. And so on.

Today at 06:59 PM My Higher Self said this

If you knew anything about chemical or biological weapons you would also know that asking how he is gonna reach our major cities is really not a difficult question. Millions of pounds of narcotics makes its way into our country through dozens of different methods and routes...chem/bio could be done easily the same way...then a little crop duster, or a private cesna could easily spread contamination over large areas...its not a difficult nor impossible scenario.

Its also not the threat of Saddam alone or his country but the dozens of terrorist groups they'd be more than happy to help.

So? The above has essentially been true for the last 50 years, and yet we haven't seen the official shifts in American foreign policy that we have seen since the Sept. 11th attacks. Is it those attacks that caused this shift, or is there another reason?

 

[Angel75]

oy this is a whole other topic in itself....fundies version vs. liberal christians version. 

 

[Lynn]

I am not for war.

However, there comes a time when the world must say "enough."

How many villages must a leader massacre before the world says "enough?"

How much evidence must be emassed? (Gen Powell did a wonderful job summing it up at the UN, IMO)

How much "ethnic cleansing" is permissible?

How much appeasement is allowable?

It seems like our world has been down this path before. We allowed someone to do whatever he wanted, allowed him to kill, conquer, round up those he didn't like and burn them in concentration camps.

How many lives would have been saved if the world had said, "enough?"

lynn