Should countries love their enemies?

[Chriliman]

If so, how could Ukraine love its enemies at this time?

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Among nations it is not so much love or hate as it is tolerate and cooperate while at the same time protecting your own national interests and the lives of your people.

 

[timothyu]

No countries in the Kingdom. But no problem for those who thrive on division. They won't be there anyways.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Such secular thinking.

Right because both evolve from the failures of mankind. And neither West not Russia cares at all about Ukraine but only how Ukraine affects their own little worlds.

I think the West is welcoming refugees and is a basic solidarity with those who are staying to fight.

 

[timothyu]

I think the West is welcoming refugees and is a basic solidarity with those who are staying to fight.

Yes but their concern is self first politically.

 

[HTacianas]

If so, how could Ukraine love its enemies at this time?

To "love your enemies" from the new testament applies to an individual. So to say you should love your enemies. You should do good for those who hate you. And it's nothing new as far as the bible is concerned. Look to the old testament:

Exo 23:4 “If you meet your enemy’s ox or his donkey going astray, you shall surely bring it back to him again.

Exo 23:5 “If you see the donkey of one who hates you lying under its burden, and you would refrain from helping it, you shall surely help him with it.

Those are examples of doing good for those who hate you. It means in your personal life. There are people who thrive on drama. Along with that they have "enemies" who they hate and would like nothing more than the opportunity to cause them some kind of harm. But we are told not to act that way towards others.

Now, by way of example, let's look at it another way.

If you meet Adolf Hitler's ox or his donkey going astray, you shall surely bring it back to him again.

If you see the donkey of Adolf Hitler you lying under its burden, and you would refrain from helping it, you shall surely help him with it.

That should help explain the difference between the two.

 

[disciple Clint]

If so, how could Ukraine love its enemies at this time?

Sounds like some of the Russian troops are not motivated to conduct war, Ukraine could make it easy for them to surrender and treat them well as an incentive for others to surrender as well.

 

[timothyu]

Sounds like some of the Russian troops are not motivated to conduct war, Ukraine could make it easy for them to surrender and treat them well as an incentive for others to surrender as well.

Ukraine is offering them amnesty and money according to France24.

 

[Joy]

MOD HAT ON

This Thread has been Moved

From
Current News & Events (Articles Required)
To
Christian Philosophy & Ethics

Some Posts & Responses have been removed
Re: Forum SoP

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[Chriliman]

Sounds like some of the Russian troops are not motivated to conduct war, Ukraine could make it easy for them to surrender and treat them well as an incentive for others to surrender as well.

Is it typical for invading forces to surrender or just retreat?

 

[o_mlly]

If so, how could Ukraine love its enemies at this time?

Preceding the command to love one's neighbor is to love God. One loves one's enemies in acts to stop their enemy's acts which continue to offend God.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

If so, how could Ukraine love its enemies at this time?

There really are some people out there who look beyond political agression and turn the other cheek. That being said, it is not unloving to defend yourself and those around you. Blessings

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

To love one's enemies is the duty of individuals. As a Christian I have a duty to love my enemy. Nations and communities are different. The nation and community that loves their enemy first, neglects love of their own people which should always be the first priority. You cannot have a nation if your rulers don't seek the peoples common good first.

With regard to the Ukraine, I don't consider the actions of Zelensky as being particularly loving in any respect. Arming civilians can only lead to civilian deaths and I believe this is being encouraged so as present civilian corpses for the camera and propaganda value. It's designed to get the west morally outraged and drag them into this conflict which could escalate the situation.

 

[Archivist]

With regard to the Ukraine, I don't consider the actions of Zelensky as being particularly loving in any respect. Arming civilians can only lead to civilian deaths and I believe this is being encouraged so as present civilian corpses for the camera and propaganda value. It's designed to get the west morally outraged and drag them into this conflict which could escalate the situation.

It sounds as if you are blaming Zelensky for what is happening. The Russians are in the wrong. This is totally the fault of Russians, particularly Putin. The people rising up to defend their homeland is no different than the “embattled farmers” who bravely fought and defeated the British at “the rude bridge that arched the flood” in 1775.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

It sounds as if you are blaming Zelensky for what is happening. The Russians are in the wrong. This is totally the fault of Russians, particularly Putin. The people rising up to defend their homeland is no different than the “embattled farmers” who bravely fought and defeated the British at “the rude bridge that arched the flood” in 1775.

I would in a certain way blame the current regime for what has happened. Russia has made it clear that Ukraine becoming part of NATO is unacceptable to them. Realists have predicted this outcome for years and instead of addressing the concerns of Russia they have only continued to goad Putin into this action. Small nations do not have the luxury of complete autonomy in their decision making processes. You must, if you want to survive play both sides and recognize the limits of what you can realistically accomplish.

Russia bears responsibility for this ultimately but that doesn't mean there are no other factors. The moral grandstanding of people like yourself does not change the reality of geopolitics. Your desired world where all nations get to do whatever they want (laughable for an American to say this is the case) doesn't exist.

The only purpose arming civilians serves is to create a good photo op and provoke western outrage. It's brilliant propaganda, but it doesn't result in the best outcome for the people of the Ukraine at this moment.

 

[Archivist]

I would in a certain way blame the current regime for what has happened. Russia has made it clear that Ukraine becoming part of NATO is unacceptable to them. Realists have predicted this outcome for years and instead of addressing the concerns of Russia they have only continued to goad Putin into this action. Small nations do not have the luxury of complete autonomy in their decision making processes. You must, if you want to survive play both sides and recognize the limits of what you can realistically accomplish.

Russia bears responsibility for this ultimately but that doesn't mean there are no other factors. The moral grandstanding of people like yourself does not change the reality of geopolitics. Your desired world where all nations get to do whatever they want (laughable for an American to say this is the case) doesn't exist.

The only purpose arming civilians serves is to create a good photo op and provoke western outrage.

Wrong.

Ukraine is a sovereign nation. Russia has no business telling Ukraine whether it may or may not join NATO or any other international organization.

Putin is trying to reestablish the old USSR, to bring all the former Soviet Republics back under Russian domination. You should as if you are favoring that.

There is nothing wrong with arming people who want to fight for their homes. As I said, it is no different than what was done here when the Minutemen stood up to the British.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Wrong.

Ukraine is a sovereign nation. Russia has no business telling Ukraine whether it may or may not join NATO or any other international organization.

Putin is trying to reestablish the old USSR, to bring all the former Soviet Republics back under Russian domination. You should as if you are favoring that.

There is nothing wrong with arming people who want to fight for their homes. As I said, it is no different than what was done here when the Minutemen stood up to the British.

Again your moral outrage means little in political terms. The Countries boarding the USA have no ability to determine their foreign policy or align with a competing power with the USA. Not just countries bordering the USA, all countries in it's hemisphere. Monroe Doctrine much? It's called real politck and we would be wise to learn by it and understand we are moving away from a unipolar world to a multipolar world where people are challenging US hegemony.

This is why people with your perspective have lead to this war by pointlessly encouraging Ukraine to move towards the West knowing the US and it's allies can't do anything to guarantee it. It's reckless and only going to result in more people killed.

I don't believe Putin wants to restore the USSR or the Russian Empire. I believe Putin wants to secure Russia's geopolitical position and understands that it is at risk with with NATO right on it's southern boarder. Regardless how you feel, that's how the Russians in power feel regarding NATO expansion. Again I recommend you listen to John Mearsheimer's lecture in 2014 about the Ukraine. He's a liberal, he's not a reactionary dissident like me, but even he saw what was going to happen because he was a realist on these things and not a liberal ideologue.

 

[Archivist]

Again your moral outrage means little in political terms. The Countries boarding the USA have no ability to determine their foreign policy or align with a competing power with the USA. Not just countries bordering the USA, all countries in it's hemisphere. Monroe Doctrine much? It's called real politck and we would be wise to learn by it and understand we are moving away from a unipolar world to a multipolar world where people are challenging US hegemony.

I see, Cuba is a friend of the US.. NOT. Monroe Doctrine? No, that was to prevent European countries from taking over Cpuntries in this hemisphere

This is why people with your perspective have lead to this war by pointlessly encouraging Ukraine to move towards the West knowing the US and it's allies can't do anything to guarantee it. It's reckless and only going to result in more people killed.

Ah yes, this is all the fault of the US. NOT. Ukraine is a sovereign nation.

I don't believe Putin wants to restore the USSR or the Russian Empire. I believe Putin wants to secure Russia's geopolitical position and understands that it is at risk with with NATO right on it's southern boarder. Regardless how you feel, that's how the Russians in power feel regarding NATO expansion. Again I recommend you listen to John Mearsheimer's lecture in 2014 about the Ukraine. He's a liberal, he's not a reactionary dissident like me, but even he saw what was going to happen because he was a realist on these things and not a liberal ideologue.

Of course, Putin is just having his army murder innocent civilians to secure Russia’s geopolitical position. He isn’t a bad guy. NOT.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I see, Cuba is a friend of the US.. NOT. Monroe Doctrine? No, that was to prevent European countries from taking over Cpuntries in this hemisphere

And ensure US power in the region. But in ensuring US power in this region alone you do not allow for the vaunted self determination you so admire in the case of the Ukraine. If ever the security interests of the USA were felt threatened the USA would not hesitate in enforcing it's interests by whatever means are necessary. Be it sanctions or a war of total devastation.

The USA's neighbors are not free in how they act. No nation or political block has ever been free to act in whatever way they want.

Ah yes, this is all the fault of the US. NOT. Ukraine is a sovereign nation.

I never said it was all the fault of the US only. But the US bares responsibility for the current situation and if people can't look at this honestly and assess how we arrived at this point, how are we going to proceed from this moment?

Of course It's is not entirely one sided, it is not good vs evil. Russia bares responsibility for this as well and she's already paying an economic price.

[/QUOTE]

Of course, Putin is just having his army murder innocent civilians to secure Russia’s geopolitical position. He isn’t a bad guy. NOT.[/QUOTE]

Never said Putin wasn't a bad guy. He's ruthless, he's willing to do things you think are absolutely evil, but if you don't see how this potentially benefits Russia in the long run how are you accurately assessing the man? Is his purpose just to cause death and destruction to the Ukrainians? I don't think so given the way Russia has handled things thus far. Strategically it would make no sense to cause mass civilian deaths by his soldiers, though a number of civilian deaths are inevitable in a state of war.

We can recognize this as evil, as a bad action, but what is to be done to minimize the damage? Is encouraging more civilians to die going to help in the end? Is inviting a total war by getting other countries involved and turning this into a global conflict going to be of ultimate benefit to the Ukrainians? The longer this conflict goes on for the worse everyone is off.

 

[Dermoplast]

This is why people with your perspective have lead to this war by pointlessly encouraging Ukraine to move towards the West knowing the US and it's allies can't do anything to guarantee it. It's reckless and only going to result in more people killed.

I don't believe Putin wants to restore the USSR or the Russian Empire. I believe Putin wants to secure Russia's geopolitical position and understands that it is at risk with with NATO right on it's southern boarder. Regardless how you feel, that's how the Russians in power feel regarding NATO expansion. Again I recommend you listen to John Mearsheimer's lecture in 2014 about the Ukraine. He's a liberal, he's not a reactionary dissident like me, but even he saw what was going to happen because he was a realist on these things and not a liberal ideologue.

Here is John Mearheimer's paper about the subject:

https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Why-the-Ukraine-Crisis-Is.pdf