There is only one real conflict

[Ygrene Imref]

I believe the last time the US declared war was in 1943.

I wasn't talking about declaration of war, I am talking about involvement.

And, I am taking your definition of declaration in context, ignoring declarations in the 21st century by the States.

 

[Ygrene Imref]

I am reminded of the Ferengi Rules Of Acquisition. One states that "peace is profitable". Another states that "war is profitable".

It is the truth.

War is profitable, which is why the US must always be involved in combat overseas. The States outsource war, and contract themselves out fir profit. The citizens are employees that keep the machine going.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

The US hasn't been out of a war for more than three years since WWII.

Correct...

This is perpetuated by this public sentiment that's ingrained in everyone from the time they're 5 that "The troops are fighting for our freedom", therefore making every criticism of our interventionist policy "unpatriotic" in the public eye.

The reality is, US troops haven't had to "fight for our freedom" since the War of 1812, that's the last time US sovereignty was at risk. ...possibly WW2 depending on which historian you talk to.

For the people really pulling the strings (the defense contractors making billions), it's a way of tying a noble-sounding public perception to their agenda, thus making their agenda immune to criticism.

 

[MorkandMindy]

The question of whether it is acceptable to kill large numbers of people in other countries and upset regional or even World peace is a very important one I think Christians need to think about.

And there's this parable of the Good Samaritan and 'love your neighbor as yourself' and that 'neighbor' also therefore includes someone from a different country.

This seemed to suggest we shouldn't steal from other countries or bomb them, but I couldn't get any present day Christian support on that especially since most of Joshua and Judges is about killing complete communities.


31% of American's are born-again Christians and G W Bush's staff was stuffed with them, yet no one seemed fussed about bombing and invading Iraq even after it was fairly certain they had no WMD.

I ended up just not knowing what the Christian message actually was.

 

[Ygrene Imref]

The question of whether it is acceptable to kill large numbers of people in other countries and upset regional or even World peace is a very important one I think Christians need to think about.

It is absolutely important. You would think that wouldn't be a question, but that depends on your definition of a person. If you can get enough people to believe someone is not human, or a person - that they are animalistic, violent, and downright evil by nature - then it is easy to destroy an entire population and get the people to back you up. Fear also helps.

And, it also depends on the "people's" uncanny valley. The deeper it is (universally, especially,) the more "acceptable" i5 is to destroy the entire kind. Zombies, and AI that look human are universally accepted entities with deep uncanny valleys.

And there's this parable of the Good Samaritan and 'love your neighbor as yourself' and that 'neighbor' also therefore includes someone from a different country.

It is painfully unpractical for humans to do this to each other because we are evil by nature - according to angels and God. That is why there is no actual good person, because no one on this planet does 100% good things 100% of the time.

This Samaritan incident wasn't really an example of how regular people should behave toward one another, it was highlighting how to love your enemy and what that means to God. Samaritans, in general, hated Hebrews. And Hebrews were by sight recognizable. So when the samaratin helped Christ, the surprising thing is not that this person helped Christ, but that he helped an Hebrew at all - and it just so happen to be Christ.

This seemed to suggest we shouldn't steal from other countries or bomb them, but I couldn't get any present day Christian support on that especially since most of Joshua and Judges is about killing complete communities.

We shouldn't be mass murdering people, but there is a difference between murder or killing.

In antiquity, the Hebrews were trying to fight off a ruthless race of abominations - the nephilim, anakim, rephaim, and enim. They are the remnant seed of the union between angel and humans. The Hebrews were ordered to kill all of them, because not only were they genetically modified with angel and technologically enhanced DNA, the larger/champions of them were obliterating the Hebrews.

These things seduced the women, and taught them how to make human sacrifices in honor of them. They took Hebrew men, and made soup stock with their bones. They relished in torture. They had to go. Their uncanny valley was abysmal.

This is controversial, because many Christians do not believe Genesis 3, 6 was about angel and human sexual interaction: to them, the sons of God were Seth, and the daughters of men were self explanatory.

So, you WON'T understand why God told the Hebrews to, for example, eradicate the Philistines, or how men can be 9 feet tall and be champion fighters (even though giantism exists, the people with this problem are fragile, and their bones are weak. Golliath, for example, was a champion fighter - which means it wasn't a thyroid problem. His stature supported healthy living with proper musculature and weight distribution.)

The apocryphal books explain this in detail.

31% of American's are born-again Christians and G W Bush's staff was stuffed with them, yet no one seemed fussed about bombing and invading Iraq even after it was fairly certain they had no WMD.

I ended up just not knowing what the Christian message actually was.

Don't let men determine your rationale for your spiritual relationship with God.

Anyone can say they are Christian, and you can see that many well intended Christians have their own standard of what is Christianity, and what is blasphemy. Even Christ says many of those that say they did things in His name wi be rejected.

Test the spirits: does it make sense to bomb an entire civilian population because of the alleged actions of a few people?

Christians shouldn't be invested in this wod enough to have a say on things like this, anyway. We [are supposed to] know these type of evil iterations are periodic. We don't sit on our hands, but we don't let it distract us.

 

[mark46]

The question of whether it is acceptable to kill large numbers of people in other countries and upset regional or even World peace is a very important one I think Christians need to think about.

Most Christians have thought a lot about this subject. Some church bodies have sets of principles and rules with regard to when it is moral to enter into military conflicts.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Most Christians have thought a lot about this subject. Some church bodies have sets of principles and rules with regard to when it is moral to enter into military conflicts.

I can't speak for Christians, but just based on my own morals, I think there are a few scenarios in which it can be moral to enter into a conflict...for example, WW2. Although, I still have my doubts about whether or not we entered for the right reasons (meaning, did we really enter it to save people from the tragedy that was happening, or did we enter because it fit the agenda of a profiteer), but I think it can be a noble effort under the right circumstances.

 

[MorkandMindy]

In WW1 the British sent a delegation to the US with the news that Britain and France were not going to be victorious and would be unable to repay the loans made by US banks.

So the US joined the war, tipped the balance and the banks didn't lose their money. Also IIRC either the US nation or S.O. got an oilfield in the Middle East as part payment.

The permanent ceasefire at 11 AM on Nov 11 1917 ending the war is celebrated by many countries: Belgium, France, New Zealand, Serbia, United Kingdom and many other countries (wiki), as a victory for peace.

However the US entry and victory made it asymmetrical so it was soon treated as a surrender and the reparations demanded by France and Britain were a key factor in starting WW2, and the US more accurately remembers the armistice as Veterans Day to celebrate the many victories our Veterans have made possible in many wars.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Major General Smedley D Butler, the highest ranking marine and also the most decorated marine wrote a pamphlet after the war giving a wide range of facts to support his claim that 'War is a Racket'.

Immediately after WW1 the US stopped it's propaganda and admitted the money making behind the war which in turn made it more difficult to persuade the public to go to war again just 24 years later.

The British more wisely kept to propaganda going so the public were ready when WW2 became viable. The British still blamed the Germans for eating babies as reported in the MSM, but were then not pleased to be fighting those babies, now grown up, that the Germans were said to have eaten. Well, blame them for being gullible but people still believe equally crazy stuff.

 

[MorkandMindy]

... (meaning, did we really enter it to save people from the tragedy that was happening, or did we enter because it fit the agenda of a profiteer)...

For the US WW2 was a huge money maker, the 'good war' it is often called.

The US came out with pretty much everything Britain owned, except for some reason the gold bullion, but got the remaining oil fields, with the oil fields in French possessions as well, a lot of Nazi gold and loot, and also a lot of gold the Japanese had collected in S. E. Asia, and plenty of IOUs.

This fantastic haul is what has allowed the US to live beyond it's means for many decades.

The wars since then have mostly done little other than take money from the taxpayer, or run up debts, and hand the money to the weapons makers and military suppliers (Haliburton for example), so the wars have continued pretty much continuously but at our expense - just as M General Smedley Butler had pointed out WW1 had mostly been.

 

[FireDragon76]

This seemed to suggest we shouldn't steal from other countries or bomb them, but I couldn't get any present day Christian support on that especially since most of Joshua and Judges is about killing complete communities.

Joshua and Judges is about Israel, not about how Christians should treat their neighbor.