Evangelical Disconnect

garage sale GT

Actually, I simply did not allow Limerickman to misdirect the discussion; I didn't duck anything. Should we maybe go on to some new point anytime he raises an objection he doesn't want to stick by? I never claimed to be a Christian, though you all may be on to me by now. The positions I took could well have been taken by a member of a different faith or an atheist, who knew a bit about Christianity and took an interest in the discussion. Hence I want to point out that Lim's question was a fairly transparent misdirect.

Now then. The reason the Iraq war is a grave sin against humanity is because GWB's people botched the occupation planning.

I cannot comment on the Popes' objection, or the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Methodist church's objections because I don't have any idea what they are based on.

The morality of the war rests entirely upon whether or not Saddam's announcement that he would readmit inspectors was a ploy or not. I don't know if it was, so I have to say "I don't know". He would of course not only have to admit them but to give them enough freedom to do their job, which he did not fully do in the period from the first gulf war to 1998.

Is it a crime not to wait for the rest of the world, just because we had agreed to remain indefinitely "seized of the matter"? (UN 1441) Hell, no. The timeline was left open to interpretation.

Of course it would have been a justification to find an ongoing wmd program, but some online sources claim even the limited inspections Saddam allowed until 1998 knew of massive stocks of weapons-grade anthrax. Post-invasion inspections were unable to prove or disprove that they had been destroyed at the claimed site.

__________________
Your mouthwash ain't makin' it.

garage sale GT

You may do your own theological research.

I don't intend to run myself ragged looking up answers to every one of your puerile objections.

__________________
Your mouthwash ain't makin' it.

Crankyfeet

I like how the US quotes UN charters... then in the next sentence (metaphorically speaking)... totally de-legitimizes the organization. US does what it wants. The UN is a tool when it agrees with the US and ignored when it disagrees.

Can you imagine hypothetically if the UN decided that they had to do inspections of US facilities on it's own soil, because the UN thought that the US was persuing a Star Wars program against the will of the rest of the world? The US would give them the middle finger.

Read my reasons for the war. If Saddam had WMD, invading Iraq would be the worst strategy. It would be like finding out that a holed up criminal had AK47's on him and then deciding to knock down the front door of his house and storm in.

But you diverge from the point... Is invading another country and killing innocent people in the name of deposing a leader, a Christian thing to do?

__________________

Crankyfeet

Oh how convenient. "Puerile"... . Straight out of the Karl Rove Strategy Book: When you can't debate the message... debase the messenger.

Pray tell me... what part of my conundrum question was immature/childish?

And you shouldn't need to study theology or spend hours finding an answer in the Bible... I gave you the Christain belief in any case. Jesus is the path to Heaven. Therefore those who don't acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God... shouldn't go to heaven right? That includes about 2 billion Chinese and Indians as well.

__________________

garage sale GT

Actually the US armed forces are well prepared for defense against NBC warfare (nuclear, biological, chemical). So much for your objection.

For pete's sake. Haven't you ever heard of gas masks?

__________________
Your mouthwash ain't makin' it.

Crankyfeet

Israel would have been wiped out in the time it takes a unit to dismount from their Humvees. Gas masks aren't much help against anthrax and many other WMDs.

But once again... back to Lim's question... Is invading another country and killing innocent victims (making the first strike) consistent with Christianity in your view?

__________________

garage sale GT

Whether or not you feel that's all there is to it, you may look up theological questions yourself.

__________________
Your mouthwash ain't makin' it.

garage sale GT

If WMDs make you all-potent, why didn't Saddam conquer the world with the ones he had until at least 1998?

What qualifications do you base your assessment on? ( what the hell do you know about wmd's? )

__________________
Your mouthwash ain't makin' it.

Crankyfeet

Obviously a lot more than you if you think gas masks are adequate defence against them.

The point is that when you put a gun against someone's head... then using WMDs might make sense. Saddam knew he was doomed.

Taking out Israel with nuclear missiles, or exploding anthrax on the US troops, as a first strike, would be stupid normally. Can't you see that the US took away the one reason why nuclear armed countries don't use WMDs... by backing a psychopathic dictator into a "cannot escape death" predicament. That is, unless, they knew he didn't possess them...

__________________

Crankyfeet

Well it's nice to know that the man so gracious to answer theological questions for umpteen posts previously.... is finally stumped for an answer. Maybe you should ponder it a while... rather than putting your head back in the comfortable warm sand of unreality.

I don't mean to be personal, despite you calling my question "puerile'. But once you invoke religion as a rationale for everything you want to do... all of a sudden logic goes out the window. Only religion could have been used as a reason to cut off the heads of innocent reporters in Iraq... and only religion could have inspired people to fly planes into buildings killing thousands of innocent people... and only religion could have been used as a rationale for nearly wiping out the entire indigenous population of North America. The list can go on.

__________________

garage sale GT

Well, you got me there. The army's modern NBC gear is more like a kind of suit.

__________________
Your mouthwash ain't makin' it.

garage sale GT

I say, how did he know he wasn't doomed in 1991 when his front line collapsed? Why didn't he gas us like he gassed the Kurds?

__________________
Your mouthwash ain't makin' it.

garage sale GT

Actually, people get their heads cut off for politics or crime, too. Ever heard of King Louis XVI? Hostages are taken and killed for a variety of reasons.

I would say the fact that people wanted their land was "used as a rationale for nearly wiping out the entire indigenous population of North America".

__________________
Your mouthwash ain't makin' it.

Crankyfeet

I don't know why. Perhaps he knew through his intelligence sources that the US didn't intend to take Baghdad, or occupy the country.

How much of a hero to the Arab world would he have been if he nuked Tel Aviv and Jerusalem? Would the US have responded by nuking the whole of Iraq? Would Saddam have really cared if he thought he was going to die... or had committed suicide. Do we really know how a psychopathic, power hungry, dictator is going to act when we storm his palace and he has a red button on his desk that can wipe out a country only a couple of hundred miles away that the Arab world would hail him as a hero for doing?

They knew he didn't have weapons of mass destruction. However if they prefaced the attack on "We're worried he might be developing WMDs", they would never have got it past the American people or the UN. It was a big lie to justify what they wanted to do IMO.

__________________