AssemblyBoard

I am very surprised that so little outcry against the invasion of Iraq has been made by the Christian Church. I would be interested to read the views of some of those who post on this B.B?

I say YEA; but my husband says NAY..at least--show us some more reason why the USA should attack.

do you realize innocent children/women will die?

Hey, what about the innocent men. ;D

Do you realize that innocent men/women/children will die due to automobile accidents if we let people drive cars.  Hey, this also includes men, maybe cars are more dangerous than war, or perhaps you are just pulling at people's hearts by using women and children in your post.  War is not intended to kill the innocent, just as driving an automobile is not intended to kill the innocent (there may be some exceptions in both cases).

That said, I agree that we should not take any action that will be guaranteed to kill the innocent.  However your use of "innocent women and children", appears to look like a way to pull at peoples hearts rather than address the issues.  Lets, address the issues.  Where do you stand, David?  I just may agree with you. ;) When you use an example such as the one that you used, it sounds the same way that politicians sound when they say if there are budget cuts it will affect the children and the elderly, they never use examples for budget cuts such as their own personal government benefits (medical, dental, automobile, etc.), it just wouldn't draw the same reaction.  (so why do they think it is so import to make cuts to the children and the elderly first) :)

David, hopefully there are not many who would push a button that would cause death of the innocent. But this is more complicated than the push of a button.  We still need to ask ourselves, what would Jesus do?

Where do I stand?  For now, my decision on this matter is "Pray Fervently!"

Greetings David:

The Catholic Church made a statement that you probably read. Is that your position?

My viewpoint:  Osomen Binladen and Saddam Hussien are mortal enemies.  One is a dictator who uses religion as a stepping stone the other is a fanatic who veiws our invasion as a feather in his cap. A smart polititian woul recognize (As reagan did) that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.  If Saddam is taken out of power it will open up much more animosity towards the U.S. I forsee a Northern Ireland senerio. Apart from that if I am to take the teachings of Christ seriously there is no way I could condone killing innocents. Buhddism teaches to see no douplicity.  there is only one group of people here on earth. to kill them is to kill my own family.

I have to admit that I don't know the first thing about Buddhism.  So here is a question for you.  My question doesn't involve the current crisis that you mention, it is only to help me understand Buddhists a little better.  If a Buddhist saw somebody shooting many of the innocent women and children from your earlier message, and the Buddhist had an opportunity to stop the killer, by shooting the killer would he/she become a killer and do this?  Or would they just sit back and watch the slaughter of the innocent with the result being that many more innocent were slaughtered, but the killer who was part of the one big family on earth would be allowed to live?

On September 11th, 2001  I made the statement,

"It will be hard for these Moslem creeps to say, 'Allah Akbar!' when Allah's Holy land is glass and ash."

I advocate massive nuclear destruction in the Mid-East, beginning with Iran and Saudi Arabia.  I am not kidding, this is what I really believe.

Hitler told everyone what he was going to do, years before he did it.  He kept his word.

fundamentalist Muslims say, "Death to America!"  They call us the Great Satan.  They have been very up front and honest regarding their plans for us.  I have every reason to believe they will carry out their clear intentions, and attempt to kill my children at the soonest opportunity.

I believe them.

For that reason, I think they should all be BBQ'd immediately.  This would also sterilize the biological agents that they may have prepared for us.

This is the cleanest, safest and fastest solution for US.  I am on our side.

Brent

Greetings everyone:

www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=6553 (http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=6553)

Above is a link to an article An Open Letter to President Bush. One of the writers is Yelena Bonner, widow of Nobel Peace Prize recipient Andrei Sakharov.

Hi David,

As one who witnessed the atrocities in the name of Allah, in which many innocent women and children perished, they will not stop until all the infidels (non-Muslim) are totally annihilated. Do not think they come carrying placards and chating peace, but with every stroke means death. This is not a cliche but a real life experienced. My own friend and classmate died in my arms, because they were Christians. I was spared because I was consider to be their own. Is there such things as innocent women and children with fanatic muslim? I do not consider all muslim are evil, for know quite of few of them. However to those who perpetrate and succor the destruction of America, there is no other way but attach pre-emptively.

Do you suppose the world war II will ever end as we know now if we were afraid to kill an innocent women and children? You may be speaking now in 'deutsch" or in "nippongo". No, evil must be dealt with or else evil prevails, and then no one can withstand it.

I am a chistian and loves the Lord Jesus. We are also given a stewardship to stand up against evils and not allow another holocaust or "imperialism". As for me and my family, we stand 100% with our president, troops and the safe of our innocent women, children and men(including you David).

[/b]



[/b]


Love you, Bro...Couldn't say it better myself.  By the time we figure out that Islam has targeted the West, Jews, and Christians it will be too late.  They really are coming after us.  And, in a world of violent asymetrical impacts from a few fanatics loaded with WMD - We're history - like the Incas, the Aztecs or the Mayans.  We're done, game over.

Democracy is an inferior system for our times since it is a system that can only work among a moral people. Freedom can only exist for an extended period of time among a moral people. Freedom can only function where there is restraint...We have lost our restraint and therefore we will lose our freedom.  We're done.

Islam is coming for our throats, folks...God has raised them up as our denouement. The book of Revelations says multitudes will lose their heads - that's Islam's specialty as the Wallstreet Journal reporter Daniel Pearl found out in Pakistan.

But, for a short season George Bush has been raised-up to restrain the madness of Ishmael - the wild donkey people, whose hands are against everyone, and everyone's hands are against them.

The world shall soon descend into madness and murder.


We need to ready ourselves -  Our redemption draweth nigh!  This is the Kingdom message for the church....For the great and terrible Day of the Lord is rushing upon us.  It is time to put on our white garments!

Seek him while he may be found, dear ones.  Let us work the works of Him who called as long as it is day; for the time is coming when no man shall work. Be ready, get ready ... BE READY!

May God help us.  


Chuck Vanasse
chuck@vanant.com

[/b]


Yep, the innocent will die...but think about it, are any of us innocent? ...Any of us?  Any at all?  I'm not.  If I die, I'm only getting what I deserved a long time ago.  Every day I've ever had has been a mercy day.  Innocence is WAY overrated.

May God help us...

Chuck Vanasse
chuck@vanant.com

As I re- read my post, where I advocate pre-emptive nuclear destruction for Iran and Saudi Arabia, I realized that because I was typing in haste, I left out some very important points.  I have thought long and hard about this, perhaps as much as I have thought about anything.

"Those who do not learn from history, are doomed to repeat it."  George Santayana.

A generation ago, there was a foreign country, who believed their "king" was divine.  They had a national religion, that was fanatical, and taught that the county's cause was a divine cause, and that because their people were so pure, they had a right to conquer others, especially their neighboring countries.  When they conquered their neighbors, they enslaved the young women as "comfort girls," and tortured the men to death.

So fanatical and militant were the religious beliefs, that people considered it an honor to go on suicide missions for their divine government.  They did this in a pre-meditated way, not in the heat of battle, jumping on a hand grenade.  They were suicide bombers, who went by the name, Kami-Kazi, which means Divine Wind.

Of course, the nation I am referring to  is Imperial Japan.  Even if you are a Buddhist, you might remember that they attacked us, unprovoked at Pearl Harbor.

The way we defeated them, which included getting them to stop Kami-Kazi missions, was by proving to them that their little emporer was NOT divine, but a defeated man.  How did we do this?

NUCLEAR BOMBS

It was an instant religious revelation for the Imperial Army, Navy and Airforce to see "god" signing surrender papers.

Fast forward to today, where there is a nation (Islam) who believes that their leaders speak for god, and who are eager to go on suicide bombing missions to kill the Jew and Infidel.  Ten years ago, these suicide bombers were smiling boys of 8 or nine years of age, like my kids.

Are these people really innocent?  Hell no!!

Are we going to get them to be less fanatical with a stupid UN resolution?  If we got them to allow a Buddhist Peace Awareness Training to take place in one of their elementary schools, do you think it would have an effect?

However, there is one quick, easy, in-expensive and sure-fire way to cure them, and protect ourselves.  Even if it didn't cure them, it still must be done, in order to protect ourselves and our families.

The weather report in Tehran, the fountainhead of Fundamentalist Islam, must read,  "Cloudy and 8000 degrees Farenheit."

When these people go to bed screaming, "Death to America!" and wake up realizing that they will never again make a pilgrimage to Mecca, and that their precious Imams have been converted from mass to energy, it will give them instant clarity as to how powerful Allah is, when compared to the Great Satan.

We can destroy them right now, but we restrain ourselves.  If they could destroy us, we all know they would NOT restrain themselves.  They are going to light off the first nuke they get their filthy hands on, guaranteed.

Our lack of moral courage is the only thing keeping us from doing the only right and sane thing.  Fewer of them, and far fewer of us, will die if we fix the problem now.

I know we won't, so it isn't hard to realize that nothing but war and bloodshed are in our future.  The kind thing to do, for the free world, is to exterminate these psychopathic people.  


Drop about 27 nukes, in groups of threes ( so if one fails to blow it doesn't fall into enemy hands):

Tehran, Rihad, Islamabad, Peshawar, Karachi, Bagdad, Libya, Mecca , Medina.  

Before dropping the nukes, ask the leaders of the above countries if they wouldn't mind handing over Bin Laden, and his Al Quaida network, in say, 48 hours.  Let them know clearly, if they don't do it, that we will be launching some rockets, and flying some planes over in their neighborhood right after the deadline.  

Blow the hell out of them, then give a two week break and ask Indonesia, and the Phillipines if they wouldn't mind handing over the fomentors of Islamic hatred in their countries.

I think they would be quite co-operative, as would many of the African dictators, etc.  

They will never love us, so they might as well respect us, and they should.

BTW, I used exactly the same logic and principles in dealing with Geftakys, only the weapons were not carnal.

How did it turn out, when compared to the "kinder, more compassionate," methods advocated by some in the past?

Brent

No, a smart politician would not adopt a stupid Arab proverb.  What good has this kind of thinking done in the Arab world, where it was coined?  Answer, none at all.

A stupid politician, like the ones we have now, might adopt a stupid, morally relativistic principle like this, but a smart one would never act in such an idiotic immoral way.

My enemy's enemy isn't my friend, unless he is my friend.  Just because Russia opened up a second front against Germany doesn't mean they were our friends.  Roosevelt should never have adopted this moronic Arab line of thinking.  If he hadn't, there would not have been an iron curtain, and countries like Afghanistan would not have been so decimated that they allowed the Taliban to come to power.

By the way David, did you know that the Taliban blew up a statue of your Buddha?  Eat some red meat and clear your mind.  David, if you are going to continue on in the ways of Buddha and Unitarian stuff, at least read some Ayn Rand.  She's an atheist, but she would never espouse the anti-intellectual drivel that you seem to be foisting on us here.  Of course, you may only be doing this in order to stimulate discussion, in which case you are doing a good job.  But if you mean it, at least learn how totally fallacious and cruel your line of thinking is.

Brent Tr0ckman,  

a Christian who sees no problem with capital punishment, war, and righteous violence.  Break into my house at night with a ski mask on and I'll show you what kind of violence I mean.

yep, yep, yep...Nice sanity pill here.

Doggonit Brent, :o
You're not giving the rest of us anything more to say!
Quit hogging the show!  >:(

Your friend,
Tim

Sorry Tim!   ;)

My wife will warn you not to get me going on certain things, and this is one of them.  I'll calm down soon, perhaps in a month or two....

In the mean time, I do hope that some other's chime in.  

Oh, and by the way, I'll rip anyone to shreds if they advocate "No war," or "Jesus' teaches not to kill the human family,"  etc.   ;)

My wife, Suzie, read this and said, "How can people think that God is anti-war?  In the Old Testament, He advocated swords and killing, etc.  Men, women, children, livestock...wipe them out.

In the NT, there is spiritual warfare.  How can anyone come to the conclusion that God is a pacifist?  

Brent and Suzie

You are 100% correct. Evil requires us to take radical action. That is why we must repent when we sin.  In the personal life there is no more radical action.  In the affairs of the nation and dealing with right and wrong, tho' as you correctly stated, we do not have the moral conviction or courage as a people to take such action, the LORD Jesus Christ will come and do it Himself!

Rev 12: 12  And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; 13  And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. 14  And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. 15  And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; 16  And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: 17  For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

Your solution would solve the problem (at least for the forseeable future) with Islam (Ishmael) but it would still leave us with the enemy within.  We also lack the guts to truly deal with that enemy.

Jesus, however, has what we lack and he is not afraid to execute it.

Brent, keep it up.  Continue to hold the banner high!

PS - My hand couldn't help itself. It moved the pointer over to [good] and left clicked another one for you.

Yep, yep, preach it, brother...

By Israeli writer and thinker:  Moshe Feiglin

Not only the regular collaborators of murderous Islam - France, Belgium, Germany, and others like them aren't enthusiastic about cooperating in the great performance that President Bush is preparing for us. The feeling of dissatisfaction can also be seen amongst moral people who understand very well that people like Saddam Hussein must be eliminated. This feeling does not arise from the nature of the action against Iraq but from the tremendous hypocrisy associated with it.

At the time of the attack on the Twin Towers I was visiting the US and I expressed my feelings at that time in an article called "Why America has Already Lost the War". Click here, or use your web browser to go to: http://zionet.co.il/manhigut/en/view_article.php3?article_id=77 (check this out it is super insightful, Chuck)

The article predicted precisely what would happen in the year following the attack, and the lack of purpose in the expected actions of the US. On one point I was completely wrong. I was convinced that the US, with its tremendous technological capabilities and great resources, would rapidly get hold of Osama Bin-Laden. It is amazing to see how this man still continues to make a fool of the super-power. Bin-Laden, using a single audio cassette, succeeds in endangering the US more than all Iraq's soldiers.

Why?

Because Bin-Laden is attacking the US at a place in which it isn't ready to fight. In the cassette broadcast by the El-Jezira network Bin-Laden tells all his admirers in the Moslem world (and all of them, without exception, admire him): "The Crusaders (the US) are attacking the ancient capital of Islam, Baghdad, in order to establish there Greater Israel".

In Western terms Bin-Laden is telling every Moslem wherever he is that we have here a religious war against the Christians and the Jews.

America isn't prepared to accept this. Freedom of religious is one of the American fundamental principles. According to the Western concept, the world order and its borders are determined by nationality. Religion, in contrast, is a matter of choice and it crosses national, community, and even family boundaries. You can be a good American, regardless of whether you are Christian, Jewish, or Moslem, or even a pagan. The US was established on this principle.

At one time it was quite easy - the Japanese Zero aircraft that attacked the American fleet in Pearl Harbor did so in the name of Japanese nationalism and not religion. The Axis powers (Germany and Italy), against whom the US waged a bloody war in Europe, held the same religion in which the majority of Americans believe, and the Vietnam War and the Cold War were waged against a (Communist) enemy who denied the existence of G-d.

Suddenly Bin-Laden appears and murders 4000 Americans in the heart of Manhattan - neither in the name of a nationalist struggle, nor for territorial demands. He does so in the name of religion.

America (and also Israel, which lies in the same position of cultural inferiority) refuses to look the new reality in the eye. It is incapable of taking up Bin-Laden's challenge. It is incapable of recognizing that this war is one between a civilization based on the culture of Islam, and one based on Christian culture. The significance of such recognition is that in order to fight, the US must itself undergo cultural metamorphosis and become something totally different from the external picture it has over the years tried to paint. [In practice Western countries have a Christian culture, despite the formal separation between Church and State. The culture of these countries is based entirely on the Christian religion and its values. However, the US has preferred to conceal it built-in Christianity and present an external supra-religious facade. The most Christian country of all, the only one that implements Christian values in such a perfect way is, ironically enough is Israel. For further examination of this issue see the articles "World War", and "Moslems, Christians, and the Temple Mount"] In order to combat Bin-Laden, it is necessary to enter his arena, the religious arena, and pay him back in the same coin. America (and Israel) will continue to flee from this truth that contradicts one of the foundation stones of its existence. It will continue to respond in the wrong arena, and will continue to be hit and crushed.

The American (and the Israeli) administration must create a response to this new enemy. The role of the leadership is to defend the lives and honor of the led. A leadership that fails to do so hasten its end. How can the American administration (and in fact, the entire Western world) defend a nation involved in a religious war while avoiding this fact?

They invent a new enemy - terrorism.

Islam isn't the enemy, but terrorism. The enemy is the terrible method used to fight against us - not the combatants, but the ideology motivating them.

It is amazing to see how the entire Western world has been deceived by this ruse. If Churchill had defined the enemy, during the Battle of Britain, as the Luftwaffe (the German Air Force) and not Germany itself, Britain would not have won the war. And when this definition exhausts itself (after millions of tons of TNT in Afghanistan), and victory is of course not in sight, the US wishes to depict the enemy in a form which it is capable of fighting - an enemy who is a national state.

Saddam is no more dangerous than any other Moslem ruler. Weapons of mass destruction are being produced in Egypt, Iran, and Libya. Every Moslem ruler is trying to get hold of such weapons. Virtually all the September 11 murderers came from Saudi Arabia. Saddam is perhaps less dangerous that the other Islamic tyrants. Any prosecuting counsel in a criminal case who offered evidence of the kind produced by Secretary of State Powell against Iraq in his speech to the Security Council, would have been thrown out of court.

So why is Bush driving his people and the entire world crazy in a stupid military campaign against Saddam?

Simply because it is easy against Saddam. Saddam isn't playing the Egyptian or Saudi game. It's easy to present him to public opinion as an enemy and to create the feeling that the administration is looking after the security of its citizens.

Obviously we shouldn't regret the blow that Saddam is going to sustain. However, America (and subsequently, Israel of course) will itself sustain far more. The lack of purpose in this war will be revealed rapidly. The Arab world will unite behind the "Iraqi heroism" and Europe will of course support them. The Americans will quickly understand that victory over Iraq is a pyrrhic one...just like all the wars in which the aim is not clear. The Americans will then wish to pay the price of their folly and appease both the Moslem and Christian worlds.

As usual, they will pay in Israeli currency.

Listen to this song!!!  IT WILL SOON BE NUMBER 1

www.townhall.com/media_services/haveyouforgotten.html

HERE ARE THE WORDS TO HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN?
by Darryl Worley


I hear people saying we don't need this war
I say there's some things worth fighting for
What about our freedom and this piece of ground
We didn't get to keep 'em by backing down
Now they say we don't realize the mess we're getting in
Before you start your preaching let me ask you this my friend

Have you forgotten how it felt that day?
To see your homeland under fire
And her people blown away
Have you forgotten when those towers fell?
We had neighbors still inside going thru a living hell
And you say we shouldn't worry 'bout bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

They took all the footage off my T.V.
Said it's too disturbing for you and me
It'll just breed anger that's what the experts say
If it was up to me I'd show it everyday
Some say this country's just out looking for a fight
Well after 9/11 man I'd have to say that's right

Have you forgotten how it felt that day?
To see your homeland under fire
And her people blown away
Have you forgotten when those towers fell?
We had neighbors still inside going thru a living hell
And you say we shouldn't worry 'bout bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

Now I've been there with the soldiers
Who've gone away to war
And you can bet that they remember
Just what they're fightin' for

Have you forgotten all the people killed?
Some went down like heros in that Pennsylvania field
Have you forgotten about our Pentagon?
And all the loved ones that we lost and those left to carry on
Don't you tell me not to worry about bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

Have you forgotten how it felt that day?
To see your homeland under fire
And her people blown away
Have you forgotten when those towers fell?
We had neighbors still inside going thru a living hell
And you say we shouldn't worry 'bout bin Laden
Have you forgotten? Have you forgotten? Have you forgotten?

NO WAR!!!  NO WAR!!!  NO WAR!!!

Just kidding, Brent...please don't hurt me... :-[















<-----------

What about North Korea?  They say that if the US can make a preemptive strike, then they can too.  I consider this a threat to us.  Should we add them to your list, so we can nuke them before they nuke us?  They could cause us some SERIOUS harm.
Yes, this may be safe for you personally, since you are part of the US and we would then be rid of some of our enemies, albeit ones who seek our total annihilation.  But why stop at the Middle East, what about Canada? I heard that there was a guy in Canada who wanted to destroy the US,  let's nuke Canada, and maybe New Jersey, I heard that there might be terrorists there as well.  This would still protect Californians wouldn't it? And what about African Americans, I heard that one of them didn't like white males, why don't you kill off them to help protect yourself as well? Perhaps Calle Serena should be added to the list. ;D Okay, I already know the answers to these questions. I realize that Canada is not as much of a threat as the countries that have radical Muslim leadership who seek the destruction of America.  My point in asking these questions is to make sure that we aren't relying entirely on our own wisdom, in matters of such great consequence. So I guess we can remove Canada from the list, but please can we replace it with France? :) Yes, there is a point when war is necessary (that point may be somewhere between Canada and Iraq, I don't know).  May the Lord lead us and give our leaders wisdom in determining this.

On this matter, I still can't say yes, and I still can't say no.  Perhaps you have spent more time considering this matter than I have.  But for now, my position on this still remains "Pray Fervently!"

Hey, I wanted to be the first one who Brent ripped to shreds! ;D  Actually on second thought, be my guest. ;D

I knew we would see you here eventually. ;)

BTW, thanks for the t-shirt.  ;D

Dear Retread:

Absolutley,  North Korea is on the list.  However, there is a subtle difference, let me explain.

Anyone who threatens the safety and security of America is what the framers of the Constitution called an "enemy."  They used the common dictionary definition of the word.  The constitution called for an army to protect the nation from enemies.  Simple and direct.  These same framers also warned against entangling foreign alliances, with which we are now engaged to the hilt.  This idiotic foreign policy is mostly to blame for our problems.  If we used the army on our enemies, and saved the diplomacy for our friends, things would be much clearer.  However, we now have this really stupid thing called the United Nations,  where we agree to use diplomats to negotiate with people who swear they want to kill us, while at the same time allowing a bunch of foreign beureacrats to put a leash on our army!  Madness!!

So, here is the difference.  While Korea is a nation, and the southern half is friendly, Islam is a religion, that has its roots in the mideast.  Islam is our enemy, at least that's what they teach in their mosques. There is no reasoning with these people, the only thing that will cause them to snap out of it is force, as I have suggested below.  These people promise to blow up Jews and Americans ASAP, and have demonstrated true consistency and honesty because their actions back up their words.  Ever hear of Nasser?

So, we have nukes, but we don't use 'em.  Russian has nukes, but they don't use 'em.  China has nukes, but they don't use 'em, same with Great Britain, Japan, Israel, India, France, Pakistan(very shakey here), Germany, North Korea, etc.

If an enemy threatens us, but has shown restraint and reasonableness, as did the USSR, then containment may be the best course of action.  We made it clear to Russia that MAD would assure their death minutes after they launched on us.  Because they were somewhat rational, they never launched, and our superior, free society ended up "winning."

However, these creeps with turbans, who marry several women, and treat them like dirt, do not think like this.  They think more along the lines of,  "Allah will stop the Infidel missiles in mid-air!  We do not be afraid to launch, Allah Akbar!  The American Infidels are to cowardly to fight back.  They will never capture our leader, Allah will give us victory!  Our youth will proudly die in order to kill the Jew and Christian..."

A policy of containment with these people is simply a policy of giving them more time to figure out how best to kill us.  The answer is to kill them now, quickly and decisively.

Korea may be different, in that they have had nukes for a while, and have not seen fit to light them off.  They need to be watched closely, and popped if necessary.  A cold-war approach, where we starve them economically, may be in order for North Korea, but DEFINITELY NOT FOR ISLAM!!

Brent

Wow, I couldn't have said it better.  As far as the UN goes, these are exactly my beliefs.  BTW, what are your thoughts on the Council on Foreign Relations, and their influence on US foreign policy.  I don't want to get you started here. (okay, maybe I do ;D)
Even though North Korea hasn't used any nukes, I fear that Kim Jong Il, may not exactly be "somewhat rational".

My wife will warn you not to get me going on certain things, and this is one of them.  

 ::)  YIPES   I better not ask about those other things!


Oh, and by the way, I'll rip anyone to shreds if they advocate "No war," ....

 ;)  Warning..warning... my husband was a collegiate football player and wrestler.  Not that he advocates "no war," but it really is possible to have a different political viewpoint and still be friends... at least I thought so!   ???

Hi Tanya and Aaron:

I put a wink/smiley by that comment about ripping people to shreds.  If I did rip anyone, it would be on the BB.  I really don't want to tangle with Aaron on the football field, or in wrestling.   ;)  Of course people can be friends when they have a different opinion.  Most of our friends are actually republican, but we do have one democrat family that we are close to.  We just don't talk about certain things with the republicans, and talk about very little other than family, weather and neutral subjects with the democrats...




I don't think this guy is on par with Margaret Thatcher either, but the fact is, he hasn't launched yet.  That shows some rational thought and restraint.

Compare that with Hamas, or Islamic Jihad, not to mention Al Quaida.  These guys are quite happy to die, and will gladly launch anything that will kill.  Can you imagine flying a plane into a building in order to kill a bunch of people?

That's the difference.

The Council on Foreign Relations is just another way to water down our sovereignty and bleed off more of my tax dollars into the black hole of foreign countries and their messed up economies.  I much prefer the ideas that Thomas Jefferson so eloquently penned:

Free trade with willing partners, entangling foreign alliances with none.  (paraphrased slightly)

George Washington:  "Do not be involved with European wars."

It's all about freedom folks.  The more we get into the UN, social programs, and entangling alliances of all sorts, the less freedom we have, and the more complicated and hypocritical we become.  

deToqueville:  "America is great because America is good."  He said this after exhaustive study of American culture.  He was especially impressed with neighborhoods and churches, and the way people helped eachother out.  Of course, this sort of thing is laughed at now, which is why America is no longer great, only stronger than the other pathetic countries.

Brent

I have yet another question for you Brent.  If we don't accomplish "massive nuclear destruction of the Mid-East", and just focus on winning a war with Iraq (this is what our president is working on), do you think that this will do more harm than good? Will a cleanup of Iraq, end up in causing an increase in resolve amongst Muslims to more fervently seek to destroy us? Remember, these folks are fanatics.  A successful campaign in Iraq, will not win them over. So if you had to vote on a war with Iraq with no chance of "massive nuclear destruction of the Mid-East", where would you stand?  As for me, I still do not have peace over this decision.

Congressman Ron Paul's speech at the Ludwig von Mises Institute on October 19, 2002:

   http://www.mises.org/mp3/20th/RonPaul.mp3 (http://www.mises.org/mp3/20th/RonPaul.mp3)

His view on preemptive war with Iraq, starts at about 40 minutes into the mp3.

I really agree with Brent in most of his points about this whole war.  

Just wanted to add something.  As we ponder Islam, let us relate it to history.  And let us relate it to their Koran.  

We must first convince ourselves that Islam is not "just another world religion."  But it is a dangerous one that teaches its followers that the only way to be totally sure of your entrance into heaven is to be a "martyr."  The kind that takes others with him or her.  We must know that Muslims hate us with a vengeance.  Not just us as Americans, or as the top world power, but as Christians, ladies and gentlemen.  They are commanded to eliminate us.

Think of these Muslim countries.  They treat their women dispicably as Brent said.  They have brutal ways of punishment for crossing the law.  And they kill Christians.  They blow up churches.  They mow down simple believers with guns and machetes.  They stop them from meeting.

But the American, liberal media says little about these horendous acts.  There might be a little blip now and then, but there is never any public outcry.  And just like the catastrophe of 9/11 became muddled and confused, so does each death at Muslim hands.

Subscribe to Voice of the Martyrs.  That will open your eyes.

When this war was falling into place, I joked that they should just make a nice lake out of Iraq.

I think they should send in a group of snipers and top notch commandoes.  But maybe that might become "Black Hawk Down."

I don't know all the details, but I do know this much.  That Islam is an evil and corrupt religion, full of hatred and malice.  Remember, Christians(and Americans), that you are in their scope, and I think this war will help lessen that.  

Peace will never come to the Middle East until Christ returns and starts His heavenly government.

A Brother in Christ,

Luke Robinson  

How true that statement is Luke.  The only thing I might add is that a false peace will come, right before sudden destruction.  For all my ranting about the right thing to do in the Middle East, we both know how it will end.  My hope is that by acting correctly now, we can put off the horrible day of God's wrath.  Nevertheless, come quickly Lord Jesus!

Retread, as for your question about Iraq,  I think it will be great if we take over the country and then let some Texans, who know how to pump oil, get in there and help us out of our recession.  Iraq owes us about 10 years worth of oil, in my book.  The fact that America controlled major oil fields in the Mid-east would take the wind out of the Saudi's sails big time.  Giving our allies oil at a cheaper price, where we get the profit would also be good.  It would generate goowill with everyone, even the French.

However, if we do an Afghanistan in Iraq, and blow a few things up, get rid of Sadaam, and then pump billions of Amercan tax dollars into their pathetic economy, and spend billions on some Buddhist/Muslim/Rastafarian U.N. Humanitarian mission, this whole thing will be a disaster.  All we will have accomplished is to allow fundamentalist Islam to gain a strong foothold in a heretofore secualr Mid-East nation.  Sadaam may be a horrible man, but he is not nearly as bad as the Ayatollah's of Iran, or the Imam's of Saudi Arabia.  

Removing Sadaam, and then giving them a bunch of my money will only serve to allow a more radical version of Islam to take root in Iraq.  Sadly, this is what I think is going to happen.  I know many Christians are really high on George W. Bush.  I understand this, but I do not share their admiration of the man.  I know he is a nice man, and NOTHING like Bill Clinton, but I really worry that he listens to the UN, and our European "allies" way too much.

Its time the USA again took a leadership role in the world, instead of pretending we are on the same level as Bahrain, Senegal and Camaroon.  If we lead, by visiting the type of destruction on our enemies, that only a super-power can achieve, we will put the rest of these idiots on notice.  I promise revolutions in many of these countries, and a quick disposal of terrorists.  Dictators, who realize that they be blamed for allowing the likes of Al Qaida in their countries will quickly decide that it is better to put their handcuffed Muslim "brothers" on a plane to New York, than to be on the business end of a minuteman missile armed with an MRV warhead.

Again, we all know that this will not happen.  The era of great men, and bold action based on moral principles is long over.  

Come quickly Lord Jesus!

Brent

Ah yes, no good deed goes unpunished.  So if this looks like what the result will be, why should we support this war?

I don't necessarily agree with it all, but there are some interesting perspectives at:

   http://www.iraqwar.org (http://www.iraqwar.org)

The more I read, the more cautious I am becoming.

Well, I don't have a problem with just taking over Iraq for a little while at least.  It can be the 51st state.  And we can put in McDonald's and Nike and I'll bet those poor women would like some Levi's.   ;D

And I like the Texan Oil idea, Brent.  Let us use the oil!  Our economy is hurting, and this would be an awesome opportunity to bring it up again.  

Why can't Iraq be a democracy?  I mean, instead of an abusive, tyrannical government.  Why can't we own the darn place?  The U.N. is full of ninnies that are too frightened and weak-kneed.  We need some guts in a day and age where fear is king.  

Winston Churchill once said:"Democracy is the worst form of government...except for all the rest."  Democracy isn't the greatest as someone said earlier, but it is a heck of a lot better than what 98% of the countries have out there right now.  

But in all of this, God is sepreme over all.  God Bless you.

A Brother in Christ,

Luke Robinson    

This guy is great! Too bad I'm in Illinois.

Glad to hear someone say that! The testosterone level needs to be lowered a little. Glands have their place but they need to stay where they belong and not displace our brains. Shall I invite my Muslim friends over for a Christian BBQ? Maybe we could show them some luv.

Hi Sebastian

I don't think that war=testosterone.  In this case, to stop at "war" indicates more of a Qualude problem, than a testosterone problem.

As for Muslim friends and BBQ's,  I have no problem with that.  I do have a problem with Islamic  "friends" who pray daily that Americans will die and go to hell.  I would take the same stance if the enemy were Catholic, or Mormon.

If you have any Muslim friends in Iran, encourage them to throw off the corrupt government, a la Boston Tea Party, and the American revolution.  That is what decent people used to do in the face of far less tyranny than these people put up with.

Many decent Muslims have fled to the US to escape all of this.  They are welcome, as is anyone else, as long as they obey the law and contribute to society.

Brent

"Qualude" - remarkable use of vocabulary, Brent.  I had to look that one up:


"Qualude" - not in the dictionary


"Quaalude" -

A trademark used for the drug methaqualone.

Word History: The trademark Quaalude for the sedative and hypnotic agent methaqualone is an example of how a product name is carefully chosen for a positive public response. Methaqualone was developed in the 1960s by William H. Rorer, Inc. At that time, the company's best-known product was Maalox, a digestive aid that derived its name from its ingredients, magnesium and aluminum hydroxides. To enhance the product recognition of their new sedative drug, the company incorporated the aa of Maalox into the name Quaalude. The other elements of the name are presumed to be a contraction of the phrase quiet interlude, a soothing, even poetic description of the drug's effect.

"Quaalude" - a sedative-hypnotic drug (trade name Quaalude) that is a drug of abuse.


Ok, so you're saying that, almost as an antonymn of testosterone, someone who is under the effect of the drug Quaalude is sedated and/or hypnotized
into a state of ineffectuality to the point where such an individual would not want a war or be engaged in a conflict of any kind.
So...do you read the dictionary all day long, pick words up out of your medical journals, or know this particular word by experience?

 ;D

Democracy, wha?  I've heard that ours is a republican form of government (elected representatives and all) and not a true democracy.  
But aren't the banks and the mafia the ones who call the shots?

I mean think of the term "Federal Reserve" - which is neither federal nor a reserve, rather a privately-owned banking cartel.  A cartel to which Congress gave the right to moderate America's economy.  

Anyone else think it strange that the economy can be so easily effected by what Sir Greenspan decides will be the interest rate today.  
Anyone else think it strange that you have to take out a loan to buy a house?
Back in the 50's, my grandpa bought a house and five acres of land off of seven-years wages.  So now most people get in debt just to have a home.  So now the economy is greatly affected by interest rates?!  Anyone else see the fantasyland this has become?  
Um..shouldn't the economy be based on what people actually produce and not how much in debt they are?
I suppose it could be said that we have social tinkerers like Roosevelt to thank for that--creating this fake, government (read cartel)-controlled monetary system.  
What exactly is a dollar?  What is that green stuff you have in your wallet?  What backs it?  What backs the points in the index you see for the stock market?  Real good and services?  That would be nice, but if that were the case, the index would be a lot lower than even what it has declined to to this day.
Anyways, just some thoughts.

Ah, Winston Churchill, the man who admitted that he was willing to conclude an alliance with the Devil himself if only Germany might be destroyed.  Winston Churchill may not have been a man who was really committed to freedom.  There is a good article on this in the June 15, 1992 issue of "The New American" magazine.  Just because democracy is better than what 98% of the countries have out there doesn't mean that democracy is what we should have.  Democracy can often be the precursor to tyranny.  Remember the UN started off under the guise of a world democracy for peace, but the real result of this is that it aims to be a tyrannical world government.  Lord Acton had a few interesting things to say about democracy:

"The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority, or rather if that party, not always the majority, that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections."

"It is bad to be oppressed by a minority, but it is worse to be oppressed by a majority."

Majorities can lead to some of the worst tyrannies.  Democracy does nothing to preserve individual liberty.  It is not based on morals or truths, but rather who has the most people on their side.  Votes can't change what is moral, and numbers can't change what is true.

For example, just because more people may disagree with you on this bulletin board than agree with you doesn't make you wrong (nor does it make you right :)).  But this is what democracy seeks to do.  We must stand up for what is right, not what the majority says is right.  Remember, the majority in Iraq may think that "Death to Americans" is a good thing, this doesn't make it right. Also remember that Saddam Hussein claims to have 99% of the vote in his country.  Democracy does not equate to a free society.

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform (or pause and reflect)" - Mark Twain

Arthur and Retread

You guys, of course, are correct.  What we are supposed to have here in America is a Democratic Republic.  It is quite different from a pure Democracy.

In a 100 member democracy, if 51 members decide that everyone with red hair should be tortured and killed, then they shall be.

In a 100 member democratic republic, where each group of 10 people elect one representative, so there are 10 rep's in all, AND where a simple 6/10 majority is required to pass a law,  the 10 read haired people only need persuade 3 other reps to save their lives.  It allows for much more sanity, and checks and balances.  Even more so when a 7/10 majority is called for.  Of course, it becomes increasingly harder to pass any law at that point.

Did you know that Congress passes over 40,000 NEW laws every year?  Most likely, each of us breaks several laws every day, simply because we aren't aware of them.  Fortunately, the police aren't aware of them either.

All this legislation only serves to make people despise the law and authority.  I think it would be great if Congress spent an entire term ERASING laws, while not writing one new law.  That would be usefull.

Arthur, with regard to the Quaalude comment, it just flowed out at about 80 wpm, while I was typing the post.  I have never taken a Quaalude in my life,  but I knew of a couple people who did, although they were not my friends.  In my freshmen year in college, we had certain sayings that we would use to insult and riducule each other.  One of the better ones, which we would use if our friend did something dumb, was:  "You're on a 'lude!"  Another application would be, "That teacher is on 'Ludes!  Did you ever see any of that stuff on the test?"

You get the picture.  ;D

Brent

Bonus! ;D

The U.S. tax code is eight times longer than the Bible--consisting of about 7 million words.  In 1913 it was 14 pages of law.
 
Back in 1913, tax was only one percent (1%) on net personal incomes above $3,000 with a six percent (6%) surtax on incomes of more than $500,000.

(Back then, they were still on the gold standard.  Seeing as how gold goes for about $350/oz today, whereas it was fixed at $20/oz then, an income of $3,000 would be equivalent to about $52,000 today.  So a %1 tax would mean that you'd have to pay $520 in federal tax.  If you made less than $52,000, you wouldn't have to pay anything at all.  Wouldn't that be swell?  Better yet, before 1913 there was no legislated, fixed income tax.  You'd have to pay nothing.   Wouldn't THAT be swell?)

For the 2003 fiscal year, the IRS will have almost 100,000 employees (full-time equivalent) and a budget of $9.9 billion.

-from www.irs.gov

We've come a long way baby!  Talk about being on ludes--perhaps it is a common government staple?!

"How fortunate for those in power that the people never think." - Adolf Hitler

I stand corrected!!  We don't really have a straight democracy!

Well, I think that the Mafia might be behind the scenes, but I think that the Mafia is just a pawn for another group...of which I will not go into.

You're right, Mr. Andrew.  Just let the moronic manliness get out of control.   ;D  Also, I wouldn't advise inviting a Muslim to a BBQ.  AND DEFINETLY NOT PORK CHOPS!!  They might start a Jihad right in your backyard.  Just kidding.  ;)  ;)

So I guess we must have a "crooked" democracy. ;D

No we have a hoosier democracy.

Greetings LR:
The Christian BBQ I was referring to is Brent's foam- at- the mouth scenario-obliteration. It aint 'ludes it's 'tudes. Hey, luv in action.

BTW, was it. you or PR that mentioned the VOM? My family got a chance several years ago to attend their conference in OK while Mr. and Mrs. Wurmbrand were still alive. I really admire(d) them.

It was LR.

From the Dec. 9 '02 issue of Christianity Today magazine:

     Christians should remember that the just-war doctrine is not grounded in revenge, punishment, or even justice.  Thomas Aquinas discussed it in "Summa Theologica"--not in the section on justice but in the section on charity (that is, the love of God).  As Christian scholar Darrell Cole writes, "The Christian who fails to use force to aid his neighbor when prudence dictates that force is the best way to render that aid is an uncharitable Christian.  Hence Christians who willingly and knowingly refuse to engage in a just war...fail to show love towards their neighbor as well as toward God."
     Out of love of neighbor, then, Christians can and should support a preemptive strike, if ordered by the appropriate magistrate to prevent an imminent attack.
           ---by Chuck Colson
     

Ah, a "Just War". This brings up a few questions.  What is a just war?  Who decides? In the case of Iraq, if we enter into a war to "liberate" Iraq, should it be the people of Iraq that decide if it is a just war? Should it be individuals that decide for themselves or should they just follow a leader?  Hey, maybe I should decide!  No, there is a real formula for disaster, I'll just follow someone else, that should be safe, maybe George Bush, maybe George Geftakys, maybe George of the Jungle, maybe Curious George.  Maybe I need to find an "appropriate" magistrate. I guess that I'll just let George of the Jungle let me know if the magistrate is appropriate.

If I want to defend my neighbor then this is my right, but if someone (the government) takes the collectivist notion that it is okay to take someone's wealth (in taxes) and use it to support their war (for the greater good of society of course ;D) then we need to be careful who's interest the war is in.  A war can take billions of dollars to execute.  Is taking billions of dollars from the innocent of this country a "just" thing? Should I endorse one injustice under the guise of protecting against another?  Maybe I should fight for my neighbor to protect him against this theft of property to support a war?  If a war is not in the interest of our country, then the confiscation of money by the government of our country to support the war is wrong, wrong, wrong (oh by the way did I say that it was WRONG yet), however that said our individual right to support a war effort should still remain.

I don't want to make the decision that it is okay to commit a crime against one individual to supposedly protect another. Chuck Colson refers to a "Just War", I wonder if he believes that there is also "just stealing", "just lying", "just adultery", etc. (for the greater good of course).  When we have to ask ourselves if the end justifies the means, then we should take real pause in what we are embarking on.

Yes, I will stand up to protect my neighbor, however I don't think that it would be "just" for me to steal an old lady's purse to get the money to pay for a gun to help me do this.

Okay, it looks like I am beginning to ramble on, and I will stop before I sound too much like a "peacenik".  I do actually believe in a strong military, despite what this message may look like.

Retread (in a ??? >:( :'( mood, but still :) in Jesus)

Hi Retread  :)

Excellent reasoning below.

In your thoughts below, you imply he problem with the "war" in Iraq very well.  

Is Iraq a threat to the safety and security of the American people?

I say yes, but only in an indirect way.  As I have stated before, Islam qualifies as an enemy, and Iraq only as it aids and abets Islam by giving weapons, money, shelter and training to terrorists.

Iraq is definitely a threat to its neighbors, as any Kuwaiti will tell you.  However, they aren't doing too much about it, we are!  This aspect of the "war" really makes not much sense, as you so well discibed.

However, if we look at radical Islam as the enemy, which is correct, then Iraq is a target far down the list when compared to Iran, Saudi Arabia, Libya and some others.

Taking out Sadaam is not going to accomplish much.  I hope it will be slightly helpful, but I fear it will only spend what little goodwill we have with other nations.

Massive nuclear destruction of the heart of Islam, however, would do a great deal of good.  Islam, and the terrorists associated with it, is a true threat to America.

If only we had leadership that could articulate things clearly, and had the guts to say the truth, even though a minority in the press would squawk about it!  I mean, if people are going to hate us, we might as well teach them to respect us.

Bottom line, I am not "for" the war in Iraq, except that it lead to bolder action in the region.  Since I know better, I guess I have to come out against it, even though I think Sadaam is a wicked man.  It should be the responsibility of the Iraqis to liberate themselves.

Brent