English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

17 answers

Not sure, a joint Christian resolution defining a "justified war" was put out quite some time ago, signed by leading protestant church leaders and the Pope. These leaders today are royally peeved at Bush's betrayal of Christian values. Unfortunately, the ghost of a "possible terror attack", Cheney's 1% doctrine, trumps all logic of most of the petty spiritual leaders in this country. Tying these same politics to the pro-life, anti-gay, and racist movements means almost unquestioned Church backing for most of the administration's policies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Just_War_tradition

2006-07-03 19:46:57 · answer #1 · answered by lostinromania 5 · 0 1

Let me put it this way - you don't have access to the Secret and Top Secret information that the President does as well as many of our military troops. I know that we needed to go into Iraq and take Saddam out. When I hear people saying this, it's due to ignorance. These people who say we shouldn't have gone in are the same people that would be having a fit if Sadaam attacked the US or countries near-by for NOT doing something. It makes me sick...my husband is a fighter pilot in the Air Force and I am proud that he has served three tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. You have no idea what goes on there or all the GOOD that the US troops have done in Iraq. How can any religious person say that it's OK to allow Saddam murder and plunder the people of Iraq and NOT try to stop him? UUUGGGGHHH!!

2006-07-03 19:50:06 · answer #2 · answered by tieia 4 · 0 0

The notion that the present war in Iraq was unjustified is, of course, absurd. As another respondent has noted, it was one of the conditions of the cease-fire of 1991 that Iraq would, in an accoutable manner, destroy its WMD (which it was known to have since it had used them). Iraq did not do so. Even though he needed no further authority to resume the war, Bush obtained the support of the Congress to do so.
So, what happened to the Iraqi WMD? Some 500 chemical weapons shells have been found in Iraq, but the bulk of the munitions and materials (amounting to several thousand tons) were secretly shipped to Syria in June 2002. As far as is known, they are still there.
In addition to its chemical and biological weapons, Iraq was working on nuclear weapons, although the program turns out to have been not too far advanced. Uranium enrichment is not easy to do, but it is trivially easy to construct a Hiroshima-type bomb if you have about thirty pounds of the stuff. (I designed a workable uranium bomb when I was in junior high school.) Such a bomb could fit in a crate the size of an office desk, and if detonated from an upper floor of the Empire State Building, would pretty much wreck everything from the top of Central Park to the Battery, immediately kill close to a million people, and injure hundreds of thousands more. Any President who would countenance such a threat is totally irresponsible.
You will note that this has absolutely nothing to do with religion. It has everything to do with the FACT that there are people out there who do not like us and will do what they can to kill us.

2006-07-03 20:41:17 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Christianity in this country has become a religion of convenience.

Few people, outside of the Amish or the Quakers, actually try to follow the real teachings of Christ to the letter. What we do is pick and chose, discarding His teachings we find incontinent and following those we can justify.

Bush supports both Democracy when it's convenient and dictatorships when there is money to be made, like with Saudi Arabia and Angola.

Realistically, our government can not afford to be TOO Christan (but by the actual teachings of Christ) because if we were we would have been wiped out as a nation years ago.

So, as a government we should try to at least abide by the spirit of the faith.

My issues with Bush is not in his handling of national defense (which I think he has done a good job), but his very un-Christian use of dirty tricks politics, distortions and deflections of the truth, with his determination to fatten the pockets of the very rich at the expense of the middle class.

2006-07-03 19:56:54 · answer #4 · answered by Doc Watson 7 · 0 0

Wasn't real thrilled about going but even the Democrats said yes. Now I say we need to finish or things will go really bad. You act like Saddam was an angel. Do you forget what he was capable of? What was unjustified? Maybe you should ask the Kurds or some people from Kuwait? Its for sure you cant ask the 5000 people of his he gassed. Or the countless others he had murdered.

2006-07-03 19:49:12 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

That's easy.

You have to accept that he (the President) won two elections.

You have to accept that Congress (both houses) gave him the authority to go to war. Don't give me any crap about NO DECLARATION OF WAR.

No WMDs? Gimme a break. If you had them and you knew we were coming for you would you:
1) Let them be captured? NO
2) Destroy them? Possibly
3) Give them to another Ba'athist country like Syria? Maybe
4) Bury them so they can be dug up later? Probably

And since when does Christian = Pacifist? Turn the other cheek works once. After that it's time to kick butt. It's that or die screaming on your knees having your head hacked off by a dull knife.

And please don't doubt for a minute that I am a religious person. I've seen more religion in my time than most.

2006-07-03 20:25:09 · answer #6 · answered by Radio Spy 3 · 0 0

Wow... what does it take to justify war? Aparently none of these little indiscretions:

- genocide
- rape and torture chambers
- state sponsored terrorism (Saddam paid rewards to families of suicide bombers)
- Use of chemical weapons against Kurds
- Threatening to use chemical weapons against USA (whether you believe they existed at the start of the war or not, Iraq threatened to use them. Should we just go ahead and assume N. Korea is lying about using nukes against us? Or should we assume that they are threatening to use nukes because the have nukes? Same thing here.. Saddam said they had chem and bio weapons and we knew they were used against the Kurds, so why should we believe they didn't exist)
- Shooting at US aircraft in no-fly zone.. last I looked, shooting at US aircraft is an act of war (by the way, the "1st" Iraq war was not officially over. Iraq violated the terms of what was effectively a cease-fire, which included the no-fly zone)

All these OK with you?

2006-07-03 19:57:18 · answer #7 · answered by Keith H 2 · 0 0

Tell me how removing a murdering madman and his two equally crazy sons is bad. Let me guess you don't like how the war is going. To many deaths for you. Let me tell you something. By now in WWII we had already lost 50x more that we have lost now. We made a couple of million people's lives better, and you want us to cut and run because to many people have died. Your probably of the same mind set as those in RDDBs (red diaper doper babies) during the 60's.

2006-07-03 23:36:01 · answer #8 · answered by Saint 3 · 0 0

That is a great question. As a christian, it astounds me what is said and believed about this war from fundamentalist Christians..

Christ's views on violence are very clear, if we live by the sword we will die by the sword. He taught about looking at ourselves and fixing our own 'sins' before we were qualified to fix someone else's. His message was one of peace. To 'love they neighbor' was one of his greatest commandments. So I agree with you, for it is unjustified and wrong.

2006-07-03 19:54:03 · answer #9 · answered by D 4 · 0 0

They are just plainly out of their minds doing that. As a Christian, I have never supported this illegal war since the war drums first sounded in late '02; then the mess followed thereafter.

2006-07-03 19:46:51 · answer #10 · answered by brian 2010 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers