Christians in Iraq

Christians in sudan and iraq need to be granted

expedited refugee status to come to the united

states ..I would hope the church in total

could agree on this and start preping for it

to take in the mass of population...I think

we still are truly a christian nation and

christians in the world do look to us ...

the naked truth is the church here is

wealthy and we do have the capacity to take

in others christians from around the world.

THEY SHOULD NOT BE LEFT TO HANG OUT TO DRY,

WE ARE RESPONSIBLE PERIOD.

 

Would North Korea harbour Osama Bin Laden?

 

I don't know.

Joseph Botwinick

 

There is no question they would give him nukes for the right price if they had them.

 

And if you had your way, he would still be doing it. It is a good thing that everyone doesn't value life the way you do.

 

Several, and some already have them.

Probably not ... at least until they are in violation of 17 UN resolutions over 12 years.

None of us like War.

Completely inappropriate to use profanity on this board. This is at least the second time you have done it. You are out of line and need to apologize and change your habits.

No one says that he did. Saddam was in violation of 17 UN resolutions over 12 years.

No, he didn't. He presented a flawed weapons report to the UN.

No, his name is Blix and he said that he didn't know for sure, but that it was possible he had them. You are late to this discussion. I have provided quotes from Blix and Kay both who said that they believed Saddam was in violation, just as Bush did.

Somewhere in Pakistan probably. There are many people looking for him. He has been rendered ineffective by the military power at work. He will eventually be caught, but for now, he can't really do anything. The search continues for him, and in the meantime millions of people have been freed from a tyrannical dictator who murdered innocent people. Why is that not good? Do you really want another Hitler? Do you really want another Rwanda or Sudan? That is what was going on under Saddam in Iraq to the tunes of hundreds of thousands of people murdered by him.

And BTW, Bush is your president too. </font>[/QUOTE]You got to be kidding me. The same excuses everytime! Bush is not my President, just as SATAN is not my Saviour, and don't you ever forget that Larry! I claim not and Pledge not to no flag or country. My kingdom is not of this earth and you should understand that.

I am so happy that Saddam is not in power. But how he was removed from Power is the issue! BUSH LIED TO GET HIM AND HE SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN HIM HIS FIRST YEAR IN OFFICE! But he blamed him for 911 and on national TV said that he was not thinking about the man who claimed 911 as a victory in JIHAD. Now lets see how humanitarian YOUR president get's with Iran and North Korea. He may posture, but he want do a thing!

Ron

 

If I had my way, no one would be doing it to anyone. You aren't a very honest person, Larry.

You had your way, and now Islamic militants are slaughtering Christians and American soldiers.

If everyone valued life the way I do, neither of those would happen. Why you get less riled about terrorists killing Chrstians than Saddam killing Islamic militants is a mystery to me.

Granted, Bush did it, but you aren't obligated to approve of everything Bush does.

 

Are you lying about living in Washingto DC? Bush is the president for all Americans. Unless you live somewhere else, Bush is your president. That doesn't mean he is your god or that you pledge allegiance to him. It simply means the reality is that Bush is the president for all Americans.

[]/qb]This lie has been soundly refuted. Bush acted on the best intelligence we had and it did it in good faith. He did not lie. That is indisputable.

Well, No he didn't.

That is not even a sentence.

 

You know very well that I am a very honest person. I was referring to the fact that you opposed the removal of Saddam Hussein. YOu know exactly what I was talking about. You simply didn't want to be honest and admit it.

That wasn't my way, and neither is there any slaughter going on. This is one of the cleanest wars in modern times. History has shown that to be the case. Of course, you would have to know history to put that in perspective.

I am not less riled about it. I pointed out the aburdity and inconsistency of your position earlier in this thread. There are fewer Christians being killed now than there were Muslims under Hussein. And if American doesn't quit, there will be a thriving democracy in Iraq.

Did what? He got rid of a mass murderer who was in violation of 17 UN resolutions. He got rid of a man who had systematically killed his own people. He got rid of a despot. Which one of those is bad?

I don't. I approve of very little that he does, as I have shown before. You just happen to be attacking him on one of the few decent things he has done, even though it has not been done perfectly.

 

Are you lying about living in Washingto DC? Bush is the president for all Americans. Unless you live somewhere else, Bush is your president. That doesn't mean he is your god or that you pledge allegiance to him. It simply means the reality is that Bush is the president for all Americans.

[]/qb]This lie has been soundly refuted. Bush acted on the best intelligence we had and it did it in good faith. He did not lie. That is indisputable.

Well, No he didn't.

That is not even a sentence. </font>[/QUOTE]1. Bush is not my President. And I do live in Washington, DC.

2. Bush did not get faulty intelligence. The CIA told him Saddam had nothing to do with it. He and the NEOCONS wanted to Attack when he was elected!

3. He did blame him, if he had not, why would you say on National TV that you were not concern about the Man who did. Sounds like a switch to me!

4. Sorry about that and thanks for correcting me, but you get the point. Bush is a coward, and if he was not he would attack Korea, a nations that could destroy us within 45 minutes of a command.

Facts are Facts Larry.

Ron

 

Ron,

Who is your president if it isn't President Bush? I think what you meant to say was that Bush is not who you wish was your president. However, unless you are not a citizen of the United States, or you don't understand our system of government and how Bush was elected again by those of us in the Red States, President Bush is, indeed your president, again.

Merry Christmas,

Joseph Botwinick

 

Barbarian observes:
If I had my way, no one would be doing it to anyone. You aren't a very honest person, Larry.

You've given me no reason to think so. You repeatedly misrepresented what I said, in spite of reminders.

Actually, I supported it. I was displeased that Bush lied to me about it to get my support, and I disagree with the way he's bungled it, causing more American deaths, threatening the existence of the Christian community in Iraq, and letting terrorists operate freely.

Of course I do. You didn't want to argue with the position I had, so you pretended that I thought something else.

Barbarian observes:
You had your way, and now Islamic militants are slaughtering Christians and American soldiers.

They just killed another 19 American soldiers. You don't think that's "slaughter?"

Barbarian observes:
Why you get less riled about terrorists killing Chrstians than Saddam killing Islamic militants is a mystery to me.

You were making excuses for Bush doing it. And you rather blatantly misrepresented what I said.

Barbarian observes:
Saddam slaughtered hundered of Islamic extremists for opposing him.

(Larry responds with a falsehood)

You should be ashamed of yourself, but I doubt if you will be.

Would you say that there have been fewer Muslims killed since we removed Hussein? Of course not. The reason that the terrorists who moved in after Bush destroyed the Iraqi Army haven't killed as many Christians is that there aren't that many Christians to begin with. And there are a lot fewer now than before, thanks to Bush. I doubt if I'm the only one to think carefully about your argument.

So you think the Shiite majority is going to just roll over and become democratic because...?

Barbarian observes, regarding the actions that made possible the pesecution of Christians:
Granted, Bush did it,

Destroyed order in Iraq and made it possible for Islamist terrorists to bomb Christian churches, murder Christians, and kidnap them.

And enabled other mass murderers.

America does not serve the UN.

He allowed terrorists to set up shop in Iraq. He did not replace the Iraqi security forces with a sufficient number of Americans to prevent disorder and persecution of Christians.

The last two.

Barbarian observes:
but you aren't obligated to approve of everything Bush does.

Explain to us how letting the Islamic terrorists destroy the Christian community in Iraq is a decent thing.

 

Bush is your president whether you like it or not. All Americans have a president elected by teh people.

Bush did get faulty intelligence. It was intelligence that the whole intelligence gathering world believed. Iraq was not attacked because of 9/11. Bush has clearly stated that.

 

That's a lie and you know it.

First, you lied by saying that Bush lied. He did not and you know it. You have seen the proof of it. It is hard for you to admit you are wrong, especially when you have been so boisterous about it, but it is time.

But more to the point, have you not said that we shouldn't have done it, since we found out the intelligence was wrong?

You accused me of misrepresenting your words, and then turn around and do it to me. That is hypocrisy. If you know what I was talking about (your opposition to the Iraq War), then you should not pretend like I was talking about something else (you being in favor of eradicating all killing).

 

Barbarian observes:
You repeatedly misrepresented what I said, in spite of reminders.

You're very careless with that accusation, and I'm not the only person who has noticed. I will say it again. You misrepresented what I said, after being reminded what I actually said.

Each of us gets to decide what we think. And people who try to "correct" us on what we think are considered to be dishonest, for obvious reasons. That's how it is, Larry.

Barbarian on the war:
Actually, I supported it. I was displeased that Bush lied to me about it to get my support, and I disagree with the way he's bungled it, causing more American deaths, threatening the existence of the Christian community in Iraq, and letting terrorists operate freely.

He lied, because he told us that he knew Saddam had WMD, at the same time that his own intelligence people told him that there was no reliable evidence for it.

Obviously, if we go to war by mistake or because our leaders lie to us about it, then it was wrong. In retrospect, it's obvious that this war damaged America, gave terrorists a foothold in yet another country, killed well over a thousand good Americans, cost untold billions of dollars and is now destroying the Christian church in that country. Yeah, that's a mistake. Now, if Bush actually pulls out and leaves behind a stable, western-style democracy in Iraq, I'll admit it was worth the effort. But it's moving the other way, isn't it?

Barbarian on Larry's false attribution of ideas:
You didn't want to argue with the position I had, so you pretended that I thought something else.

It's what you did, Larry. There's no point in denying it.

If so, you should have said it. Too late to change it.

Barbarian on whether Americans are being slaughtered in Iraq:
They just killed another 19 American soldiers. You don't think that's "slaughter?"

People who were there, disagree with you. They said it was a horror. Three more died yesterday. Maybe you don't think it amounts to slaughter, but the people involved and their families would disagree. They are just as dead as if a hundred died at once.

Barbarian observes:
You were making excuses for Bush doing it.

C'mon Larry. Everyone's seen the posts.

Barbarian observes:
And you rather blatantly misrepresented what I said.

Look here...(Larry does it again)

Q.E.D.

No, you lied about that. I said it was good that he was removed. I said that it was stupid and counterproductive to destroy order in Iraq, because it allowed terrorists in to kill Americans, destabilize the government, and to destroy the Christian community there.

We could have taken out Saddam, and left the middle ranks of the Baathists to maintain order, with the understanding that if they did not act as Saddam had, there would be no more trouble.

You aren't a very honest person, Larry.

Barbarian observes:
Would you say that there have been fewer Muslims killed since we removed Hussein? Of course not.

Yes, we do know. In fact, the number of Iraqis killed since we invaded is much greater than the number Saddam killed.

The New England Journal of Medicine did a study on veterans of the Iraqi war, and found that 14% reported killing at least one Iraqi civillian (mostly terrorists)
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/351/1/13

Assuming they each killed just one, that would be about 30,000. There have been all sorts of figures tossed out about Saddam, but evidence is for less than 10,000. (the inflated figures count Iraqi soldiers killed in the war against Iran)

there aren't that many Christians to begin with. And there are a lot fewer now than before, thanks to Bush.

Nope. But he was responsible for making it possible for the terrorists to do it. Saddam didn't allow them to attack Christians. Bush allows it.

But it isn't working, is it? The churches get bombed. Christians are killed and kidnapped. Didn't happen under Saddam, because he wouldn't permit it. Not because he was a nice guy. Because he didn't care about religion, and he hated muslim terrorists.

That's a very good decision. Too bad you weren't that honest to begin with.

Barbarian observes:
Destroyed order in Iraq and made it possible for Islamist terrorists to bomb Christian churches, murder Christians, and kidnap them.

You just told me you had no idea how many he killed. Why don't you show me the evidence that Saddam killed that many people. Opinions from someone else is not evidence.

Barbarian's response to Larry's attempt to justify the war by UN authority:
America does not serve the UN.

If you agree with me, why did you use the UN's authority to justify us going to war?

Barbarian on Larry's suggesting that Bush did a decent thing in Iraq:
Explain to us how letting the Islamic terrorists destroy the Christian community in Iraq is a decent thing.

So, it wasn't decent after all? Bush made it possible, didn't he?

Whoever has control in Iraq is. Who do you think that is?

Well, we'll wait until we get some evidence for those "hundreds of thousands."

Good luck.

 

Another lie. I am not careless with the accusation at all. I state it when it is the truth. Previously, I dealt with you by allowing you room to simply be mistaken. But you have done it too often and too consistently. I did not misrepresent what you said. You changed the topic in order to pretend that. My point was clear. You can go back and read it and try not to miss it this time.

AGain, you lie. He acted in good faith on intelligence that everyone agreed with. You again were dishonest enough to not tell us that he had conflicting reports, but that they mass of evidence supported the fact that he knew he had them. You just don't learn.

I didn't say it wasn't a horror or tragedy. I said it wasn't a slaughter. It clearly wasn't in terms of war. If it happened in MacDonald's, yes it would be a slaughter, but war is clearly different.

That's not true, but you are probably uninformed as you are on many things. Most reports say about 300,000; some say 400,000. It is hard to know exactly. Excavating mass graves is difficult to do without destroying bodies. But this pattern of killing has gone on for 24 years, (and you defend it in the same way that I defend Bush ... which means you don't defend it at all.)

Most of your post is filled with your usual nonsense. You continue to demonstrate an extreme lack of critical thinking skills and a lack of hte ability to process information intellectually. It is inconceivable why this is. You have the ability to read. But there is a disconnect when it comes to connecting sentences and thoughts in the context of a conversation. It is sad to see. Hopefully one day you will realize this and take some steps to improve. It would be nice if you stopped posting until you did. You need to learn to resist the urge to reply. It doesn't suit you well. You aren't good at the interchange here. Almost every post contains something so off the wall it is hard to know if you are posting in jest or playing he devil's advocate, or if you really mean it. Sometimes, I am convinced of the former, but it happens so often that it is hard to discount the latter. The knowledge you lack is not hard to come by, especially in an internet age. You should avail yourself of it.

 

Yes, Larry, we all know you are fond of calling people who disagree with you "liars." We all know you've again gotten embarassed by presuming to argue that you know better than they do, what they think.

But let's get to the issue. You made an assertion of hundreds of thousands of people killed by Saddam.

I asked you for some documentation.

You replied:

Yep. The usual evidence-free Larry post. How did I know you'd have no evidence?

By now you should know why, Larry.

Better luck next time.

 

While we debate who said what ..Iraqi christians

cannot even worship as they please.

Lets get out in front of this issue and offer

them assylum a place to come too as they

are the ones in real persecution.

We are the wealthiest christian church in the

world if we organize we can take these people

in...lets also take in indonesia and sudan as

well. Iraq is lost(naked truth as I see it)and

revenge killings will be taken out on Iraqi

christians.

 

Since the actions of the United States are responsible for the plight of Iraqi Christians, it is our moral responsibility to offer them asylum if they apply for it.