Obama’s War Policies Worse than Bush’s, Anti-War Activists Say

Takling about the phrase "non-combat" troops---------

We have about 4 Army divisions deployed in South Korea and another 4 divisions stationed in Germany

Are these troops in S Korea and Germany "non-combat"?????

True-----not all is rosy between North and South Korea---but we haven't fired a shot in anger there since '53 and for the most part--the folks in Germany are law abiding-----I can see the need for "combat" troops in Iraq---but Germany????

 

LOL, and the war is one reason some people voted for obama(despite his murderous stance concerning children), lol, it isn't going to get better anytime soon. obama just wants his own war, not the leftovers of bush.

 

O"bama rex is like a dog chasing his tail. He is cutting the size of the military while Russia is revamping theirs.

 

So you're posting this because you agree with these anti-war demonstrators who say we should immediately leave both Afghanistan and Iraq? I'm surprised.

 

My guess is Obama will have most of our troops tied up in different parts of the world or involved with the U.N. Most of which, where they are not needed.

 

"But, Oceania Was Always At War With Eastasia..."

Remember, you "must not only obey, but 'love' Big Brother".

George Orwell only got the year wrong.

 

Right...cause we all live with a telescreen in our house. :laugh:

 

I am against both wars. I want all of our troops home tomorrow. If you were against war, really against war, you would have supported Ron Paul. You are against wars, except when a democrat leads them. That is the worst form of hypocrisy.

You also keep yourself ignorant of a lot of fellow poster's positions, most likely on purpose, to somehow exalt yourself over people you feel are "lesser" Christians. You've been challenged enough times by me to know where I stand. You do this garbage on purpose.

 

I will admit that I didn't know Ron Paul or his positions too well but I am very much in favor of responsibly ending these wars.

 

Don't hold yer breath.

 

And I figured Just Christian would disappear as soon as being confronted on his ignorance. Happens all the time with him. I'm not worried, because he'll do the same thing again, and again, and again, and again.....

 

That was an excellent post. Yes, you have been against the war for a while. It is refreshing to see insight that recognizes both Democrats and Republicans for what they are, creations from the pits of hell. Neither has a clue or could care less about the Constitution or serving our citizens.

If I had my way, all troops would be withdrawn around the world to help patrol the borders here. If someone gives us trouble, well we could stop that in a few minutes and give them a new gigantic parking lot to build a Walmart.

To those of you who endlessly argue about which party is doing this nation better, read the Constitution, then compare it to what is happening today in the last three administrations.

 

Why is this not considered trolling? I was told it was making derogatory remarks toward another poster which has nothing to do with the OP. Maybe Matt will answer, since you are the one who said this to me in another thread:

BTW, this is not about Bro. Curtis. I only use this as an example.

 

There are several reasons that Bro Curtis's post is not trolling. The main one is he has been here much longer than me, and always engages in debate to get his point across, whether I agree with him or not, and usually do agree with him. He answers differences of opinion and does not give opposite views to attack or be mean to another.

As far as the name you quoted him calling the other poster, it was not a personal attack, but a name to characterize his obvious lack of consistancy on the war issue between administrations.

With 31 posts, maybe you should read more threads and get the tone of the back and forth. You need to learn the difference between a mean, personal attack and honest debate before making rash statements in a forum you are unfamiliar with.

 

The reason we have war is not because God doesn't love man but because man doesn't love God.... JC!

When Jesus was here, he sent his disciples out twice: These first missions were truely that of peace.... to preach the gospel. They were instructed not to take extra rament or food, money nor scrip, but to accept the hospitality which would be offered where ever they went. Jesus knew that word of him had already spread and there were many interested in hearing and his followers would be treated favorably.

But it was time for the passover feast, and at the last supper our Lord told his disciples what was going to happen to him. Luke 22:35, 36 says "And he said unto them, when I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. (vs 37)For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. (vs38) And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.

Why? Jesus knew he going to the cross.... for our sins.... but as a 'convicted felon' worthy of judgement though he had committed no wrong. He knew that whatever favor and reputation which he had had beyond those who followed him would now be doubted by those who heard of his death 'as a criminal'. (In those days, although Rome allowed a degree of leadership from among the Jews, still a capital offense, particularly those which purported to be of religious jurisdiction, had to carry the oversight and permission of Rome. Pilot might wash his hands..... but he still gave his permission. Therefore, whatever rumours spread regarding the reason, whether it was because of the Jewish courts or reputed to be a rebellious threat to Roman rule.... many of the population was ready to question and believe there might be justification for his death.... and to consider his followers as suspect consorts.) Jesus knew he was sending his disciples into an unfriendly world where not only would they be persecuted, but a dangerous world where they must provide for their food as any other, pay what was fair as any other, and protect themselves from criminals and robbers who preyed upon travelers and unarmed folks as any other reasonable person might do. A sword in that day was the equivalent of self protection. In this Jesus did not give permission for aggression, but he essentially alludes to one's right of self protection.

Now regarding the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan..... whether it is just or not... as far as our human ability to judge .....it is a matter of perspective and understanding...... of whether an aggression had or was about to take place: We expected WMD in Iraq. They had used some in the past. They had not permitted inspections as per agreement of the international community: They were given notice of our intention .....of impending war...... that it should have come as no surprise. It is possible that if they had weapons more powerful than any which were found.... they had ample time to dismantle or move them to hiding.

What I'm trying to say is that there was/is enough uncertainty regarding the grounds of going into that war that it defies taking a pragmatic stand totally for or adamantly against it..... though many try. Hindsight may be considered to be 20/20 but that vision wasn't present when decisions were made. There comes a point where no matter what our beef is or how we think we could have done things differently, that was then and this is now.... and we can either live with the responsibilities of our decisions.... or futially expend anger and waste time over debates of what should of, could of, if we were president or in charge ...might have beens. More simply put then is then, now is now. It will not change what is, and we only add our individual frustration to the mix if we keep up the detraction of the old arguements and fail to accept that what is, is, and drop that which is behind and start dealing with the present.....which is the only time we have to work with if we want change or want to make things better. Let us hope and pray that improvement is what will result from the present policies. We have but one country and one people to defend above all others: That is the responsibilty of the CIC. Let us hope he'll lead us in the right way and keep us strong to defend ourselves.... and, if need be, our weaker neighbors, rather than mistake compromise for strength and in doing so, give up both to weakness.

 

I don't agree with this at all. This isn't like a job where one must learn the ropes. This is a place of discussion. I have been discussing things for over 50 years; I don't need to wait until my post count is some magic number to satisfy you or anyone else before expressing my opinion.