Voters for Peace

Discussion in 'Politics' started by KenH, Mar 19, 2006.

  1. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
  2. Brother James

    Brother James
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Messages:
    660
    Likes Received:
    0
    I hope they have some success but I'm not holding my breath.
     
  3. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    ==In this reply I am going to stay clear of the normal silly political back and forth over the war. However I want to make clear how utterly silly the above statement is. I don't say it is silly in order to insult the person(s) who wrote that or the persons who believe that. I do, however, say it is silly because of the nature of the statement. The nature of the statement is unrealistic and all Christians should see that. The fact is that there will always be "wars and rumors of wars" (Matt 24:6) until Jesus returns and sets up His Kingdom (Is 2:4). Until that great event occurs there will be war(s). As long as sinful people control the worlds governments there will be war(s).

    Now to the statement...

    "ending the occupation of Iraq"

    This is a nice neat little slogan that has no moral or realistic foundation. Regardless of one's position on the war it should be clear that no "cut and run" plan should be seriously considered. We cannot, as a moral rule, just up and leave. It would be nice if we could but that is just simply not realistic. If we did the country would sink into the pits of hell (further than it currently is) and would be used by various terrorists groups to hit us and other countries in the area. That can't be allowed. There is also the Iraqi population to consider. If we "up and run" we will be handing them over to awful slavery and bloodshed (worse than it is now). No, we cannot up and leave. We broke it, we bought it. And now it is our MORAL duty to finish the job.

    I am sure that does not tickle ears. I am sure many, even professing Christians, want to take the easy way out. However the easy way out is not always the right, or moral, way out. Regardless of what one thinks of the war (it's justification, or lack there of...) one should at least have the moral courage to realize that a cut and run plan is, at best, immoral.

    "preventing future wars of aggression"

    Nice statement but not a realistic position. As long as sinners are kings, queens, presidents, and prime ministers there will be war. That is a fact of life that all adults should understand. This is mainly true for adults who are Christian (see above).

    Also "wars of aggression" are sometimes a necessary evil. That is a fact of life when one lives in a fallen, sinful world.

    It would be nice if we could live in a world without war, but we don't. And until Jesus's Kingdom comes we will not. While I admire the good intentions of these "peace" groups I cannot support their positions. They don't take reality into consideration and they don't give enough weight to the difficulty of the issues at hand (of course one can say the exact same thing about the strongly pro-war folks).

    In Christ,
    Martin.
     
  4. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jesus' kingdom already exists. It's called the church.

    The U.S. has no business starting a war of aggression. Our military should only be used in self-defense of our nation.
     
  5. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    KenH:
    ==I have to assume that you understand that there will be a literal future Kingdom on earth (Thy Kingdom Come). We certainly do not live in a time when "they will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, and never again will they learn war" (Is 2:4). No, we certainly don't live in that time. Want proof? Turn on the news. We live in "difficult times" (2Tim 3:1-5). In fact we live in a day full of "wars and rumors of wars" (Matt 24:6).

    ==Really not sure how one can have a war without "aggression". Seems to me that saying "the U.S. has no business starting a war of aggression" is more of a political position than a realistic one. More importantly nothing you said in your reply even starts to deal with the complex issues I am raising. It is typical among those who are heavily involved in the game of politics to avoid the difficult questions/issues that their positions create. This issue is no exception. You should strive to divorce all politics (etc) from your position and base your position on truth. I would also hope that you would take the time to consider what I said in my reply.

    In Christ,
    Martin.
     
  6. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    1) No, I reject that false interpretation of the Holy Scriptures.

    2) I do. I read journals and books on public policy issues that are not based on party politics or conservative/liberal argumentation.

    Just because you post something, Martin, doesn't make it the truth.

    [ March 19, 2006, 09:30 PM: Message edited by: KenH ]
     
  7. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    KenH:

    ==False "interpretation"? Do you honestly mean to tell me that you believe we are in the Kingdom now? What about the promises of peace, etc? I think the position I am presenting is closest to the Biblical position here. Sorry.

    ______________________________________

    ==No, that is not true. All, and let me repeat that "ALL", sources have one bias or another. If you don't see that then you are being dragged along by people who pretend to be unbiased. When I say you must divorce politics from your position I am talking about political activism (of all sorts), I am talking about making unrealistic claims about the war (or any war or issue), and I am talking about promoting political organizations.

    ________________________________

    ==And visa versa.

    Btw, you still have not responded to the things I said in my original reply. The truth here is simple...any premature "cut and run" policy leaves thousands, if not millions, of people in slavery to terrorists. That is truth, not opinion. Anyone who doubts the reality of that statement is either not facing reality or has a highly unrealistic view of the world.

    I do not support the war in Iraq but I understand that once a operation like that is started it must be finished.

    Martin.
     
  8. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    1) Yes, I do. There is peace between Christians and God and there always will be. The promises are about peace with God, not peace between sinful human beings on this earth. We will not settle this argument in this politics forum nor this side of Heaven. You stated your position and then I stated mine.

    2) Actually, there are folks who try to look at issues in an unbiased way.

    3) I also do not support a "cut and run" policy. We also can't stay in Iraq forever.
     
  9. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    **DOUBLE DOUBLE POST POST**
     
  10. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    KenH:
    ==Well I am not sure how that agrees with the Scriptures that state that "nation will not lift up sword against nation, and never again will they learn war" (Is 2:4, etc). I don't see how your position can be supported with Scripture or (least of which) the present reality.

    ____________________________

    ==We can try but our views will always, and I mean always, cause us to view an issue from one side or the other. Experience, worldviews, and other such things will always color our study and reporting. There is no such thing as an unbiased scholar, reporter, teacher, or anything else. That is not really a bad thing (we should have a worldview, etc). However if a person does not realize this fact they can be lead astray by smooth talking leaders/reports who pretend to be unbiased.

    ______________________________

    ==The website you linked to clearly states as one of its goals, "support both ending the occupation of Iraq". That is promoting a cut and run policy. They want the so-called "occupation" to end. They also talk about ending the "occupation of Afghanistan" and are critical of democrats who have voted to support the troops. They even down play the horrible results of their immoral policies by quoting a magazine that agrees with them...

    "We will not support any candidate for national office who does not make a speedy end to the war in Iraq a major issue of his or her campaign. We urge all voters to join us in adopting this position. Many worry that the aftermath of withdrawal will be ugly, but we can now see that the consequences of staying will be uglier still."

    Of course they have to IGNORE the thousands, or maybe millions, who would be ensalved to the terrorists. They have to ignore the Taliban type reign of terror that would fall on those innocent people in that country. They have to IGNORE the fact that we broke it and thus bought it. We are now responsible to finish the job. Certainly a cut and run policy would be easy for us (in the short term). However we must seriously consider the impact of such a move (which the website you linked to does not do). I assumed you linked to them because you agreed with them.

    Martin.
     
  11. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    1) Nor I yours.

    2) I agree.

    3) I linked it because it is a group trying to influence this year's elections. I don't support the group as I think it goes too far.
     
  12. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    You mean like the assistance that removing the Taliban has been to the lives of Christians in Afghanistan:

    www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/1/4813.html
     
  13. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    ==In this reply I am going to stay clear of the normal silly political back and forth over the war. However I want to make clear how utterly silly the above statement is. I don't say it is silly in order to insult the person(s) who wrote that or the persons who believe that. I do, however, say it is silly because of the nature of the statement. The nature of the statement is unrealistic and all Christians should see that. The fact is that there will always be "wars and rumors of wars" (Matt 24:6) until Jesus returns and sets up His Kingdom (Is 2:4). Until that great event occurs there will be war(s). As long as sinful people control the worlds governments there will be war(s).

    Now to the statement...

    "ending the occupation of Iraq"

    This is a nice neat little slogan that has no moral or realistic foundation. Regardless of one's position on the war it should be clear that no "cut and run" plan should be seriously considered. We cannot, as a moral rule, just up and leave. It would be nice if we could but that is just simply not realistic. If we did the country would sink into the pits of hell (further than it currently is) and would be used by various terrorists groups to hit us and other countries in the area. That can't be allowed. There is also the Iraqi population to consider. If we "up and run" we will be handing them over to awful slavery and bloodshed (worse than it is now). No, we cannot up and leave. We broke it, we bought it. And now it is our MORAL duty to finish the job.

    I am sure that does not tickle ears. I am sure many, even professing Christians, want to take the easy way out. However the easy way out is not always the right, or moral, way out. Regardless of what one thinks of the war (it's justification, or lack there of...) one should at least have the moral courage to realize that a cut and run plan is, at best, immoral.

    "preventing future wars of aggression"

    Nice statement but not a realistic position. As long as sinners are kings, queens, presidents, and prime ministers there will be war. That is a fact of life that all adults should understand. This is mainly true for adults who are Christian (see above).

    Also "wars of aggression" are sometimes a necessary evil. That is a fact of life when one lives in a fallen, sinful world.

    It would be nice if we could live in a world without war, but we don't. And until Jesus's Kingdom comes we will not. While I admire the good intentions of these "peace" groups I cannot support their positions. They don't take reality into consideration and they don't give enough weight to the difficulty of the issues at hand (of course one can say the exact same thing about the strongly pro-war folks).

    In Christ,
    Martin.
    </font>[/QUOTE]Excellent thoughts and very well expressed Martin! I don't agree with every detail you presented but I agree with the overall message. But, beyond that, I just like the way you present your case.
     
  14. Petrel

    Petrel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,408
    Likes Received:
    0
    So if your next door neighbor is beating his kid to death in the front yard and you're in possession of a shotgun, do you just sit inside thinking, "Hey, at least it's his kid that's getting killed, not mine"?

    What about if you're walking down the street and see a man trying to drag a screaming woman into a van. "Sure glad that's not me!"?

    If self-defense is acceptable, defense of others is even more obligatory. This may not always take the form of war but at times it must.
     
  15. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your cases do not give you the right to put other people at risk.

    To use your example, then it should have been George W. Bush himself who went to Baghdad to remove Saddam Hussein from power.
     
  16. Enoch

    Enoch
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2004
    Messages:
    1,267
    Likes Received:
    0
    Saw this on some t-shirts.

    Except for Ending Slavery, Fascism, Nazism and Communism
    War has Never Solved Anything
    .

    Communism has only killed 100 Million People
    let’s give it another chance
    .

    Saddam Only Kills His Own People
    It’s None of Our Business!
     
  17. Petrel

    Petrel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,408
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yep, that's Protest Warrior.

    KenH, you seem to be forgetting the fact that the United States is a nation (with a volunteer military, I'll add) and that Iraq is a nation. Unfortunately nations usually don't settle conflicts by single combat between the leaders, although that probably would be a really good way of doing it. [​IMG] If only it would work!
     
  18. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    The nation - through it's elected representatives and excecutive leaders - has every right to demand its fellow citizens to defend it against all enemies by service to the nation. We, as individual citizens, are obligated to performing that service if so called to do it. In any conflict, some have to lead and some have to follow and all have to perform the specific roles assigned to them.

    [ March 23, 2006, 03:35 PM: Message edited by: Dragoon68 ]
     
  19. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Excellent!
     
  20. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Our Congress - that's the folks we freely elect to represent us - decided the following in 2002 and wrote it down to make it real clear what would be done and why it would be done:

    This is exactly what our military has been busy doing for us.
     

Share This Page

Loading...