How did christians become warmongers?

Speaking of terrorists and stinger missiles.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Rebels fighting to depose Syrian president Bashar al Assad have for the first time acquired a small supply of surface-to-air missiles, according to a news report that a Western official did not dispute.

Now before we go blaming Obama and the democrats for arming the "rebels" let's take a step back and see how our conservative republican "representatives" really feel about it.

From the same Reuters article . . .

Some conservative U.S. lawmakers, such as Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, have criticized the administration of President Barack Obama for moving too slowly to assist the rebels and have suggested the U.S. government become directly involved in arming Assad's opponents.

So, according to "conservatives" Obama is moving to slowly to assist the "rebels" such as Al Qaeda.

So the "debate" is not about whether we should be arming Islamic extremists or not it's about how fast we should be arming Islamic extremists.

The debate is not about whether we should be arming Islamic extremists or not it's about whether we should slowly arm them through proxies or take the faster more direct approach of arming them directly.

While we are being told that the only thing that will keep us safe from Islamic extremists is the nullification of all the safeguards embodied in the US constitution designed to protect us from a tyrannical government coming to power here at home our government has been very busy making sure Islamic extremists have all the tools they need to be an effective fighting force in the middle east and north Africa.

While the threat of Islamic extremism is being used as an excuse to grope little old ladies at US airports. Our government is arming Islamic extremists over there.

While the threat of Islamic extremism is being used as an excuse to build a huge militarized police state here in the US our government is arming Islamic extremists over there.

While the threat of Islamic extremism is being used as excuse to shred the US constitution and do away with due process of law here in the US our government is busy arming Islamic extremists over there.

What kind of conclusion do you all draw from this?

Come election day which way are we gong to vote? Are we going to vote for arming Islamic extremists slowly through proxies or are we going to vote to arm Islamic extremists much faster by doing it directly?

The choice is not whether or not we want a tyrannical government here at home. The choice is how fast do we want a tyrannical government here at home.

The choice isn't whether to have peace or war. The choice is which type of war do we want most.

There's our choices so which of them will we choose? Either way we vote this time we will voting to arm Islamic extremists. Either way we vote this time we will be voting for war.

So, if ECs haven't been the big supporters of the warfare state and a tyrannical government that Chuck Baldwin claims in his OP how did we get to this point?