A new group trying to influence this year's elections.
www.votersforpeace.us/index2.jsp
Voters for Peace
Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by KenH, Mar 19, 2006.
Page 1 of 2
-
I hope they have some success but I'm not holding my breath.
-
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. -
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. -
KenH:
In Christ,
Martin. -
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 ] -
KenH:
______________________________________
________________________________
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. -
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. -
**DOUBLE DOUBLE POST POST**
-
KenH:
____________________________
______________________________
"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. -
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. -
www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/1/4813.html -
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. -
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. -
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. -
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! -
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. If only it would work! -
[ March 23, 2006, 03:35 PM: Message edited by: Dragoon68 ] -
-
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:
Page 1 of 2