Open your eyes

[rinard]

I saw photos on T.V I hope pictures like this will spread around so that people will start thinking with their conscious instead of their greed. I also heard that the Americans administration is afraid of such pictures being spread around and anti-war resentiment might rise again. I'm fully aware that many innocent Iraqi civilians are being injured and killed by US bombs, and that's horrific. Honestly, thoughts like this plague me every day... I do not consider myself truly pro- or anti-war, but that does not make me indifferent.
I would advise anyone in here especially young and sensitive members if you go to these sites, are aware you are going to see dead people of both sides.

EDIT: All links removed from post. If you have to give a disclaimer before posting a link, it should not be posted on these forums. If you re-post these links, or any like them, you will immediately be banned from the forums. If anyone wishes to view these web pages, please PM rinard privately.

 

[Jango]

Quote[/b] ] I also heard that the Americans administration is afraid of such pictures being spread around and anti-war resentiment might rise again.

Whether people hate the war or not, we're going to finish it. The Iraqi people deserve freedom after what all they've been through. To pull back now would show that we're weak, and that we do not care.

Quote[/b] ]I'm fully aware that many innocent Iraqi civilians are being injured and killed by US bombs, and that's horrific.

And while that is awful, you must realize that it is war. People die in wars.

 

[Maddmedic]

This war may not be right and I am not in total agreement anymore with it, but how many people were found in mass graves in Iraq ? And how many athletes did Saddam's son feed into a plastic shredder either feet first or head first depending on his mood ?
So if you are going to throw pictures at us of bombings of civilians reportedly by American bombs, throw in a few from the car bombs that have been set off also by Iraqi militants. Don't pull the famous liberal media stunt of showing one side of the story.

The US ignored Hitler and Japan while they killed and conquered millions, maybe we did do the right thing with Saddam ..Although I think Bush probably should have finished with Osama first.

 

[Firewasp]

Nuke em all!

Teach them what happens when your indiffrent to letting terroists stay in your citys and towns.

 

[Tek7 (Legacy)]

Moved to Religious Discussion.

 

[Fleck]

AAH ARGH DARN STUPID
The post I was typing just got delted twice.
According to howstuffworks.com , over 3000 people died on september 11.  Remember how we went into Afghanistan?  Remember how dropped food and were like.  "look we're doing what the bible says! it says here to feed your enemies when they are hungry."  I note here that it doesn't say to kill them and feed them simultaniously.  But also, it reminds me of a passage in luke.  Luke 6:29"If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic."  Somehow that doesn't really seem what we are doing.  
I also find it interesting that 164000 christians were martyred in the year 1999.  (according to the world christian encyclopedia) They were brave enough to stand up for what they believe in, and be killed for it without resistance, like a lamb to the slaughter.  Its really hard to realize how many people that is.  So if you go into microsoft word, fill up over twenty pages with exclaimation points on abadi mt condensed light font, thats about how many people died.  
Its still really hard to think about each of those exclamation points as people.  People with their own personality traits, and their own lives, and probably their own families. Some of them even went deliberately into danger knowing that they could die, but it was worth the risks.  How many people do you think woke up and went to the WTC September 11, 2001 and thought "I think it would be cool for me to become a martyr today?"  I don't think many of them did myself.  So why do we think that the 3000 people that died September 11, are more signifigant?  I will make a few posts containing the exclaimation points, because it exceeds the maximum charatcter count.  if anyone asks me to delete them I will, because it probably will be hard to scroll through. but i think its alright to violate the charachter count in this case.  because its to make a point.

 

[Fleck]

bah...it didn't work out like i wanted it to...

 

[Eon]

I don't have a problem with the war in Iraq.
I have a problem with how it started and why.

I do have a problem with the US adopting the failed tactics of Israel and importing them to another Arab country. Armies can win you a war, but they can't win a peace. A peace has to be won with diplomacy, patience and above all you have to offer someone the hope that life will change, for the better.

Right now the people in Iraq are enduring the present violence and waiting for the other shoe to drop. When will the US get bored and wander off, leaving things half resolved - probably worse than they were before? Like they did in Vietnam. Like they did in Somalia. Like they did in Afghanistan.

You cannot build a nation at gunpoint.

 

[Jango]

Well, Bush and the UK Prime Minister ( Forgot his name, >_< ) are supposed to give back control July 30th, I believe.

Quote[/b] ]So why do we think that the 3000 people that died September 11, are more signifigant?

Sure, there are a lot more Christians that were martyred, yet does that make September 11th any less bad? Five hundred more people died in Pearl Harbor, and we went to war for it, and because of that, we saved the world. By starting the War on Terror, we may help save the world from terrorists. Don't you ever take away from the deaths of September 11th.

Quote[/b] ]Remember how we went into Afghanistan? Remember how dropped food and were like. "look we're doing what the bible says! it says here to feed your enemies when they are hungry." I note here that it doesn't say to kill them and feed them simultaniously

The killing of the citizens are accidents. And at least we don't let them starve.

Quote[/b] ]But also, it reminds me of a passage in luke. Luke 6:29"If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic." Somehow that doesn't really seem what we are doing.

yeah, I bet you'd really say that if we did nothing and your parents were killed in a terrorist attack.

 

[Fleck]

oh yeah theres one thing i forgot to add to my post that kind of goes with eon's point.  "An eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind."  You might have heard that before.  Its from a guy called Ghandi, who led people to suffer, and to their deaths in the name of peace.  By taking the moral high ground he won his war.  His people were starving, his people were beaten, his people were murdered.  When they were fired upon unarmed, theres one other word that might possibly fit- massacred.  I agree with eon. This is not the road to peace.  But if it pacifies the minds of the american people to know that we are "fighting the war on terror"  then i guess it can't hurt.  Idiots.  By proving that we are evil enough to invade thier country and make their people suffer, the only forseeable outcome is that more people will join their cause.  The one thing I liked about Bush before he was elected is that he said he wouldn't do any nation building.  I wonder what this is called.  
Of course it is sad when the american soldiers die.  Leaving them there will only make more of them die.  And more civilians and iraqi militants die.  But they're not really important after all.  I mean, they're not talked about on the news, or by the whitehouse nearly as much as the american soldiers.  Probably because we can connect with them better.  What about the orphans in iraq... whose family members died because of the occupation of Iraq?  Don't you think they will feel the same way about us as you said you felt about them because what happened on 9/11?
No, The gospel of Jesus Christ is for every man.  Even and especially those who don't know him.  I feel strongly about this.  To kill them, or support them dying, is to say to them " I wish you were dead"  and they will burn in hell for it.  But instead, pray for them, that they may be saved! For God views all sin the same as the same, from that bad word you said to killing somebody.  So instead, pray that they their hearts might be changed so that they could enter the Kingdom of God.  To say that they are evil is sin too.  Because if they are evil does that makes us good?  Only the father who knows all about such things can judge whether a man is evil or good. Don't you still do what is wrong sometimes?

Furthermore in response to your post i didn't mean the killing of civilians. I ment even the militants. And it wouldn't be doing nothing it would be doing something. Trying to overcome them by taking the moral high ground. The obvious moral high ground. Obvious enough that no man could dispute what is right and what his wrong. I still think that they believe what they were doing was right. Not many people are born thinking that they are the ones who are wrong and everyone else is right. So make ourselves right in thier eyes, and we would win.

 

[Drelin]

Quote[/b] ]Don't pull the famous liberal media stunt of showing one side of the story.

Don't pull the famous conservative media stunt of showing one side of the story, either.

Quote[/b] ]By starting the War on Terror, we may help save the world from terrorists. Don't you ever take away from the deaths of September 11th.

Take what from the victims of the Sep. 11 attacks? Failures like Afghanistan? Surely the memory of Sept. 11 victims is worth more than that?

Quote[/b] ]The killing of the citizens are accidents. And at least we don't let them starve.

Yeah, at least you don't let them starve. America has done a splendid job at rebuilding Afganistan, not only fixing the damage they did, but actually adding something positive of their own. Oh wait, disregard that; they've done neither.

 

[Eon]

The problem with the Ghandi analogy was that he used the inherent decency of the British people against them in order to free India. He, effectively, said that unless we were willing to change ourselves into the kind of people that would virtually depopulate the country and rule by absolute terror, then we would never control the Indian people. The British people felt unanimously, that we weren't that sort of a nation. The whole of British Imperialism has always been based on the idea that both Colony and Imperial state profit from the relationship - we get raw materials and wealth, they get stable governance, military protection from less altruistic masters (France or Spain for example), the rule of Law (most subjects of a Crown Colony experienced MORE freedoms under Imperial Governance than they did as "free citizens" under a local warlord) and increased opportunities for trade and education. Ghandi himself was educated in a British university.

Balanced against this relatively benign occupation we have the American model - which is to go in quickly, smash the existing power structure with maximum force and put in a local government that is friendly towards free trade. After this point, market forces are supposed to be sufficient to rebuild the infrastructure and kickstart a modern economy. This is a fine idea in principle, with only one minor drawback.

It's completely ineffective.

It didn't work in Vietnam. It didn't work in Afghanistan. It's not working in Iraq.

What WOULD work would be a transparent program of infrastructure investment and construction, based around small scale projects in which obvious progress could be seen. Forget modernisation, lets settle for sewage and drinking water. Let's settle for healthcare and food. That's what the people of Iraq need - along with the purging of foreign elements that are seeking to destabilise the peace. And there will be a price - in money and blood.

We should have made it clear that until the country was operating again, that not a penny of oil would be sold. That Iraq was out of business until it was rebuilt. Only THEN would the Iraqi people have believed we went in for anything other than control of those oilfields.

Once in position, the troops you deploy must become PART of the local scene. they shouldn't wear helmets or be heavily armed. Strong reaction squads should be in reserve, ready to be deployed where necessary, but patrols should NOT be in force. They should also be on FOOT within townships and cities. Flak jackets and sunglasses should NOT be worn. You have to make these troops into human beings for the local people - give gum to kids and respect local customs.

This kind of approach WORKS. It worked in Malay, it worked in Kenya, it worked in Dhofari Oman. It worked in Northern Ireland.

Given the fact that the UK is one of the ONLY armies to have defeated locally supported communist insurgents you'd think the US would be tripping over itself to get help and advice from us. Guess who the US has directing their policy towards the Iraqi people? Israel.

I think that says everything that needs to be said...

Eon

 

[4t0p]

Quote[/b] (Eon @ April 19 2004,6:07)]We should have made it clear that until the country was operating again, that not a penny of oil would be sold. That Iraq was out of business until it was rebuilt. Only THEN would the Iraqi people have believed we went in for anything other than control of those oilfields.

Once in position, the troops you deploy must become PART of the local scene. they shouldn't wear helmets or be heavily armed. Strong reaction squads should be in reserve, ready to be deployed where necessary, but patrols should NOT be in force. They should also be on FOOT within townships and cities. Flak jackets and sunglasses should NOT be worn. You have to make these troops into human beings for the local people - give gum to kids and respect local customs.

(1) If you know the geography of the area it's nothing without oil.  It's the only resource there that's worth anything.  If you take that away it only hurts things.  If anything the US should have bought more oil (to help rebuild the Iraqi economy faster since that's the only economic infrastructure in place) to build reserves since we already have massive reserves and don't use them anyway.

(2) For soldiers to walk around a place where they are loathed being unnarmed is insane.  The majority of Iraqi people hate all things Western, if you want to go Baghdad and walk around in jeans and a t-shirt that says "If you love beating down lesser peoples move to the West!" knock yourself out.  I personally wouldn't ask our soldiers to do that.

The War in Iraq may have been started for the wrong reason but its done now.  Think about Sept 11 even, Bush gets CIA briefings every morning.  Every morning for the past 15 yrs the President has probably gotten a breifing which said something to the effect of "other countries don't like us ... terrorists would love to attack us".  If Bush had known the specific flights and stopped them nothing would have happened and everyone would whine and cry about him slowing down flights and crying wolf.  It did happen though and because of it we (1) took out one of the most oppressive regimes in the World, the Taliban, and (2) we took down one of the most ruthless rulers of our time.  Should he have made up evidence or lied about why? NO, but its done I'm sorry to the anti-war people but Iraq is a better place w/o Saddam killing and starving his own people that couldn't fight him.  However, we should have removed him, put the infrastructure for an election in place, and just gotten it done and gotten out.  That's why people don't like us, because we overextend our influence when it's not needed.


Sorry for the rant.

 

[Whitestone]

Using the turn the other cheek portion of scripture does not seem to fit well in this situation. Look to Rom 13, we are supposed to follow our goverments lead.

 

[Drelin]

Quote[/b] ]2) For soldiers to walk around a place where they are loathed being unnarmed is insane.  The majority of Iraqi people hate all things Western, if you want to go Baghdad and walk around in jeans and a t-shirt that says "If you love beating down lesser peoples move to the West!" knock yourself out.  I personally wouldn't ask our soldiers to do that.

Perhaps what Eon suggested goes to far, to quickly. Even if your average Iraqi hates America even half as much as you say, that's still an issue that needs to be overcome. I'm not an expert, but I'd say that Iraqi hatred is due to a number of factors, not least of which is the perception of America being cowboy of the globe, dropping bombs on countries without regard for the effect on the lives of actual people. Thus, somehow humanising occuping armed forces would be a step in the right direction.

Quote[/b] ]Using the turn the other cheek portion of scripture does not seem to fit well in this situation.  Look to Rom 13, we are supposed to follow our goverments lead.

I feel much happier after Romans 13 told me that Hitler's authority was established by God. I take it you're all for abortion, Whitestone? Hey; the governement is an extention if God's divine authority. If you do the right thing, you've nothing to fear. Really, you can't provide verses like this for one topic and blatantly ignore them in others.

 

[Jango]

Quote[/b] ]I feel much happier after Romans 13 told me that Hitler's authority was established by God.

Well, if the government tells us to sin, God doesn't want us to do it. I don't have a verse, but God hates sin.

 

[Drelin]

Did you read the verse, though? It's saying that authority is insitiuted by God. It's saying that good people who do the right thing have nothing to fear from authority. This doesn't fit with reality at all, yet the Bible is inerrant?

 

[Jango]

Well, if you keep the laws the government sets, and pay your taxes, why would you have to fear it?

 

[CCGR]

God's commandments override anything, even though I'm suppose to honor my parents if they switched religions to lets say buddism, that doens't mean I would have to convert to honor them.

 

[Fleck]

it didn't say that we blindly had to agree with everything our government says. We are ment to be able to think freely. And to obey the law and respect the government by following its laws. But that doesn't mean that we should accept everything anyone says because they are in the government.