|
Post by robin on Mar 6, 2012 12:25:19 GMT -8
Atheist Jon, You seemed intent on convincing me and others that Obama is somehow Justified is his wars, where Bush was not. I want to make myself clear. This is not about Bush, and I have NO interest in defending Bush's reason's for invading Iraq. At one point I did, but I no long feel the way I once did.
Here are a list of the Countries that President Obama has expanded our military operations.
Pakistan Libya Somalia Yemen Uganda South Sudan the Central African Republic and the Democratic Republic of the Congo
In each of these countries, civilians have been killed. In a couple cases US citizens were killed By US drones at the direction and authorization of President Obama.
Feel free to defend.
|
|
|
Post by atheist jon on Mar 7, 2012 22:44:32 GMT -8
Robin, I'm not asking you to defend the actions of the Bush administration's decision to go to war in Iraq. Besides, I think history will show, if it doesn't already, that it was a monumental error. And they were highly deceitful in prosecuting that war. Illegally so, in fact.
But it looks like we really need to define the word 'war'. I personally do not believe the word is appropriate when describing an American president who slightly expands the small but long-existing American presence in a country that is suffering from long-term conflicts in which America has always had an interest. That's not war. I think it's usually pretty obvious when foreign policy suddenly becomes a war.
Whether you defend Bush or not, the fact remains that you equated his actions with President Obama's. The latters motives and objectives are clear and transparent. That is not to say that 100% of his judgements are correct, but that the intent behind them is rationally thought out and intended for the good of all. The same cannot be said of Bush and his cronies.
|
|
|
Post by robin on Mar 8, 2012 8:31:13 GMT -8
You will have to excuse me if I don't accept you definition of war. To those on the ground being shot at and killed, it's war. When the mission is to remove a government like in Libya, and now Syria, you can classify it as war. I know that the governments being attacked felt, and feel like it's war. So lets not pretend that the wars waged by Obama are not just as unconstitutional and unjustified as the war in Iraq.
However, I would still like to hear why you believe Obama was justified in sending our troops to the countries I listed above. Is it for humanitarian purposes? Do you support sending our troops to war for humanitarian purposes? And what about the killing of US citizens over seas? any thoughts on that?
By the way, where did all the anti-war protesters go? The wars are still here but the protesters are gone. Very interesting....
|
|
|
Post by stevekimes on Mar 11, 2012 20:13:02 GMT -8
Many of the war protesters went to the Occupy movement, which is pretty wide-spread and takes on a large set of issues. Some of them feel that in the Occupy movement something might actually get done, while protesting against war is pretty much pointless in this day.
Obama made it clear that he was interested in increasing some warfare throughout the world before he was elected. He's not a pacifist, nor even leans in that direction.
I think the difference between Obama and Bush is in the extent of the warfare. Obama might have done a full out war against terrorism, much like the Bush administration, but the economy didn't allow it. Bush's policies were great for certain corporations, but were horrible for the economics of the nation as a whole.
|
|
|
Post by robin on Mar 13, 2012 11:45:38 GMT -8
It's great to hear from you Steve. Can you give a defense for any of the wars listed above?
|
|
|
Post by stevekimes on Mar 16, 2012 21:27:08 GMT -8
Well, I can give no defense to any war, ever. Josh knows this, I'm a pacifist.
War necessitates the killing of innocents. No one can remain unstained by killing an innocent. But to engage in any activity, knowing for a fact that some innocent will be killed by this action-- this cannot be justified. Only repented of with sorrow and heartbreak.
|
|
|
Post by robin on Mar 21, 2012 11:45:14 GMT -8
I see, so you won't defend any war. Is there no such thing as a justified killing?
|
|
|
Post by stevekimes on Mar 27, 2012 19:54:08 GMT -8
Absolutely. But God is the Judge and all human judgment is limited by human prejudices, human knowledge and human frailty. "Vengeance is mine", says the Lord, and we should be willing to place all capital punishment in His hands alone. We should only imitate God's mercy, not His judgment.
|
|
|
Post by robin on Mar 28, 2012 16:26:57 GMT -8
It's the last part of the last sentence that confuses me. What kind of judgment should we use?
|
|
|
Post by stevekimes on Apr 6, 2012 21:47:06 GMT -8
To judge those determined to be unsafe for our society, separation is sufficient, even as Jesus said. The ultimate judgment is to kill, which should be left to God's hands alone. God grants life, it is His to take, not ours.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Apr 7, 2012 8:57:04 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by robin on Apr 7, 2012 20:10:05 GMT -8
I may agree with you to a certain extent when it comes to capital punishment. What I'm concerned with is the right to self defense and the duty of one to protect their family that may require that they take someone's life. Would that be justified?
|
|
|
Post by stevekimes on Apr 7, 2012 22:44:00 GMT -8
That is between that person and God.
However, I think that we should all seek to take classes which gives us options apart from violence in violent situations. The truth of the matter is, violence is rarely a workable option, often causing more danger to innocents than protecting them. To be trained in conflict resolution, to learn about how to reduce anger and to understand how to react in crisis situations does a lot more in protecting one's family than, say, owning a gun.
|
|
|
Post by robin on Apr 8, 2012 8:11:10 GMT -8
Sounds like a fair position. However, there are parts of the world where the threat of violence and death is a daily concern. Taking classes on non violent approaches may not be so reasonable to those in Egypt, Pakistan, or any number of places around the world.
|
|
|
Post by stevekimes on Apr 8, 2012 11:06:07 GMT -8
Is is never unreasonable to learn skills we might use.
And we should never be afraid to be persecuted in the name of Jesus, for if we accept such persecution, it is a way to eternal life.
|
|
|
Post by robin on Apr 8, 2012 21:34:14 GMT -8
Pretty easy for you and I to say seeing that we have no real immediate threat to our lives or our families. I won't judge who are in far worse circumstances when I can't imagine the hell some people are forced to in.
Also, people are not only persecuted for being Christians.
|
|
|
Post by stevekimes on Apr 9, 2012 6:46:22 GMT -8
I'm not trying to be glib about someone else's suffering. I am referring to Jesus' and Paul's many statements that endurance in persecution is essential for salvation. I do know that Asian Christians pray for us that we would be persecuted, and I think that is necessary for Christianity in the U.S.
|
|