God's Politics

God's Politics


Tony Campolo: Religious Leaders Propose a Way Out of Iraq

posted by gp_intern

Charles De Gaulle once said that politics is far too serious to be left in the hands of politicians. I agree!

The politicians in Washington are painfully divided over what should be done about the war in Iraq. The Republicans talk about “staying the course,” which our nation can ill afford. The Democrats, on the other hand, propose a “cut and run” policy, and everyone knows that this would leave a vacuum to be filled with the chaos of all-out civil war. But some of us in the religious community propose a third option, which we believe could get America out of Iraq without leaving a total mess behind. Our plan has three parts.

First, we propose that American and British troops be replaced by an international police force composed of those who better understand the Iraqi culture. Leaders in Saudi Arabia proposed such a solution almost three years ago. Americans and Brits are not only devoid of any grasp of the language and the religion of the Iraqi people, but are defined by many Muslims as a Christian army that has invaded a sacred Islamic land. Our army’s presence is perceived by many in the Muslim world as a rebirth of the medieval crusades.

Second, we propose that the United States appropriate $50 billion to rebuild the towns and cities that the invasion of Iraq has left in shambles. This would be a small price to pay, considering the $2 billion we are presently spending every week in order to keep this war going.

Third, we propose that our president go before the United Nations and ask the world to forgive America for what we have done to Iraq, and how we have set back efforts for world peace. He should point out that he is asking forgiveness on behalf of almost all Americans – because we overwhelmingly lent support to the invasion of Iraq some four years ago. He should further point out that our original intentions were good! We Americans were told that we were invading in order to remove the threat of what we thought were Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
Repentance of this kind is necessary because we need to re-establish our moral standing in the world, and confessing wrongdoing is a start for doing that. It is not weakness to admit that we did wrong, especially when the whole world knows that we did. Now is the time for us to live out that verse from 2 Chronicles 7:14, which reads:

If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

If you are willing to support this proposal, go to www.tikkun.org/iraqpeace. You will find an expanded version of this proposal there, along with an opportunity to sign on with us. Do it now, because time is short and the days are filled with evil (Ephesians 5:16).

Tony Campolo
Tony Campolo is founder of the Evangelical Association for the Promotion of Education (EAPE) and Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Eastern University.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(145)
post a comment
Ben Wheaton

posted April 25, 2007 at 7:53 pm


I can think of a few difficulties with this plan. Firstly, wouldn’t Saudi forces be regarded by the Shi’ites as a Sunni invading force? Secondly, the civil war requires skilled militaries to suppress it. I have no faith that middle eastern armies are up to the immediate task. Secondly, why apologize? We thought it was the right thing to do, and continue to do so (at least the Bush administration does, and so do I). Making apologies is bad foreign policy. You may change your mind, but never apologize; it sends a sign of weakness. This isn’t personal relations, where people ought to apologize. Once again, Rev. Campolo shows himself to be incredibly naive about foreign policy. Religious leaders are notoriously inept about foreign policy, both right and left, and ought not to comment extensively on it.



report abuse
 

Mike Hayes

posted April 25, 2007 at 8:19 pm


Tony, Thank you for speaking out, and for providing the link to the ad.



report abuse
 

Kristopher

posted April 25, 2007 at 8:40 pm


I don’t see how this is any different from “cutting and running.” In fact it takes cutting and running up a couple notches by asking Bush to apologize to the world. This was a humerous attempt at trying to look moderate.



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 25, 2007 at 8:58 pm


Kristopher | 04.25.07 – 2:45 pm | # Well said – I’m sorry Tony – but this does not add up in my book. The 50 Billion that you are talking about is that a ‘one time’ payment or ‘yearly’? Why don’t we just divide up the country like the UN did with Korea only we will have 3 or 4 zones rather than two. Establish a DMZ between each of them and have the Blue Helmets patrol the borders. Then we can be there for the next 50+ years just like Korea. Here we have Iraqi people blowing up Iraqis’ so to convince us the US to get out of there. SO – we leave, then they don’t blow each other up – they now can go all over the world and blow other people up. This is a war of ideologies. We the US and our allies just want a world at peace and are willing (at least some) to do what it takes to make that happen. THEY – the terrorists (fundamentalist Islamic) want to conquer the world and rule it with Islamic Law and are willing to have a world at war to achieve their objective. What do you want? Tony – I believe you error on this one. Later – .



report abuse
 

jesse

posted April 25, 2007 at 9:32 pm


First, we propose that American and British troops be replaced by an international police force composed of those who better understand the Iraqi culture. –They would probably welcome the help. But is anyone offering it? Also, it appears that you’re assuming that the terrorists don’t feel understood and that’s why they’re killing people and trying to destabilize the region. How realistic is that? Second, we propose that the United States appropriate $50 billion to rebuild the towns and cities that the invasion of Iraq has left in shambles. –The US has already invested billions in Iraq, which is why their per capita income has doubled since the invasion. The US is helping with the rebuilding…how a group of ministers feel qualified to give such estimates is kind of bizarre to me (same for point one). Third, we propose that our president go before the United Nations and ask the world to forgive America for what we have done to Iraq, and how we have set back efforts for world peace. He should point out that he is asking forgiveness on behalf of almost all Americans because we overwhelmingly lent support to the invasion of Iraq some four years ago. He should further point out that our original intentions were good! We Americans were told that we were invading in order to remove the threat of what we thought were Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. –I’m confused with this point. If the intelligence was bad, why should we ask for forgiveness? It was a mistake to believe they had WMDs (as many other countries in the world suspected), but believing faulty intelligence is not a sin that requires repentance. I suspect that what you’d really like to see is for Bush to apologize for lying and invading Iraq for some dark, greedy motives. But he’s not going to do that, because I suspect he actually believed the intelligence he was given. I think I remember Campolo saying that religion and politics often go together like doo doo and ice cream. This is a prime example of that!



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 25, 2007 at 9:43 pm


You just got to why it isn’t a simple equation; I believe we should divide the country, as they seem to want. It was cobbled together by the British about 1918 and they have never wanted to be one country. For every example of an outside country putting down an insurgency and I ll give you ten that it couldn t be done. The British had a simple system in Iraq; if anyone in a village caused a problem they came in and killed about every other male in the village, a little like Saddam. They will not go along with a central government and we can’t make them short of draconian methods. How long did it take the British to figure that out in Northern Ireland? Or how did the French, Japanese or US do in Vietnam. Again the French in Algiers, or the British in Egypt or all of the European powers in Africa. You can use the example of how our Christian forefathers dealt with American Indians that worked well but I don t think you can get our citizens to go along with that or can we? Starvation, massacre, disease, literally steal their land promising to reimburse which we ve never done need I go on? The Kurds will be abandoned when we finally leave because they are a problem for our strong ally Turkey. BTW, Saddam kept the Kurds somewhat under control but do we want to use his methods although it seems a little like that now in the rest of modern day Iraq. Notice how everyone who is in favor of the War in Iraq will dance around the question of dealing effectively with insurgencies. I challenge you to deal directly with the insurgency question in light of history or in the current situation (hate words like situation), call it WAR with everything that goes along the word WAR. Or do you prefer Shock and Awe?



report abuse
 

Eric

posted April 25, 2007 at 9:43 pm


Somehow I don’t see this working any better than the current course. I don’t think the people who are fighting over there now will suddenly stop once the U.S. leaves and soldiers from other Middle Eastern nations arrive. Also, if Bush is to apologize to anyone it should be the Iraqi people, not “to the world.” The U.S. government didn’t do anything “to the world.” The Iraqi people are the ones suffering now. I also wonder who would do the “forgiving” in this instance… All in all, it’s a silly plan Tony. Sorry.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 25, 2007 at 9:46 pm


–I’m confused with this point. If the intelligence was bad, why should we ask for forgiveness? It was a mistake to believe they had WMDs (as many other countries in the world suspected), but believing faulty intelligence is not a sin that requires repentance. Jesse Tell that to the father, mother, brother or anyone who “knew” a dead or tortured Iraqi. If you did it to me or mine I would send you to God to explain the difference between sin and a mistake.



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 25, 2007 at 9:47 pm


jesse | 04.25.07 – 3:37 pm | # It looks like most of the people that write articles for Sojo would like Bush to apologize for being alive. Bad Intel = Bush Lied. If I had a dime for every time I heard that you and I could vacation in Hawaii for a month. Later – .



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 25, 2007 at 9:49 pm


I also wonder who would do the “forgiving” in this instance… eric The same people who will sign the surrender papers when we win “The War Against Terror”.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 25, 2007 at 9:51 pm


Bad Intel = Bush Lied. If I had a dime for every time I heard that you and I could vacation in Hawaii for a month. Moderatelad If I had a dime for every time it was true I could join you.



report abuse
 

Justin

posted April 25, 2007 at 10:04 pm


To me, what seems to be the problem is that you guys seem to have separated the world into the ideal and the real. In other words, this is somehow an “idealistic” vision of the world as opposed to a “realistic” vision. As I’ve discussed with ministers in my life, it seems to me that Christ was both the ultimate idealist and the ultimate realist. He really lived all his ideals. Imagine that. If we lived, not as though there are two types of existences, but in unity of Spirit and action. Where the life we live is Christ and the world we live in will be judged by the Lord who we may really trust despite the “idealism” of His plan. I have more to say, but I’m truly disheartened by the amount of callousness I’m reading from my “Christian” brothers and sisters. Not callousness toward the religious elites or Pharasaical types, but callousness toward our enemies, a group God allows the rain to fall upon as well. Peace to you all.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 25, 2007 at 10:20 pm


“idealistic” vision of the world as opposed to a “realistic” vision. justin Humor me and tell me the realistic way to deal with this WAR. If you end it with peace and fairness to all the idealistic way will appear.



report abuse
 

CRP

posted April 25, 2007 at 10:21 pm


Tony is right in that a peacekeeping force is going to be needed for many years to come. The challenge is that the rest of the world is so angry at the US that no-one wants to share the cost. But that’s the only option that can work, so it has to be done. I think it will indeed consist of “blue hats” patrolling the border, but that’s what you inherit after you invade a country. Comes with the territory.



report abuse
 

mingus

posted April 25, 2007 at 10:24 pm


truly mind-boggling how some of the posters here are STILL refusing to acknowledge the administration’s use of KNOWN TO BE FAULTY evidence of terroristy links, wmds, uranium and niger, etc. truly mind-blowing.



report abuse
 

CRP

posted April 25, 2007 at 10:28 pm


“Also, if Bush is to apologize to anyone it should be the Iraqi people, not “to the world.” The U.S. government didn’t do anything “to the world.” The Iraqi people are the ones suffering now.” Not so. Wars are NOT fought in a vacuum. There are always global implications.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 25, 2007 at 10:35 pm


But that’s the only option that can work, so it has to be done. I think it will indeed consist of “blue hats” patrolling the border, but that’s what you inherit after you invade a country. Comes with the territory. CRP CRP, you are jumping way ahead, how do you deal with the insurgency NOW? Blue Hats will just be another target unless the insurgents stop. We started this and you haven t told me how we will get the Blue Hats but that is also putting the cart before the horse? I’m trying to put myself in an Iraqi’s shoes, if you came and dragged my son off to Abu Grarib then I’ll never stop until you are gone, I may follow you home but for absolutely sure as long as you drive up and down my street I would never stop. I gave a number of examples, find the lesson from any of those or another insurgency and tell how to stop the insurgency. A direct question deserves a direct answer!



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 25, 2007 at 10:40 pm


truly mind-boggling how some of the posters here are STILL refusing to acknowledge the administration’s use of KNOWN TO BE FAULTY evidence of terroristy links, wmds, uranium and niger, etc. truly mind-blowing. mingus Ok, we did it now how do we stop it?



report abuse
 

CRP

posted April 25, 2007 at 10:51 pm


Butch, History does prove you right in terms of insurgencies. The odds are stacked way against us. Some strategies include: (1) Placing psychological distance between the replacement peacekeepers (“good cops”) and the current coalition foces (“bad cops”) (2) Use peacekeepers who do not draw the ire of the populace. (3) Make peacekeepers a public good in Iraq, and an investment so that they are incentives to work with them. Lessons of history still bug me…but I’ll keep thinking…



report abuse
 

mingus

posted April 25, 2007 at 10:52 pm


Ok, we did it now how do we stop it? butch | Homepage | 04.25.07 – 4:45 pm | we can’t stop it. period. we either stay and lots of people get killed, or we leave and lots of people get killed. going forward, we hold our future presidents and administrations responsible for their approach to national security and international politics. we pay more attention to the world around us and less attention to who got voted off of american idol.



report abuse
 

Kevin Wayne

posted April 25, 2007 at 10:54 pm


Faulty Intelligengence = Bush lied? OK, well indulge you myopic right-wingers on this one. Bush didn’t lie, he was just incredibly stupid. :)



report abuse
 

Ngchen

posted April 25, 2007 at 10:55 pm


It’s an interesting question whether the invasion’s supposed rationales were the real ones, or whether other motives were at work (pipe dreams of “democratizing the middle ease, loot and plunder, etc.). If it were the latter, then yes we do owe an apology at least for aggressive war. Things like the Downing Street Memo, the shady history of groups like PNAC, the Niger uranium forgery, reports of “stovepiping,” and so forth at least suggest that someone had ulterior motives. John Dean wrote an excellent article a few years ago (available on findlaw) detailing how he believes either (1) the Bush administration’s national security apparatus was utterly incompetent, or (2) the war was based on deliberate lies, with evidence picked and chosen to make the case for war.



report abuse
 

Carl Copas

posted April 25, 2007 at 10:58 pm


What do the Iraqi people want? Do they want 3-way partition, which seems to be about the most promising of a bunch of bad solutions? Has anyone asked them?



report abuse
 

CRP

posted April 25, 2007 at 10:59 pm


“we can’t stop it. period” What if we make the “we” larger than the “US?”



report abuse
 

Hali

posted April 25, 2007 at 11:17 pm


1. Did the Viet Kong follow us home? Any suggestion that Iraqi insurgents will come to the United States to continue their fight here is beyond insane. And even if they had the desire, how could they accomplish it? Do you think you can get an IED onto a plane? I can’t even travel with a fershlinging bottle of hand lotion. 2. Dividing up the country could be problematic. The Sunni-dominated region happens to lack oil. Oops! However, a federal system might work. 3. Bringing in a third party is not the ideal option, but it is the least lousy option. Getting rid of the occupiers would be a big deal. It would signal to the Iraqis that the world is serious about solving their problems. In the Middle East, appearance is EVERYTHING – and right now, the appearance of an occupation, complete with a wall going up (what does that look like to the Arabs, do you think?), is a huge impediment to peace. The involvement of the Sa’udis would offset the Syrians (secularists) and the Iranians (Shi’ite theocrats), who would also necessarily be involved. The smaller Khaliji states have an interest in lending a hand as well.



report abuse
 

Jay S

posted April 25, 2007 at 11:20 pm


The characterization of the Democrats as supporting “Cut and Run” is insulting in the extreme. I recently listened to a Moveon.org sponsored Q and A with the presidental candidates (all were invited, only the Democratic candidates attended) and only Kucinich favored an immediate withdrawl. All of the remaining candidates supported withdrawing over variable and adjustable timelines. Democrats and the majority of Americans, including many Republicans, want a reasonable and timely end to our military involment in Iraq. Most Democrats do not want to “Cut and Run”. This is a polarizing term from the administration and right wing media. Let us PLEASE move beyond it so we can give the Iraq war the respectful discussion it deserves. Thank You.



report abuse
 

Barbara Hemmings Gray

posted April 25, 2007 at 11:26 pm


First thing I’ve read which deals with the real issues and proposes a real solution. We have poured $$$$ into Iraq but as usual, most has gone to the contractors and mercenaries and friends of the oil companies. Have you noticed the high profits and prices of petroleum? Our “fearless” leaders come from that venue, remember?



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 25, 2007 at 11:44 pm


leaders come from that venue, remember? Barbara Hemmings Gray The characterization of the Democrats as supporting “Cut and Run” is insulting in the extreme. Jay with evidence picked and chosen to make the case for war. Ngchen None of these types of comments whether true or not address how to deal with the insurgency. Until that answer or answers are found nothing changes.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 25, 2007 at 11:55 pm


(1) Placing psychological distance between the replacement peacekeepers (“good cops”) and the current coalition forces (“bad cops”) (2) Use peacekeepers who do not draw the ire of the populace. (3) Make peacekeepers a public good in Iraq, and an investment so that they are incentives to work with them. Lessons of history still bug me…but I’ll keep thinking… CRP 1) No peace keepers will ever be accepted 2) See no 1, none will come and none will be accepted. 3) Mercenary peacekeepers? I see what you want but how? If you have to work that hard for lessons of history, there may not be any.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 25, 2007 at 11:58 pm


What do the Iraqi people want? Carl Really good question, an independant survey and we really need to know. They will have what they want and we are not stopping them. At least not at a cost of 3 trillion, 3500 lives, who knows how many Iraqi’s, plus what it will cost to rebuild.



report abuse
 

ynot4tony2

posted April 26, 2007 at 12:01 am


When President Bush apologizes to the world for invading Iraq, should he also apologize for freeing Iraqi children from prison (for not joining the Saddam equivalent of the “Hitler Youth”)? Should he apologize for closing Saddam’s rape rooms? Should he apologize that America gave Iraq the chance to vote for their government without government intimidation? Should we also apologize that we have put our own young men and women in much greater danger in order to reduce civilian deaths on the Iraqi side? This plan is far worse than the “cut and run” of the Democrats. Not only is this plan unconditional surrender, but also an admission that Saddam should still be in power. As a Christian, you should realize the necessity of taking out a despot that threatened God’s chosen people repeatedly.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 12:03 am


What if we make the “we” larger than the “US?” CRP Great but we will have to change our rhetoric completely. Like, “We really screwed up will anybody help”. Can you imagine that happening in today s atmosphere of Republican and Democratic positions? Maybe we need to figure some of this out collectively and tell the political leaders instead of buying the sound bits on both sides.



report abuse
 

Hali

posted April 26, 2007 at 12:08 am


butch: “1) No peace keepers will ever be accepted” That’s a pretty absolutist statement. Where did you get this information, that you are so sure? There are two things that the Iraqi population have made clear: 1. They don’t want the occupation. 2. They don’t want to be abandoned to lawlessness. How else do you meet those criteria?



report abuse
 

Barbara Hemmings Gray

posted April 26, 2007 at 12:15 am


It is non-realistic in the extreme not to look at the monetary issues in this war. All wars make certain people rich and kill others. This truism has to be reckoned with or our solutions will be naive.” the love of money is the root of all evil…



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 12:19 am


As a Christian, you should realize the necessity of taking out a despot that threatened God’s chosen people repeatedly. ynot4tony2 ynot, I won’t beat around the bush, that is the sillyist crap I’ve heard. But to give you your take on all this and maybe I’m wrong. How do you deal with the insurgency? They clearly don’t share your view and how they feel is more important than my take.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 12:34 am


1. They don’t want the occupation. 2. They don’t want to be abandoned to lawlessness. How else do you meet those criteria? Hali Those criteria are a stalemate. How do you deal with the insurgency.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 12:36 am


love of money is the root of all evil… Barbara Hemmings Gray Do you pay off the insurgents?



report abuse
 

Hali

posted April 26, 2007 at 12:46 am


“Those criteria are a stalemate. How do you deal with the insurgency.” 1. Third party peacekeepers (see previous post). 2. Negotiate a government that Iraqis trust (more or less) and can live with. I’m not sure how much you know about the Middle East. Are you aware that there is another occupation going on there that has been a source of anti American sentiment for decades (because we pretty much unconditionally support it)? Perception is everything. The multiple insurgencies will not be able to maintain the level of support they have right now if the peacekeepers are local. The Americans and the Brits are probably the worst people, apart from the Israelis themselves, to try to maintain an occupation in the M.E.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 12:46 am


There is no military solution. As far as ridding the world of evil Sadaam, then lets go out and remove the other two dozen or so dictators that murder their subjects. However, that is not the reason Iraq was invaded. Choose the lie of the day: WMDs, links to 9/11, bring Democracy to the ME. Get real…Iraq was invaded because they have huge amounts of oil, thought to be strategically isolated and have a large but weak military. In short, Bush thought they were easy pickings. The three parts of war are tactical, strategic and moral with moral being the strongest force. We can kill anyone, anywhere at anytime; if we can find them. However, we lacked the mental capabilities to turn our military strength to really bring Democracy into the ME. We lacked any moral advantage by lying to go to war, torturing people, denying Habeas Corpus. In short, saying we are a Democratic people while occupying an entire nation and lying to the rest of the war. I thought the surge might work if and only if Bush used the time to try and get folks talking to each other. Perhaps sing proxies such as Saudi and Syria. Instead, a wall is created which drives people further apart. We cannot stay there as those who are willing to fight us can pick our troops off at will or lay low until we leave. The longer we stay, the more hatred will be generated. There will be very little help from the Iraq soldiers as there is no national focus; each soldier is loyal to their own tribe. We need to leave in a timely manner as this what the people want. We must leave the oil and bases behind. We cannot affect the outcome one way or another, as we are a catalyst for destruction. Some in earlier logs suggested stealing their oil is the price the Irqis pay for us liberating them. What a sick, disgusting attitude.



report abuse
 

Joey

posted April 26, 2007 at 12:56 am


This could very well be the first thing about Iraq I have read on this blog that I thought was fair. Especially the “maybe Bush and the Republicans DIDN’T just want to screw up for no reason” part. I’m not sure if this is a SOUND plan—what Shi’ite country can we find to help in Iraq? And while it does seem like the RIGHT thing to do, would apologizing just make us worse in the eyes of honor-oriented Arab countries?—but thank you, Prof. Campolo, for a GOOD one. God bless.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 12:56 am


There is also a school of thought among 4GW experts such as Lind who think the only course is for our military to save up suplies and leave. Exit through Kuwait as fast as possible. There is nothing our military can do to alter any solution in a positive way. Define “winning” anyway you want and we will not be victorious. So if we cannot influence the result, get out now. The timed exit is a smoke-screen to appease the moronic cut-and-run crowd who would rather lie and die.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 1:01 am


The three part diviison of Iraq will never work because Turkey will not allow a free and independent Kurdistan. Why do you think they denied the 4th division transit at the start of the campaign? We already have large military bases there. Turkey does not want to deal with the nationalistic Kurds.



report abuse
 

Hali

posted April 26, 2007 at 1:02 am


bobc: “So if we cannot influence the result, get out now.” Logistically, that would be impossible. We need to start PLANNING right now to get out as quickly as we can. MEANWHILE, we need to involve other countries. And that *will* necessarily involve our swallowing our pride somewhat.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 1:05 am


Hali, You are right about the planning and is probably already being done. The mantra has been for Bush to involve other countries and this has not and never will be done. I would gladly suffer a hit to our pride if it save a lot of folks from dieing needlessly.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 1:16 am


Negotiate a government that Iraqis trust (more or less) and can live with. Hali Yes, I know quite a bit and you are right. Everyone I ve talked to mentions that there is no lasting piece until that occupation is resolved. Among many were high-ranking Turks, Egyptians, Saudi s and Iranians. We have to separate modern day Iraq into 3 parts, the Iranians defend or supports one, the Saudi’s defend or supports another and we guarantee Kurdish safety. Peacekeepers would have to keep the 3 apart which would not be simple or easy but it would give most someplace to put down roots and form loyalties. Please don’t go on to the other things like oil, reconstructon, etc until we figure out how to stop the insurgency.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 1:19 am


We cannot stop the insurgency. This war was lost before the first shot was fired. The only thing we can do is make it worse. There is no military solution.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 1:43 am


I would gladly suffer a hit to our pride if it save a lot of folks from dieing needlessly. bobc Nothing would be more important than one of my loved ones dying for pride. Here Lies XXXX He Died for Pride Not His Pride Someone Else’s



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 1:53 am


We cannot stop the insurgency. This war was lost before the first shot was fired. The only thing we can do is make it worse. There is no military solution. bobc Bob if you had someone there in a Hummer or on the street with a bull s-eye on his head you wouldn’t have such a defeatist attitude. You would be praying and pleading for an answer. Join in looking for an answer?



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 2:02 am


The three-part division of Iraq will never work because Turkey will not allow a free and independent Kurdistan. Why do you think they denied the 4th division transit at the start of the campaign? We already have large military bases there. Turkey does not want to deal with the nationalistic Kurds. bobc One of the few who understands the Kurdish question but to abandon them would be like Israel, a festering sore that won’t go away without a solution. We give so much money to Turkey they will do what we want. Their parliament could vote on our entry into Iraq through Turkey but they would not have a vote on Kurdistan. I didn’t want to confuse the issue but we would have to exercise influence on the Kurds to not be a bother to Turkey.



report abuse
 

Sarasotakid

posted April 26, 2007 at 3:35 am


Tony, you are absolutely right about what should be done. Do I believe it will be done that way? No. I believe that it is an idealistic (though correct) way of proceeding. One of the most unrealistic parts about you post is that you believe that people who purport to be Christians would act like Christians (that asking forgiveness part is what I mean). That is a major miscalculation of where American Christendom is. They would assume that since we live on the greatest nation that ever existed on God’s green earth, why should we apologize. Until that arrogant attitude is eliminated, we will not have true Christ-like reconciliation. We’re too busy being right.



report abuse
 

Sarasotakid

posted April 26, 2007 at 3:45 am


It looks like most of the people that write articles for Sojo would like Bush to apologize for being alive. Bad Intel = Bush Lied. If I had a dime for every time I heard that you and I could vacation in Hawaii for a month. moderatelad Boy, Moderatelad you waste no time in defending Bush and in disparaging Al Gore (in other posts). Try to be honest Moderatelad. Given your Republican bias, if Clinton had done the same thing (invaded a country for a reason that proved to be invalid) would you have cut him as much slack as you’re cutting Bush. I suspect that the answer would be “no” if you’re being honest with yourself.



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:04 am


Sarasotakid | 04.25.07 – 9:50 pm | # I saw no reason for Clinton to get us involved in the Bulkins, but I supported him as I figure that the people in the Oval Office know more about what is going on and what needs to be done to straighten it out. Several people said that he did it to keep Monica off the front pages of the newspapers. I could not imagine that any Pres. would put the brightest and best of the millitary (sorry John Kerry) in harms way for that reason. (maybe they were right??? – I still don’t think so) I just know that in Iraq their are hundreds of Moderatelad’s and Sarasotakid’s that would like to have half the life that we have and I pray that we can give it to them. Later – .



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:12 am


Until that arrogant attitude is eliminated, we will not have true Christ-like reconciliation. We’re too busy being right. Sarasotakid Very true, tell me when politicians tell the truth about what they say about their agenda and when do they admit their information was less than ____? How do we stop the insurgency?



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:16 am


I just know that in Iraq their are hundreds of Moderatelad’s and Sarasotakid’s that would like to have half the life that we have and I pray that we can give it to them. Later – . moderatelad Mod you run around with these little nice Christian sounding remarks. Now tell me how your prayer will work out. How many are dead right now while you hope and pray? Give me a realistic prayer to end the insurgants?



report abuse
 

Sarasotakid

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:24 am


I just know that in Iraq their are hundreds of Moderatelad’s and Sarasotakid’s that would like to have half the life that we have and I pray that we can give it to them. moderatelad I don’t doubt your sincerity, Moderatelad. However I don’t think that it ever was about giving people a better life in Iraq. I think that before the war, these people had “half the life” we have. At least they could go out onto the street and not worry about being blown to smitherines. Now they don’t even have that. That is immoral.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:40 am


Mod, I’m convinced I would like to be in a Sunday School class with you, we would discuss and debate theology and the world. At the end we’d hug and I would say I wish I had his self-confident faith. Now let me try to help you understand how silly your prayer about “half the life” sounds. Find a mother and father of a dead soldier or Iraqi mother and father of a dead soldier, you need to find ones who died 3 years ago so they’ve had time to live with it. Tell them you are praying that our presence in Iraq gives them “half the life” you have. After all the lies, and death we still hope for some good to come out of Iraq. The only good will be to stop the madness and the insurgents have to stop before anything else good can happen.



report abuse
 

PhilipH

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:54 am


How does a president, congress, nation, United Nations, and the nation of Iraq proceed when there are no good answers? Thank you Tony for laying something out on the table to move the debate. But I think it illustrates the profound difficulty of proposing any kind of solution. The assured way of being right in the debate would be to oppose whatever the current policy is because it won’t work. It seems to me the issues on the ground are so broad and so complex and so deep and so ‘eternal’–that it allows everyone to make points and ‘be right’ at some level–and insures everyone’s overall approach will fail to deliver. What is needed is far more than what the US can deliver. But the issues are so global the US must be centrally engaged.



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:57 am


butch | Homepage | 04.25.07 – 10:45 pm | # ‘…say I wish I had his self-confident faith. Self-confident faith? My faith has nothing to do with me and everything to do with an Almighty God. The ‘radicals’ are the ones that are blowing up their own countrymen trying to get us to leave. It is working on Harry Reid. Every life that is lost is precious and if I were younger and in better health – I would join up. As I said before – I tried but my medical records kept me out of the service. We can not come to a truce of armistice in this conflict. That will do nothing but imbolden them (the radical islamists) to cause more harm around the world. Silly and Prayer in the same sentence – you are good. Later – .



report abuse
 

Ted Voth Jr

posted April 26, 2007 at 6:15 am


Dear Brother Campolo ‘ Because we overwhelmingly lent support to the invasion of Iraq some four years ago. He should further point out that our original intentions were good! We Americans were told that we were invading in order to remove the threat of what we thought were Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.. Those of us even those of us Christians who were paying attention knew this was nothing but a trumped-up war of adventure, launched partly out of greed for oil and partly because certain radical ideological elements said to themselves ‘What’s the good of being the world’s ‘the World’s’ superpower, ‘Babylon the Great’, if we can’t push someone around?’ Those of us who were paying attention predicted what would happen: there’d almost instantly be a Resistance not an ‘Insurgency'; Insurgency implies a rebellion against a legitimate government, not the normal reaction of any patriotic people to a collaborationist Quisling government propped up by a foreign invasion and there’d be civil war among the Sunnis and the Shi’is. Remember what we Americans did when we decided the British lobsterbacks were foreigners? Speak for yourself, dear brother, and for the other Americans who were too lazy to pay attention to their own politics, but you don’t speak for me. Wake up and smell the wolf-musk beneath those appealing sheep-skins Bush, Rove, and Cheney, are wearing! Too many of the ‘evangelical’ church in the US, like Jim Dobson, are ‘wise as doves and innocent as serpents.’



report abuse
 

PhilipH

posted April 26, 2007 at 6:31 am


Ted Voth, I am sorry you were not consulted prior to the Iraq invasion since you were one of the few paying attention. Maybe you could go ahead and let us know the correct policy we should take towards Putin or Kim Jong-il. Since these matters are so simple, maybe if you would mention the solution to Darfur we could take care of that this week.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 6:38 am


Ted while we debate the semantics of resistance or insurgents how do we end this conflict. How does it stop as long and some resist or how ever you want to define it. Anyone who knows Muslims knows about the Shite/Sunni divide, the news media didn’t ask questions, congress didn’t ask questions. At this point what difference does it make, how can we bring this to an end.



report abuse
 

PhilipH

posted April 26, 2007 at 6:40 am


Donny–If Dr. Campolo’s wife and ‘friends’ all conformed their lives and beliefs to your view–then how would you respond to the specifics of his proposal???



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 6:42 am


Since these matters are so simple, maybe if you would mention the solution to Darfur we could take care of that this week. PhilipH Mister smart mouth, does it occur to you that a silly pissing contest with Ted has little value when people are dying? I’ve been asking what to do? And you come in a pick a fight with Ted.



report abuse
 

PhilipH

posted April 26, 2007 at 7:04 am


Butch and Ted, I apologize. I too prefer to be on the question of what to do.



report abuse
 

kevin s.

posted April 26, 2007 at 7:13 am


I have a hypothetical question to propose. If it could be determined that the president had been honest in presenting his case about Iraq, would our effort be valid. Basically, I am asking what happens if we take the “Bush lied” argument out of the whole deal. I would also ask whether that would have any effect on what we should do now as well. If (again this is hypothetical) we could ascertain that Bush has acted in good faith based on intelligence he received, should we then continue to stay in Iraq?



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 8:33 am


If (again this is hypothetical) we could ascertain that Bush has acted in good faith based on intelligence he received, should we then continue to stay in Iraq? kevin s. The belief is so widespread that the whole administration lied which causes a lot of anger. BIG BUTT that doesn’t matter at this point. History will deal with Bush and it may not be what any of us think. How or what will stop the resistance? Remove what they are resisting, us. Yes, I know there is sectarian violence but we are catalyst. Prior to the war I said loud and in public, Don t Do It . When it was clear we were going anyway I said, Do It Very Gently , cause as little death and damage as possible. When the major conflict ended I said, Follow the South Africa Model of forgiveness of anyone we can possibly find an excuse to forgive. Now I m saying Pull Back to Kurdistan and let the Shiite and Sunni settle the rest. Tell Iran and Saudi Arabia that we will bomb the bejesus out of any troops or mechanized units that move into Iraq. Then tell them when they stop killing each other we will come back and secure the oil for distribution to all 3 areas. Offer to feed everyone when the conflict ends and we will rebuild with the oil money or sooner, not so sure about how to structure rebuilding. We will have to permanently be in Kurdistan to make them safe or abandon them to a terrible fate. Does this sound crazy? How bad is it now?



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 1:13 pm


Butch (way upstream) Sorry Butch…I know people who died in Iraq and am a two tour VN combat vet myself. Defeatest attitude my butt… Anyone who is willing to leave the troops there to be targets is a moron. The other nonsensical idea is leaving the troops in Kurdistan. Will you please look at a map? Nothing like sticking them in the middle of nowhere where they are perfect targets. And, of course, we will loose Turkey as an allie for once and for all. Great idea folks. No one has said how leaving the troops in Iraq will solve any problem. It will only make things worse for the Iraqis and us.



report abuse
 

Aaron

posted April 26, 2007 at 2:09 pm


With many people in this combox saying they won’t stop fighting if we leave, I have to wonder then, why stay? They fight if we’re there, they fight if we leave.



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 26, 2007 at 2:49 pm


butch | Homepage | 04.25.07 – 11:33 pm | # Let’s leave, let them have their blood bath. They – the ones that are blowing up their own people and ours have no desire to live in peace with the west as they hate us and our way of life. Their desire is world domination – period. They will do anything and everything it takes to achieve their objective. We can stop the conflict in the middle east – they will come and find us a few years later and then we can fight them here in the US for our exsistance. I know that many say that there is no ‘war on terror’, couch it anyway you like to make you feel good. OK – some mistakes were made on the way in Iraq – excuse me – name one war that didn’t have mistakes. The war with Japan was to last 12 to 18 months tops…quess someone should have been impeached on that one. This is not the war that we started but it has become what it is – so we can deal with it now or later on our continent. OK HARRY – the war is lost. You could have said the samething about WWII Japan or Europe many times and for the same reasons. Thank God no one listened to you back then. But then again Harry – you believe that this war (manipulated by you and others like you) will put the Dems back in full control with a super majority in both houses. Damn You for the lives that are lost for your political agenda. (I know – what about Bush…you can paint that pictureas Sojo does so well) Sleep tight tonight – your counterpart in Iraq and elsewhere is looking out for the next car bomb set off by his neighbor. Later – .



report abuse
 

Donny

posted April 26, 2007 at 3:03 pm


PhilpH, I am not advocating Campolo or his heretical wife conform to my ideas. I am encouraging them to follow the New Testament honestly. War is not appropriate for Christians to promote. And neither is homosexuality, abortion as a birth control method (99.9%) godless secularism (Democrat political power goals) etc., etc.. Ever notice how “absolutist” Letists are? They’re fanatics. Once the Iraqi war is a batte of Muslims slaughtering each other (and Americans are back home searching for their next lay) Christians in America that believe in the Lord and His Gospel, can get busy to the task of ridding the Church body of the Leftists. What’s interesting, is that guys like Jim Wallis and Tony Campolo (or at least his wife), are free to invent a new religion, under a new labal, but the “choose” to cruise the Churches looking to trap the unwary. Of course, in the unedited New Testaments still around the Evangelical community, declare that people like Wallis et al, would be doing precisely what they are doing. That is not “my” opinion. That is the statemnets of the Apsotles and Christ Jesus. Let no Leftist claim they do not know what they are violating and how. I want to see soldiers come home because Islam is not worth having another war over. You cannot defeat Muslim totalitarianism because it loves war. Let us Christians be allowed to bring the Gospel to the world and see what happens. But notice, it is The Left, as well as, Muslims in the western world and Islamic world, that are outlawing Christians from being able to speak in public and private. I just point out the players. The Progressives (Liberals, Democrats) are every bit as hostile, oppositional and “adversarial” to the Gospel of Christ as Islam and Muslim Jihadists. Just open your eyes and ears to what is truly happening. Why fear anyone or anything? The Truth, will set you free. Notice how quiet Campolo and his Leftist buddies are to the truth that Muslims and Liberlas are killing and outlawing Christians in many, many places on earth. What’s happening in Darfur and England, are just examples of what is in store for the Christian Church by its declared enemies. “For those who have ears, let them hear.”



report abuse
 

Donny

posted April 26, 2007 at 3:27 pm


And Philip, The specifics of Campolo’s outreach, is gutless cowardice. He will not bring the Gospel to those that oppose it. He will not “contend for the faith” against Muslims and Secular Progressives. No, he and his wife cruise the crowds that want to hear religion “politically correct.” Christ Jesus and the Apostles were all killed FOR NOT being politically correct. For not liberalizing the Gospel. Peace for debauhery is not a Christian concept. Mrs. Campolo needs to actually read the Red Letters of the Gospels, rather than to sell out the Church. Mr. Campolo should be a better steward towards his wife. The enemies of the Church are using these people to further corrupt other individuals. Jesus mentioned this: Offenses will come, but ‘woe’ to those that bring offenses. It is easy to prove how corrupted Leftist theology is because the Apostles have already contended against it for us. Nothing is different than the debauched world of the Greco-Roman world, and the common Liberal actions of today. Nothing new under the sun for sure. Notice that Christ Jesus, Peter, Paul, James and the rest of the Apostles, went right to the people that wanted them killed. Paul opposed hypocrites in the Church and the sexual hedonists in society. Paul certanly is not welcomed at Democrat fundraisers. Houston we have a problem. Leftists (I guess some that even call themselves Christians), push their socialist Democrat Liberal politics, instead of saving the lost. In fact they further corrupt and encourage sinners and promote sinful behavior, to literally be licensed as OK. This is not a game. There are evil and malevolent people and forces desiring nothing but harm to the Church. And, as Jesus and the Apostles said, some are in our Churches. And, by their fruit, you will know them. Taxes to godless communism, abortion for convenience, promoting sodomy, outlawing Christian speech, all are things proveable and celebrated as being Leftist goals. That’s not my opinion, that is actions of Liberals, Secularists, Humanists, Progressives and Democrats every day. I am at least satisfied that they are being exposed and are out in the light of day. The monologue to dialogue of the Religious Right and Liberal Left, certainly can thrive where it will stand up and be seen. I am confident that souls will be freed from the Liberal and Progressive death grips, over and over again, when truth is compared to its lies. I know mine was once I opened my eyes and ears. That not one Leftist will go to Islamic countries and oppose Islam to the faces of those that are really teaching war and murder in the name of that false religion and political structure, shows the Left and its leaders for what they are. Peter, Paul and the other Apostles not once acted or spoke like a Leftist desiring to be recognized as being in the Christian community, does today. Why is that? Do only Muslims have the right to kill people in war?



report abuse
 

H. Steven Wetzell

posted April 26, 2007 at 3:44 pm


Bush is never going to apologize. We know that. We also know that the reason given for the war was probably just a stand in for the real reason: oil needed in case of war. I understand the ideas made by other commenters of breaking up the country into three parts, but would that later just cause us to be involved forever in demilitarized zones? Why not just go along with the plan developed by the group our current Secretary of Defense was a part of? We can make Bush go along with that eventually, if we don’t back down.



report abuse
 

God's Politics Moderator

posted April 26, 2007 at 3:58 pm


This message thread has been visited by a God’s Politics Blog moderator for the purpose of removing inappropriate posts. Click here for a detailed explanation of the Beliefnet Rules of Conduct: http://www.beliefnet.com/about/rules.asp which includes: Courtesy and Respect: You agree that you will be courteous to every Beliefnet member, even those whose beliefs you think are false or objectionable. When debating, express your opinion about a person’s ideas, not about them personally. You agree not to make negative personal remarks about other Beliefnet members. You agree not to engage in derogatory name-calling, including calling anyone evil, a liar, Satanic, demonic, antichrist, a Nazi, or other inflammatory comparisons. Disruptive behavior: You agree not to disrupt or interfere with discussions, forums, or other community functions. Disruptive behavior may include creating a disproportionate number of posts or discussions to disrupt conversation; creating off-topic posts; making statements that are deliberately inflammatory; expanding a disagreement from one discussion to another; or any behavior that interferes with conversations or inhibits the ability of others to use and enjoy this website for its intended purposes. Vulgarity: You agree not to display words, information, or images that are vulgar, obscene, graphically violent, graphically sexual, harm minors in any way, exploit images of children, or are otherwise objectionable. Copying Content: Beliefnet discussions are intended for interactive conversation; members are encouraged to express their own ideas in their own words, not to parrot the words of others. You agree not to create posts that consist substantially of material copied from another source. Help us keep the conversation civil and respectful by reporting inappropriate posts to: community@staff.beliefnet.com



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 26, 2007 at 3:59 pm


bobc | 04.26.07 – 9:49 am | # our useless President ignored all the pervious intelligence work Are you talking about Clinton (who couldn’t keep him mind on the correct job) and the now missing intelligence thanks to Sandy ‘honest mistake’ Burger? Anyone who supports this war needs to rot in the darkest regions of Hell. Good one – shows that you really wish to dialog in a meaningful way – NOT! Looks like another grad of the CNN university – whatever. Later – .



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:00 pm


Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Gonzales, Perle, Rumsfeld, and Rice (for starters) need to be tried at the Haque for crimes against humanity. If convicted then open up Spandau prison and let them rot inside. They will get a fairer trial then the people they have locked up and tossed the keys away. Or better yet, send them to Iraq to participate in the reconstruction efforts personally.



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:02 pm


H. Steven Wetzell | 04.26.07 – 9:49 am | # I understand the ideas made by other commenters of breaking up the country into three parts, but would that later just cause us to be involved forever in demilitarized zones? But that is the UN Way! People hailed it when the UN stopped the conflict – and we the US are still there. It worked before it could work again. Hopefully people will stop dying – I don’t think so as they we just be able to stage their attacks from there on other people in other countries. Later – .



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:03 pm


Yep..good old Clinton…who had to fight the Repub Congress to even get the meager attack launched… Yep..Sandy Burger..who is accused of destroying documents even though he gave Bush all the data which Bush ignored. I am tired of dialoging with those who think it is kool to allow folks to die because it fits their misbegotten political agenda. You are evil if you support this war and you are partly guilty for the death and distruction that occurred.



report abuse
 

Pacific231

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:03 pm


Dear bobc: Thank you for your OUTSTANDING post: http://www.haloscan.com/comments/godspolitics/119644202333618363/#69394 It is a slice of reality that the religious right will surely ignore — after all, you can lead a right wing ideological Christian to the facts, but you can’t make him think. May all people with genuine faith in their hearts (as opposed to the false witness, venomous far-right ideological variety of Christianity, residing in their brain stem) pray for an end to the monstrous lunacy of the far right ghouls infesting the White House.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:11 pm


Pacific231, Actually Wallis talked about the attitude of the Religious Wrong in “God’s Politics”. People who are victims do not beleive they are responsible for their actions. They are simply responding to outside forces. The Religious Wrong continues to make a living with this attitude: Since the whole world is against us, we can do anything we want to anybody we want whenever we want for whatever reason we make up. They need to read and understand their Bibles sometime and not just leave them on the coffee tables for show.



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:11 pm


bobc | 04.26.07 – 10:08 am | # ‘…Sandy Burger..who is accused of destroying documents even though he gave Bush all the data…’ If that was the case – why did he remove classified documents from the archives in his BVD’s and socks? You are making assessments that logic doesn’t support. Why was he removing anything at all – he knew it was wrong – period. Excuse me – need to make my travel arrangements to hell. Stay Home with Sojo – I know you will. I believe you would stay home if someone was beating your neighbor across the street because you sound like a Just War person to me. Later – .



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:13 pm


Moderatelad, Making war is the easy part. Stopping the killing is the hard part.



report abuse
 

Sarasotakid

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:24 pm


You are evil if you support this war and you are partly guilty for the death and distruction that occurred. bobc Although I tend to agree with the sentiment conveyed in this comment, I try to refrain from making such comments because I don’t like it when the right wing levels similar accusations against me for the “sin” of showing empathy toward the pro-choice position or gay rigts. But again, I fully understand why you are so upset. Stay Home with Sojo – Moderatelad There you go disparaging the supporters of SOJO again. Based on your previous posts, I know that you have military-age kids. I pray that they will not feel compelled to go over there and become terribly disillusioned (let alone hurt in some way). Peace



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:34 pm


Sarasotakid, Actually, those that support this war are partly responsible for the death and destruction that continues to occur. There is a price for cheerleading evil. I had enough of combat in the 60’s and 70’s and hear the same old arguments from a new generation of warmongers. Very few ever were shot at or killed someone else. Doing the alternative is hard as it means dealing personally with people you don’t like; even if you are partly responsible for them being in that position. The easy solution is to fight. But then you have to deal with the consequences.



report abuse
 

Jon Jernigan

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:38 pm


Tony, I like your ideas and wish the solution was that simple. The only thing that was holding Iraq together in the first place was Hussein. He was a powerful dictator that the different religious factions in the country feared. We went in and eliminated the only thing that was holding this country together. Mistake! Now we are trying to hold together a country that is literally falling apart. We’ve created a mess and there will be no “winning”. If we leave, it will only fall apart faster than if we stay. I see no workable solutions that will not result in a high civilian casualty count. We’ve lost what little face we, as a country, had in the middle east. We own the Iraqi people more than just an apology. I just pray daily for God to intervene in this situation. As a “christian” nation, we’ve become a cruel joke. Jesus died for all. That includes all Muslims and our “enemies”. I get sick to my stomach when I read some of the earlier comments made by “christians”. I pray for them too. I could say a lot more but I’ll end it here. jonj



report abuse
 

Donny

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:44 pm


bobc, Since this is a Campolo/Christian blog . . . If a person is evil for supporting the war in Iraq, then they are also evil for supporting Jihadism (100-million Muslims that is), supporting taxing the family into communism, abortion for birth control or any other reason, they are evil for supporting same-sex marriage, and supporting Secularism and Humanist doctrines to rule our society, Gaia worship that drives the Green agenda, etc., etc., etc.. Looks like the Left has a lot of repenting to do.



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:46 pm


Sarasotakid | 04.26.07 – 10:29 am | # Thanks for your thoughts. My children have been taught that we as people of faith (Christians) are our brothers keeper and at time we will be called upon to be the defender. Islamic Radicals are out there killing innocent Islamic people. Who will stand up to the bad guys and protect the weak ones? Greater Love hath no one then they that lay their life down for another. That does not mean that you go over there and just stand in the way so that you are killed first and then the people you are trying to protect die second. YES – diplomacy has to be the first item in the process – how many UN resolutions did he blow off – 16, 17??? How many innocent people did he gas and kill??? No doubt if I was being attacked by someone from another country – by the time bobc, Sojo and others figured out if it fell into the constraints of Just War or the UN – I and my family would be dead and they would be moving onto the next family to attack. Yes bobc – if Clinton had been doing his job and supported the inspectors and had the inspectors been allow to do their job properly, the would might be in a better place. There is an old poem about ‘for want of a nail, the shoe was lost…all the way to – the war was lost’. But then again it depends on what your definition of ‘nail’ is. bobc is definitive of SHWS as well as many of the authors of articles on this site. Later- .



report abuse
 

letjusticerolldown

posted April 26, 2007 at 4:53 pm


We might drop language about winning or losing ‘the war.’ I believe it distracts us from being clear on our national objectives; and contributing to Iraq/UN/others working towards just agendas. If we cannot state a clear apologetic as to how the military presence contributes to the much broader (non-military) objectives, then the military should get out. If Iraq’s government does not want the military presence–then we need to get out. I think anyone who ‘knows the exact consequences’ of President’s strategy; or of immediate withdrawal; are not being honest. Any of us are likely on fairly firm ground to criticize any strategy by saying, “That will end in a mess.” So we advocate for stronger processes, stronger cooperation, clearer objectives, finding small things we can accomplish, and listen/submit to Iraq’s sovereign government (re: our presence there). I do not expect Mr Bush to be omniscient. I do expect he and the Congress to have the humility and dedication to clearly state our broad objectives. How can we even consider strategy arguments without knowing the objectives we seek to accomplish. Obviously there are huge inherent costs to invasion of another country. It is not adequate for proponents of ongoing occupation to argue there is some good that could come of it–the good must dramatically outweigh the inherent profound costs. It is not enough to argue that leaving could be worse. That is not a positive objective. The benefit of the doubt must always go to the side of keep your troops at home on their bases. Likewise, it is not enough for opponents of occupation to argue we must leave becaue of all the negatives of our presence. Of course there are negatives. Sadaam was clearly sticking his fingers in the eyes of the international community, the United States, his own people, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait for years. We were obviously directly engaged militarily since the invasion of Kuwait. The question was never whether we were involved–but rather our objectives and strategy. I did not believe before the present occupation of Iraq, nor now, that there was an adeequate apologetic nor clarity of objectives. Do you recall prior to the military action to retake Kuwait how the government tried to prepare the US for massive casualities from Iraq’s WMD’s? We had bad intelligence then. We had ten years of obvious inability of the UN to develop good intelligence. Further the US has decades of experience trying to maneuver the endless factions/divisions of people in the Mideast–as well as helping run a successful insurgency against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. I just did not buy and do not buy the “Aw Shucks, we just did not know what we were getting into.” And I did not see before the occupation, nor now, a military leadership that believed this was a job they could or should do. I have lived many years in high crime neighborhoods with bad ‘police-community relations.’ I have a simple rule for calling 911. If someone needs to be arrested–call 911. If the problem is a marriage, bad parenting, kids with an attitude, etc.–don’t expect a 22-yr-old guy with a badge and gun to solve the problem. Multiply that by 100,000 in regards to deciding whether to send American tanks and aircraft carriers to the Middle East. I call 911 alot. But I have very narrow objectives.



report abuse
 

Daniel

posted April 26, 2007 at 5:09 pm


Apologizing = Good A distinction has been lost between what Tony has written and what you have read into the words: Tony has called for the President to apologize on behalf of America. It is America he is suggesting that needs to humble ourselves and ask forgiveness, not one or even a room full of our political leaders. It is not a question of the personal intentions, mistakes, or decisions of one man – however much those things might be wrong – this is a suggestion about how an entire nation will relate itself to the world at large. At Nuremberg the Nazi defendants argued that there were no international laws and no international sovereign that superceded German law or the Germasn government – and since they followed the orders and laws of their own sovereign government they could not be tried and found guilty of anything at all. The court, the Allies, and the prosecution argued that no codified or official sovereignty were necessary – there are self evident truths expressed through international treaties and fundamental but unwritten laws of humanity which apply with the force of real law even if no such codified law existed. Now we are the ones arguing that we should be able to do whatever we deem right and necessary without regard for the exact same self-evident truths or the context of international humanity. As long as we are willing to let the Hesses and Himmlers of the world go free because they are sovereign and have no responsibilities to others then we can justify that position. But, in so doing we would also dejustify the rationale for war against Saddam Hussein. Ergo, we’ve already chosen. An apology from America for the times when we violate the principles we hold others to is hardly a concession for our enemies. At some level we have to hold onto our own humanity and not justify monstrous actions as justified because we can’t show that we respect ordered liberty, human rights, the democratic process. Without such contrition we undermine our credibility for democracy promotion and international cooperation – the very cornerstones of winning the broader War on Isamic Fascism. So from either the moral or pragmatic perspective, not apologizing is the wrong thing to do.



report abuse
 

Kristopher

posted April 26, 2007 at 5:34 pm


I am starting to wonder if this BOBC character is trying to bait us conservatives with his extreme rhetoric. Kid, thanks for keeping it civil. Thank you for not condemning us to rot in the darkest regions of hell, just because we don’t have the same ideology.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 5:34 pm


moteratelad wrote: bobc is definitive of SHWS as well as many of the authors of articles on this site. Ok…I’ll bite…what does SHWS mean. Another falsehood is how we got there is meaningless now… Bunk… It is the prime driver of how we get out. For when we lie to do something, it removes many options for completing the effort. We lacked the moral authority to wage war on Iraq. Couple that with abu Ghraib, the destruction of Fallujah, torture and endless imprisonment without trial and we can never attain any moral footing. The horror we gave the Iraq people cannot be explained away by we gave them their freedom and they should love us. We removed Sadaam and then let the apocalypse happen because we lied to the whole world and ourselves about our mission. From the beginning we acted immorally. We must leave as soon as possible. No one can say what good we are doing by staying. As far as dividing the country into separate parts and expecting the UN to intervene well Fantasy Island ended a long time ago. Another favorite sideline of the worst President in our history is insulting all who oppose him. The side effect is our need for help will be ignored. The problem is it is not we who need the help; it is the Iraq people. Another problem is whenever a decision point was reached; Bush took the path that led to more violence. Only so many wrong decisions are tolerated before any chance at arbitration is impossible.



report abuse
 

CRP

posted April 26, 2007 at 5:36 pm


“Now I m saying Pull Back to Kurdistan and let the Shiite and Sunni settle the rest. Tell Iran and Saudi Arabia that we will bomb the bejesus out of any troops or mechanized units that move into Iraq. Then tell them when they stop killing each other we will come back and secure the oil for distribution to all 3 areas. Offer to feed everyone when the conflict ends and we will rebuild with the oil money or sooner, not so sure about how to structure rebuilding. We will have to permanently be in Kurdistan to make them safe or abandon them to a terrible fate.” Hey Butch, I like your idea of moving forces to Kurdistan. And the US/Brits could provide close air support to a multinational peacekeeping force. This strategy looks very much like the one that ended the war in the former Yugoslavia. It could work. Tell Wes Clark and see what his take is.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 5:37 pm


How can anyone who desires an illegal and needless war not be responsible for the actions that happen once it occurs? Sorry..there is no free pass. I really don’t care what political strip you have as it is Conservatives who brought us this mess and Liberals who did not fight enough to prevent it. Why do Conservatives love it so? Why do Liberals let it happen with out saying much?



report abuse
 

CRP

posted April 26, 2007 at 5:48 pm


“Why do Conservatives love it so? Why do Liberals let it happen with out saying much” For the former, they are nationalists. For the latter, most do not have the courage to call out the insanity of nationalism, because they want to stay in office.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 5:51 pm


Donny I tend to agree with you on most points. Yep, the jihadists are wrong So is abortion. I would like to see more of an effort to preventing unwanted pregnacies. Call it the supply side of the abortion effort. Remove the supply of unwanted pregnacies and the demand is removed for abortions. The problem is this is very difficult and requires a great deal of thought and investigation into the whole idea of women getting pregnant when they don’t want to be pregnant. A whole lot of issues that Wallis discusses in “God’s Politics”. As far a gay rights. I am not bothered about it and the Bible is not overly clear about it. I would like to see religion removed from the marriage ceremony and let gays get their civil rights. Each church can decide for themselves to honor the union or not. This is the krux of what Wallis says. I am not against fighting if peace will not give you the needed end. In Iraq, Bush clearly went for bullets first. However, Clinton did not help it any with sanctions and no-fly zones. He wanted regime change but never made a clear, moral call for action. The idea of mimicing Yugoslavia in the north has problems but may be worth a try. Look at a map first and decide what to do about Turkey. BTW…Clinton did this over the objections of the Conservative Repubs. Are you guys singing Bubbas praises on something?



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 5:53 pm


sorry..remove the state from the marriage cerimony…



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 6:00 pm


What seems to be the case is those of us who have seen war will go to war at the last resort. Those who never saw war go to war at the first hint of conflict. Maybe it is just ignorance?



report abuse
 

kevin s.

posted April 26, 2007 at 6:03 pm


“You are evil if you support this war and you are partly guilty for the death and distruction that occurred.” This seems a bit bananas, but Daniel actually says essentially the same thing below. “At Nuremberg the Nazi defendants argued that there were no international laws and no international sovereign that superceded German law or the Germasn government – and since they followed the orders and laws of their own sovereign government they could not be tried and found guilty of anything at all.” Are we, then, responsible as the nazi’s were? Should I be put in prison? If you and Bob are correct, that is the unescapable conclusion, i think. We followed Bush’s lies and systematically slaughtered (what’s the figure of the day?) 2.8 million people. We destroyed the region, all for oil. Shall we send all Republicans to prison? Would be interested to hear responses to this question, as well as my question above about whether this war was jsutified if Bush was not lying.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 6:11 pm


Kevin s. Sorry but the wrong strawman. Bush did lie and the war was not justified. We need to really think through the doctrine of premptive war. When to do it and how to avoid it.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 6:15 pm


What is so difficult about being forced to be responsible for cheerleading an illegal war? What should the penalty be? Is it living with the knowledge that you took innocent lives? I took innocent lives and it is something I think about everyday. When you go to the mall and you see young families…how does it feel to know you approved of wasting innocent lives like those? The cheerleaders are guilty of the sin of ignoring the effects of their actions. It is something they have to live with.



report abuse
 

letjusticerolldown

posted April 26, 2007 at 6:26 pm


Kevin We have been militarily engaged in Iraq since 1991. My answer to your question is the current invasion/occupation was not justified even if Mr Bush was speaking truth because there was not (in my book) a compelling apologetic for this action that outweighed the understood costs of invasion (let alone unforseen costs). That does not answer the question as to what I believe would have been justified. One problem I have with some of the “Pull out now” crowd is some seem to hold the war was justified or not justified based on the outcome. If everything goes smooth they are for it and if it doesn’t they are against it. Likewise I have a problem with some of the “Stay the course” crowd who seem to say–“Since the cause was noble, there is no catastrophe so great as to cause us to withdraw.



report abuse
 

Carl Copas

posted April 26, 2007 at 6:50 pm


What do the Iraqi people want for their nation? Indeed, given the religious and ethnic divisions, is there such a thing as “the Iraqi people”?



report abuse
 

kevin s.

posted April 26, 2007 at 7:07 pm


“Sorry but the wrong strawman. Bush did lie and the war was not justified.” Ummm. A hypothetical is not a straw man. You are confusing terms here. Thank you for your answer, justice.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 7:14 pm


I have lived many years in high crime neighborhoods with bad ‘police-community relations.’ I have a simple rule for calling 911. If someone needs to be arrested–call 911. If the problem is a marriage, bad parenting, kids with an attitude, etc.–don’t expect a 22-yr-old guy with a badge and gun to solve the problem. Let Justice Very insightful, the call to support troups really says support the leaders because they tell 22 year-olds what to do.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 7:17 pm


letjusticerolldown, I don’t think those of us who are in the “Pull out now” crowd think justification has anything to do with the outcome. The justification has to stand by itself. We should pull out now because we are not adding to the greater good. We are only making it worse. If there was someway us staying there improves the situation for Iraqis then we should stay. The reason for staying must be the effect on Iraq children. If our staying makes it better knowing all the horror we have caused them then we should stay. If our staying continues to foster the incredible horror that is being dumped on them then we should leave. All I ever hear about us leaving is the chaos and carnage that would then happen. That is a hollow argument as we are causing incredible chaos and carnage now. The Iraq people have said time and time again they want us to leave. To ignore them must mean we are staying for other reasons. The only other reasons are a false sense of pride and stealing their oil.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 7:32 pm


OK…I’ll play along. Assume the following: WMDs were found bin Laden was helped by Sadaam. Bush did not deliberately insult the Europeans to force them not to participate. Bush went to the UN and tried to make a case for removing one of the two-dozen or so leaders that butcher their citizens. Colon Powell told the truth about building and trailers containing laboratories and WMDs Iraq has no oil so there is no ulterior motive to take action. Bush was talking to the neighbors to involve them in the decision-making. We had intelligence that the yellow cake and aluminum tubes were really for WMD production. We would all be in favor of taking action. The rest of the world would support us. Now obviously, none of the above happened so that is why Bush had to resort to lies. This means we have no moral footing and is why we are in this particular state. Bush invaded because he thought it would be easy and stealing Iraq oil was the prize.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 7:35 pm


I took innocent lives and it is something I think about everyday. Bobc At my age it is hard for me to look back at things I did and saw and things that were done to me as well. The problem is looking or acting or causing others to act when you haven’t been there. Asking a recently returned soldier to make a judgment is a waste of time, asking people like us who have had the time to reflect on history we lived is better. You and I quarrel with some like Moderatedlad who were never there and lived it. I think it is a waste of time. You mention thinking about it every day as I do, we have sent many to create these types of memories for themselves and others. It is just so sad. You cause me to think as I type about the things I did and saw and after all these years I still cry. How could anyone who has been there send others to do such things?



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 7:42 pm


Now, back to my question how to stop the insurgents? If they will never stop this can never end. I think about what I would do if someone came here. I would never stop until they leave, are they different?



report abuse
 

Sarasotakid

posted April 26, 2007 at 7:46 pm


What do the Iraqi people want for their nation? Indeed, given the religious and ethnic divisions, is there such a thing as “the Iraqi people”? Carl Copas That question has not been asked by those who would stay the course. It seems that their primary concern is making sure the U.S. looks good. Opinion polls in Iraq have shown that the overwhelming majority want us out of there. I guess that the democracy that we’re fostering there is along the lines of the 2000 U.S. presidential election where the majority (or at least plurality) does not gets its way. That point is lost on the conservatives backing the war but is evident to the rest of the world. Just another resounding proof of our benevolent intentions.



report abuse
 

letjusticerolldown

posted April 26, 2007 at 8:01 pm


Butch Discussing with me what you have seen and understand will not result in my comprehending what you comprehend. That however does not make the discussion hopeless. I believe it is often that which makes us feel we are wasting our time is the open door to contributing what God has for us to give. If I understood what you have experienced, I would not need you. Sooner or later we bump up against death, severe darkness, evil and/or horror. When we carry it before a holy God it becomes even darker and more devastating. But in that moment of severe, suffocating darkness, there is a light, a power, a hope, a Gospel–that gives new life and breath. As we walk that out our lives become something new and life-giving. We are surprised by Joy–faith, hope and wisdom that provides the sources of guidance for Brothers and Sisters on the journey.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 8:05 pm


Just another resounding proof of our benevolent intentions. Sarasotakid Just another resounding statement that will cause neocons to defend themselves, if you can’t find the middle ground there will no end to shouting match. Right wrong or indifferent, how do we end the insurgency? Nothing will change until this happens.



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 26, 2007 at 8:13 pm


bobc | 04.26.07 – 1:37 pm | # Bush invaded because he thought it would be easy and stealing Iraq oil was the prize. before the war and even today, we get very little oil from Iraq, less than 5% if I recall, it might be more like 2%. Have you even read the 15+ resolutions from the UN. No – go ahead and live in your own little world of ‘Bush lied – people died’ as I believe that is your ‘happy place’. whatever – .



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 8:16 pm


Butch, We have no input into ending the insurgency as we are catalysts for increasing the violence. This has everyone paralyzed. Regardless of staying or going, bad stuff will happen. Every path leads to violence. Therefore, we should not be the occupier any more. We lost the liberator mantel long ago.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 8:20 pm


moderatelad , Not quite so easy. Iraq has either the most or second most amount of oil reserves in the world. Taking their oil allows us to not be beholden to the rest of the cartel. It of course, allows the oil barrens huge access to product unfettered by things like owned by others. Why do you think the many permanent bases were built? It was to exert permanent influence in the ME My happy place is when all the troops are out. Bush lied..peeople died is a fact that his supporters will have to live with forever. Enjoy the memories.



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 26, 2007 at 8:35 pm


bobc | 04.26.07 – 2:25 pm | # My memories are fine – but I perfer to have a vision. I would like to see an Iraq that is self governing and a player in the world market. It is amazing how you can draw the lines and connect the dots over your idea of how the oil market works but fail to see that the same could apply as to how the radical Islamists could/are doing the same so they can terrorize the world. Your saying that Bush put our brightest and best in harms way just so he could have the oil is as vulgar and offensive as people saying that Clinton sent our millitary into armed conflict to keep Monica off the front pages of the nations newspapers. But since you can make that determination – I may have to rethink mine. Later – if I even want to address your posting again. .



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 8:36 pm


We have no input into ending the insurgency as we are catalysts for increasing the violence. Bobc This is the first step in the process, if we are the catalyst then we have to remove ourselves from that role. That is my belief which is a big part of my move to Kurdistan. So, can we get to some agreement about the catalyst argument, if not then what? Nothing has changed for years (years is long time in war) so we should not stay this course, the surge is just lets do it again with a new name.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 8:42 pm


My trouble with Kurdistan is: 1 – Turkey won’t like it. We are currently trying to install anti-missle batteries in Turkey. We better figure out what kind of relationship we want with them. 2 – It isolates our troops from their supply lines in the Gulf leaving the only supply path through Turkey.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 8:47 pm


moderatelad, Sorry pard. If you really cared about the rise of radical Islam then you would never have invaded Iraq. Our invading has empowered the radicals to heights they could have never imagined. Bush is their greatest recruiter. In the same vein bin Laden recruits fearmongers for Bush. Some vision…too bad you are blind to what is really happening.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 9:01 pm


Turkey and supply Bobc We can finesse that if we control Kurdish rebels, Turkey would like it. We can supply by air. Remember Berlin? The Kurds are rebuilding now, we pitch in in a big way and we have our model. If they are independent then they can vote a government, again a model. Now we are out of the Shiite/Sunni conflict. I’m like you we are the catalyst; they could stop pulling triggers in a hurry. If not we can’t stop the insurgency anyway.



report abuse
 

Sarasotakid

posted April 26, 2007 at 9:02 pm


Your saying that Bush put our brightest and best in harms way just so he could have the oil is as vulgar and offensive as people saying that Clinton sent our millitary into armed conflict to keep Monica off the front pages of the nations newspapers. Moderatelad You seem to be looking at this whole issue of us (in your case the Republicans) vs. them (the Democrats). So every time somebody brings up Bush’s having lied to get us into the war, you bring something up against Clinton. Has it ever occurred to you that some of us who are against this war might actually believe that Clinton did something so despicable as to start bombing the sh_t out of Kosovo, Bosnia or wherever else he may have bombed to get the attention off of him and Monica? We’re not beholden to Clinton, Gore, or any other Democrat whom you might choose to citicize. That’s not the point. So everytime you point out some misdeed that the Democrats may or may not have committed, it does little to change anybody’s opinion about what Bush did. Butch, I agree with bobc that we are the catalyst for the civil war in Iraq and our presence there is only fueling the fire. So pull out baby…!



report abuse
 

Sarasotakid

posted April 26, 2007 at 9:03 pm


Just another resounding proof of our benevolent intentions. Sarasotakid Just another resounding statement that will cause neocons to defend themselves, if you can’t find the middle ground there will no end to shouting match. Butch Mighty conciliatory today, Butch.



report abuse
 

butch

posted April 26, 2007 at 9:12 pm


Mighty conciliatory today, Butch. Sarasotakid Maybe, but I can hardly bear the shouting match while people die. I’ve killed with a gun and I’ve seen it, I’m telling you and others your pride doesn’t carry any weight with me. I know many make little debating points and show them to friends and loved ones with pride looking for a pat on the head. The insurgency goes on and we talk about politics while people die!



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 26, 2007 at 9:26 pm


bobc | 04.26.07 – 2:52 pm | # This whole thing started in the late 30’s and has been growing ever since. In the late 80’s into the 90’s it was well established and growing faster than you can imagine. A friend of mine that was working over there was telling us that radical Islamists were well organized and were going to do something – we all thought Israel but were wrong. The weakness that was shown to the world by the Clintons emboldened them and I believe laid that foundation for 911. They were already pissed off at us – it did not start with Bush, 1 or 2. Part of a vision is to be able to see it even when it looks like it is impossible. I know that the world will be a better place but our greatest hurdle is Hary Reed and Company, they are assisting with the recruting because they are telling the radicals we are going to leave. Lay low UBL – Reed and Peloci will clear the way for you. Later – .



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 26, 2007 at 9:35 pm


Has it ever occurred to you that some of us who are against this war might actually believe that Clinton did something so despicable as to start bombing the sh_t out of Kosovo, Bosnia or wherever else he may have bombed to get the attention off of him and Monica? NO ONE HAS EVER SAID THAT ON THIS SITE. I believe that there was/might have been bad intel. But so many were sayign the samething both here and abroad. Reed now wants to call members of the adm in front of his committee and question them about Saddam trying to purchase material to build WMD of sometype – something that the British Parlement has done their rechecking the facts on and stand by their origional statements on the topic. Let the impeachment begin Harry – we should have impeachment hearings everytime the White House and Congress are controled by different parties. Later – .



report abuse
 

Carl Copas

posted April 26, 2007 at 9:35 pm


moderatelad: “Lay low UBL – Reed and Peloci will clear the way for you.” mod, this is beneath you, Christian brother.



report abuse
 

Conrad Steinhoff

posted April 26, 2007 at 10:46 pm


Tony, I have to quarrel with you on several points. 1) The Democrats are not proposing “cut and run.” A phased withdrawal is not “cut and run” which implies cowardise. I know you are dedicated to non-partisan balance, but sometimes you just have to face up to the facts. Continuation of the Iraq war is ruinous and unacceptable. 2)Not everyone was complicit in supporting the war for several years. I was in Washington before it started, particiating in a major mobilization trying to prevent the war. I have been dead set in my opposition to it ever since, and have been vocal about it. 3) What do you think is going on in Iraq? Most informed observers are calling it a civil war. Our presence is, if anything, preventing the resulotion of the sectarian conflicts. It is certainly not helping anyone. Our president says if we leave, there will be a “bloodbath”. What does he think is going on there now? 4) I generally support Tikkun’s ideas, but these proposals, especially the apology, just ain’t going to happen. I don’t see anything about what the American religious community is going to do. We need to join together to put unrelenting pressure on the Congress and the Administration to get out of Iraq. Conrad Steinhoff



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 11:00 pm


It is the many people on this site who are so tolerant of murder when Bush does it but are so against it when Clinton did it. Why is that? I was horrified by the ethnic cleansing that went on by Milosevic and others and thought when the UN went along with military intervention it was wrong. One set of bombers was traded for another. Where were the attempts at peacekeeping missions? I was hoping for more activity from clergy heads to mitigate the violence. Clinton did the same thing Bush did only Clinton was blessed by the UN. Repubs to their credit tried to stop the funding but were denied. In addition, yes, I will accept being evil for saying Bush murdered nearly 700k Iraqis and over 3300 of us in an attempt to grab the Iraq oil fields. It was always about oil; not about humanitarian efforts. In fact, there was absolutely no planning for dealing with the civilian aftereffects of Sadaams fall. There is ample evidence for the planning of military bases to maintain a long time presence in the ME. The only reason is to guarantee the supply of oil and profits to this country. Repubs are not concerned with the massive humanitarian needs but are concerned about the Iraq oil contracts. I will believe other wise when Bush renounces any desire for Iraq oil. I will believe otherwise when Bush announces the US will pay for reconstruction but no US company will participate in the reconstruction efforts.



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 26, 2007 at 11:07 pm


I wonder how anyone can defend Bush… Let’s see. Lie to go to war Tortue people Illegal surveilance Illegal firing of DOJ lawyers. Outing a CIA agent who found out about the lies. Possibly vote fraud in Ohio and Florida. Ignoring global warming and forcing scientists to lie about data. I am getting typers cramp…. I don’t know about impeachment. It may be better to leave his regime members there and keep the subpenas coming. With hope, the nightmare that is the conservatisim philosophy will be small enough to flush down a toilet.



report abuse
 

Sarasotakid

posted April 27, 2007 at 1:25 am


Let the impeachment begin Harry – we should have impeachment hearings everytime the White House and Congress are controled by different parties.Later -moderatelad In other words, since you can’t prove that Bush is right, you might as well tear down the Democrats in response to criticism of Bush. That doesn’t convince anybody.



report abuse
 

John Mustol

posted April 27, 2007 at 1:31 am


Campolo says we need to replace our military force with a police force that understands Iraqi culture. This recognizes one of the worst defects of the American Iraq Adventure. We have never understood Iraqi culture, customs, history, or language. There is a massive disconnect between what Americans think and believe and what is really going on in Iraq. It is the same error we made in Vietnam. We simply have no idea what is really occurring in Iraq.



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 27, 2007 at 2:47 am


Sarasotakid | 04.26.07 – 7:30 pm | # Please – there has not been a Pres since Nixon that the Dems have not tried to get into an impeachment trial. Every Republican Pres. are corrupt and deserve to be impeached? The Dems have out spent the Reps on special counsels and investigations several times. It is SOP for Kennedy -Peloci and Feinstein. Later – .



report abuse
 

dlw

posted April 27, 2007 at 5:04 am


I’m not against the plan, I don’t feel fit to assess its feasibility. I have tried to persuade others that we shd as Christians also be calling on Bush to call for a nationwide week of fasting and mourning over what we have wrought in Iraq, during which almost all major forms of entertainment would be suspended temporarily. I think our leaders repenting is good, but we shd also repent and I think turning away from the “entertainments” that we fill our lives with so regularly would be a good way of doing that. We did after all approve of the regime-change of Iraq. I think it matters that we demonstrate seriously remorse over Iraq and that we make those who are too inured to feel remorse over Iraq to break away from the bubble they’re normally wrapped up in for a spell. It’s a bit of the “wailing donkeys effect” from the book of Jonah. We need to collectively repent and make each other remember the suffering and serious loss of life experienced in Iraq because of our mistake. dlw



report abuse
 

Sarasotakid

posted April 27, 2007 at 5:39 am


Please – there has not been a Pres since Nixon that the Dems have not tried to get into an impeachment trial. Every Republican Pres. are corrupt and deserve to be impeached? The Dems have out spent the Reps on special counsels and investigations several times. It is SOP for Kennedy -Peloci and Feinstein.Later -moderatelad I guess you’ve run out of arguments so you resort to this?! Even if it were true, it seems pretty irrelevant to the question at hand.



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 27, 2007 at 6:34 am


bobc | 04.26.07 – 5:12 pm | # Please – if I had made comments like that people here would be calling for me to be cained. I have refuted a few of those – with news paper articles to back them up and was refered to by one as a ‘Bush Whore’ – something that I would never do but then again – that just me. Blessings – Later – .



report abuse
 

bobc

posted April 27, 2007 at 12:12 pm


moderatelad, Sorry about flushing conservatism down the toilet. Bush is not a conservative; he is a neo-conservative which is a totally different, more dangerous animal. Real conservatism died with Barry Goldwater.



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 27, 2007 at 4:12 pm


bobc | 04.27.07 – 6:17 am | # And the last of the great moral liberal/democrat was Harry Truman. later – .



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 27, 2007 at 4:58 pm


Tony – Your idea for the “Way Out of Iraq” does a lot for getting us out and very little in securing their future except that we are going and the weak and innocent will be at the mercy of the Radical Islamic Leaders that desire the power to rule and be served by their people and not to serve and lead their people. So – lets do the ‘way out’ and get back to our safe and secure lives and let them go back to open season on their leaders killing citizens when ever they feel the spirit more. ???? – later – .



report abuse
 

Jack

posted April 27, 2007 at 6:04 pm


Any proposals on getting us out of mass genocide in our own country? Any way out of killing our children by the millions? Aren’t there larger issues than Iraq we have to worry about? -Jack



report abuse
 

Doug7504

posted April 27, 2007 at 9:14 pm


Make no mistake about it…we haven’t secured the future of Iraq, and won’t. We are headed the way of the Soviets in Afghanistan, the Brits in Northern Ireland, the French in Vietnam. Accusations of “cut and run” are just restatements of the cowboy mindset which has driven our foreign policy since Korea. The fact is that our leaders went to war for the wrong reasons with the wrong tools, and now won’t ever admit their mkstakes. Our nation wants to protray itself as leader of the Free World. We are nothing of the sort. We no longer represent freedom to most peoples. Those who DO want to come here are demonized more and more in the name of “security”. America has become what we always claimed we stood against: a ruthless, empire-building monolith which represents evil and oppression to millions around the world. It is time we stepped back from the brink and asked ourselves: what do we want to be to ourselves, and the world? Peace.



report abuse
 

dlw

posted April 28, 2007 at 12:34 am


It seems everybody wants to debate military strategy or accuse the other of extreme partisanship. Nobody wants to talk about my idea of calling on Bush to call for a week of fasting and mourning over what we have wrought in Iraq! I think such a week, during which almost all forms of public entertainment would be suspended, would help us show the Iraqi people and the world our deep remorse over what we have done in Iraq. The evidence is overwhelming that we have serious blood on our hands. I believe this is something that we can rally around, across party and faith backgrounds. dlw



report abuse
 

dlw

posted April 28, 2007 at 12:57 am


please draw attention to Ukraine and pleas like this one for peaceful reforms there. http://eng.maidanua.org/node/724 dlw



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 28, 2007 at 4:36 am


Just for thought – Charles Colson had an interesting articale about GW and Iraq as well as the great conflict with terror and he has written that our attacking Iraq did fit GW. Now that it has changed we have an even great moral obligation to see it though and keep our promises that we made to the people in Iraq – Chuck Colson. Later – .



report abuse
 

HASH(0x132b08f8)

posted April 28, 2007 at 6:40 pm


What Tony Campolo is presenting here is “cut and run” with just a gloss of diplomacy. We bring in a “multinational” force — Campolo can’t be bothered to say what nations would be involved — while the US bails out. In order to make it look like he cares about the future state of Iraq, Campolo specifies that the US should throw money and mutter an apology as it bails out. But let’s not kid ourselves. Campolo supports cut and run. Everything else he suggests is just veneer. Wolverine



report abuse
 

HASH(0x13274540)

posted April 28, 2007 at 6:40 pm


What Tony Campolo is presenting here is “cut and run” with just a gloss of diplomacy. We bring in a “multinational” force — Campolo can’t be bothered to say what nations would be involved — while the US bails out. In order to make it look like he cares about the future state of Iraq, Campolo specifies that the US should throw money and mutter an apology as it bails out. But let’s not kid ourselves. Campolo supports cut and run. Everything else he suggests is just veneer. Wolverine



report abuse
 

Sarasotakid

posted April 28, 2007 at 11:40 pm


So what do you suggest, Wolverine, in light of our outstanding success in Iraq?



report abuse
 

moderatelad

posted April 29, 2007 at 3:30 pm


Hello Chuck Colson people on Just War? No takers… Later – .



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

More blogs to enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting God's Politics. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here are some other blogs you may also enjoy: Red Letters with Tom Davis Recent prayer post on Prayables Most Recent Inspiration blog post Happy Reading!  

posted 11:14:07am Aug. 16, 2012 | read full post »

Why I Work for Immigration Reform (by Patty Kupfer)
When I tell people that I work on immigration reform, they usually laugh or say, "way to pick an easy topic." Everyday it feels like there is more fear, more hate. Raids are picking up in Nevada, California, and New York. A number of senators who supported comprehensive reform only a few months ago

posted 12:30:52pm Oct. 16, 2007 | read full post »

Audio: Jim Wallis on "Value Voters" on The Tavis Smiley Show
Last week Jim was on The Tavis Smiley Show and talked about how the changing political landscape will affect the upcoming '08 election. Jim and Ken Blackwell, former Ohio secretary of state, debated and discussed both the impact of "value voters" on the election and what those values entail. + Down

posted 10:11:56am Oct. 16, 2007 | read full post »

Verse of the Day: 'peace to the far and the near'
I have seen their ways, but I will heal them; I will lead them and repay them with comfort, creating for their mourners the fruit of the lips. Peace, peace, to the far and the near, says the Lord; and I will heal them. But the wicked are like the tossing sea that cannot keep still; its waters toss u

posted 9:35:01am Oct. 16, 2007 | read full post »

Daily News Digest (by Duane Shank)
the latest news on Mideast, Iran, Romney-Religious right, Blog action day, Turkey, SCHIP, Iran, Aids-Africa, India, Budget, Brownback-slavery apology, Canada, and selected op-eds. Sign up to receive our daily news summary via e-mail » Blog action day. Thousands of bloggers unite in blitz of green

posted 9:31:25am Oct. 16, 2007 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.