Insurgents target Strykers in Iraq

[MikeyD]

"I personally have never seen a militant Christian cut off another militant Christians head"

... oh, can anyone say Protestant reformation? English civil wars? German religious wars? Irish wars? Spanish inquisition? It was the lucky ones who got a nice clean chop!

Modern times - well, I genuinely expect to meet my end at the hands of some right-wing southern Baptist before this century's half-over.

[zmoney]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

"I personally have never seen a militant Christian cut off another militant Christians head"

... oh, can anyone say Protestant reformation? English civil wars? German religious wars? Irish wars? Spanish inquisition? It was the lucky ones who got a nice clean chop!

That’s my point. That kind of crap happened along time ago and stopped along time ago as far as Christianity is concerned. The sad thing is, is it happened along time ago in Islam as well but just never stopped.

I love how Christian haters love to bring crap up from long ago yet fail to see that things have changed in the West yet turn a blind eye or even make excuses for Islamic craziness.

Do you not remember all the riots over a carton of the Prophet like a year ago? I have never seen any Jews or Christians rioting and torching the Iranian embassy over the anti Jew/Christian cartoons they ran in their papers. Yet there were people in the west that say “well those Muslims do have a point that is pretty offensive”. Now if a Christian speaks out about someone saying Jesus was actually gay then that Christian is looked at like a cave man that needs to join the twenty first century.

I don’t get all the fear of Christians in the West. Sure it’s annoying to have someone knock on your door when you’re trying to eat dinner and try to convert you to this or that. But that’s a lot different than someone knocking on your door because they want to cut your head off.

I’m curious though why do you feel a Baptist is going to kill you? I hope it not true because you make great models.

[argie]

Have you read my post?

I can provide plenty of examples on tortures and executions in the name of Christianity in LatAm alone in the last century.

Many against people as Christian as nuns and priests. And we have some priests so high ranked as bishops incarcerated facing charges of human rights abuses.

There isn't a matter of hate or fear. Is just what happens with messianic fundamentalists in all dogmas, being them religious or not.

For that is that is unfair to judge a religion for what some people do in its name.

[MikeyD]

"I love how Christian haters love to bring crap up from long ago..."

Oh! Why so touchy? Its not like its a deep dark secret how much blood has been spilled on the European continent over religious wars. after all, I share the same family name as the notorious Cardinal Armand Duplessis de Richeleau! And we don't have to go very far back at all to find fascistic right-wing dictators justifying dirty deeds in the name of Christ - Pinochet comes to mind, Franco. Didn't our current president state that Jesus told him to invade Iraq?

let's not throw around the phrase 'Christian haters' and confuse it with very well justified fear of the fascist tendencies of any group that believe they posess the 'true path', whether protestant, catholic, muslem, hindu, unitarian, Unification Church, Christian Scientist, Salvation Army...

[Moronic Max]

That kind of crap happened along time ago and stopped along time ago as far as Christianity is concerned.

Northern Ireland, anyone?

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by Moronic Max:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />That kind of crap happened along time ago and stopped along time ago as far as Christianity is concerned.

Northern Ireland, anyone? </font>

[zmoney]

This will be my last post on this subject because it is going way off topic and I feel bad for leading it so far astray.

Ariel, all things are not made the same. People have every right to see what is going on around them and making judgment. As far as SA goes you did mention those evil people are in jail now and they are generally condemned by other Christians. So I wouldn't say thats the norm for Christianity and no one else with a sane mind can either.

Micky D, Pinochet and Franco didn't do their bidding for religious purposes. Pinochet was fighting communism. And yea Bush invaded Iraq for the lone reason that Jesus told him to. Your insane. Oh and I'm sure Bush knocked down the trade centers too.

Moronic Max, how many people died in the name of religion there? The numbers probably aren't very high compared to the middle east Sunni vs Sheiti dispute. Plus I don't believe that the NI situation is going strong now is it? So another isolated event when you consider how many nations consider themselves Christian.

YankeeDogg, those scum also used to burn down churches. Plus like I said that kind of crap happened along time ago and wasn't condoned by 90% of Christians. You can't honestly say you think those guys are doing gods will. Whereas Muslims do.

My point is Christianity isn't immune to people doing stupid things in its name but generally that activity isn't condoned. People also do stupid things in Islams name now but the difference is, it's accepted by the majority of Muslims as the norm.

[argie]

zmoney, sadly, you seems deluded.

If, as you says, the Muslim majority accepts what some whackos do, you should look at what makes them to accept it. Hint: it isn't related to religion, as it wasn't related to religion what, opposing to your suppositions, makes some Christians not only accept, but encourage other Christians to do.

Like the Church in Chile and Spain going full in support of Pinochet and Franco: they gave mass and pardon to people who had just tortured to dead, not communists, but other Christians too.

Power, zmoney, is behind a lot of things. People who is disenfranchised from their own power is easy to manipulate in most cases, but it can be done with or without religion.

[Battlefront.com]

Zmoney,

Well, if you are talking about shades of gray, sure... Islam's recent history of unbridled violence compared to Christianity's is lopsided in favor (if you want to put it that way) of Islam. Just don't forget that the neo-Nazis, KKK, and other rightwing groups who espouse murder based on religious beliefs would kill in huge quantities if they got the chance.

As a historian, I don't think of the 19th Century as being that long ago. There are still people alive today that were born in the 18th Century. In fact, today the only surviving woman to serve in the US military during WWI passed away at the age of 109. McCarthy was only 60 years ago. The Christian opposition to Christian African Americans having anything resembling equal rights was only 40 years ago (and still going, though smoldering). Out of extreme religious laced thinking Tim McVeigh and his helpers murdered a few hundred men, women and children, many of whom (if not all of them) were Christians. That was only a few years ago.

Your point that the majority of Christians disagree with this extreme version of Christianity, even if many do sympathize with the rationale for it, is valid. And that this majority keeps the minority largely in checkis also valid. Therefore, the % of Christians that feel murder is acceptable is quite small and generally opposed, whereas this check and balance is obviously lacking in the Islamic world. But don't think one is inherently better than the other... it simply comes down to one side being able to keep a lid on its own extremists better than the other, not that that Christianity is somehow immune from such things.

If the balance between those who preach hate and those who oppose it goes the other way in the Christian world, so does the check that prevents things from the extremists from taking control. That is what Mikey is afraid of and, I have to say, not without historical merrit. It's hopefully not likely, but nobody here can say it is impossible.

Steve

[ March 28, 2007, 08:47 PM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

[Battlefront.com]

Heh... I see Ariel has not lost any of his fire Good to see you back here (as opposed to the GF).

Steve

[YankeeDog]

A great man once said:

"Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone."

The world would be a better place, if ALL peoples, took his advice to heart.

'nuff said.

Cheers,

YD

[argie]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Heh... I see Ariel has not lost any of his fire Good to see you back here (as opposed to the GF).

Steve

Oh, you have been missing the best of me then

(Edit: I've just said "testicles" there).

[ March 28, 2007, 08:42 PM: Message edited by: Ariel ]

[Battlefront.com]

BigDuke6,

First, there's the Nurenburg riposte, which goes wearing a uniform does not fully excuse you from reponsibility for participating in an "illegal" war.

Which was never applied to anybody but the top of the organizations or to those who committed specific crimes (like execution of POWs or wiping out a village)

Second, there's the Vietnam riposte, which goes if enough military-age members of a democratic society say "heck no I won't go" to a war the society sees as wrong, then the society's leaders will end their participation in the war.

It was never intended to cover those already in uniform. The primary logic goes that the leaders would be smart enough not to send an all volunteer military into an action that it knew to be unjustified. Hence all the games that were played in the leadup to war. The secondary logic is that an unpopular/unjustified war will reduce the ability for the military to recruit and retain the personnel needed for the military action to continue. The only work around to that would be a draft, which would be in the hands of Congress and unlikely to happen if the action were so unpopular. Third part of it is that an all volunteer force will necessarily be smaller than what a major action would require. This is was why the neo-cons convinced themselves that they didn't need more than 50,000 troops to start and a year or so later nearly all would be released from duties within Iraq. If they owned up to what it was likely to take, even if the war was managed competently, then they would have had to ask for a draft. If the population didn't feel a draft was warranted, then the forces wouldn't be available and the action would not be possible. Tese forces are much larger than the individual and are in fact working just fine right now.

Third, there's the Washingtonian riposte, which goes just because you are a service member you do not cease to be a citizen with responsibilities to your society. Act against the interests of the society, and you cannot expect your uniform to protect you unilaterally from criticism in fair and open public debate.

Which is why the neo-cons have worked so hard to shut down the debate before the war started and certainly after. But that does not mean that service members are supposed to be voicing their personal opinions while in uniform. That is, as others have pointed out, illegal for sure. So unless Congress changes the rules to allow Lance Corporal Smith to spout off how much he thinks Bush sucks for putting him in Fallujah, he's got to wait until he gets out of uniform. Otherwise he is violating the laws of his country that he swore he would abide by. Since it is a volunteer military, its a right that was knowingly and willingly given up. No crying over spilt milk allowed.

[Fourth, there is the 1917 riposte, which is if an army's leaders are too gung ho about a war that isn't working for too long, they risk mutiny by the troops, unheaval in the societies they swore to protect, and more practically devastation to the militaries wherein they make their careers.

Sure, but that is a last resort not a first course of action. As badly handled as this war is, as poorly justified as it might be, as shaky the legal grounds its on in the minds of some, things aren't bad enough that a mutiny is even possible. That's because it took some time before the majority of people figured out that they had been mislead (at best). Now they are acting and there are other avenues to correct things without devolving into anarchy (which is also the lesson of 1917). Plus, whether the hardcore neo-cons want to admit it or not, troop reduction will occur in 2007. One way or another, for one set of reasons or another, it must happen. I don't think there is anybody in Washington that disagrees with that in private.

Steve

[ March 28, 2007, 08:55 PM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

[Bigduke6]

Steve,

On the Neo-Cons, you're preaching to the choir. Don't get me started.

[Mr Shtick]

Originally posted by zmoney:

I personally have never seen a militant Christian cut off another militant Christians head because he wasn't the same exact kind of militant Christian.

Is that right? Talk about "utter rubbish."

You’re not gonna tell the board Rwnda isn’t a Christian country, are you EinSheise? Be careful how you answer here because your brain power only revs at an RPM of a Yugo.

Should you say Rwandans didn’t massacre their Christian brethren in the name of militant Christianity, you’d be sanctioning and defending inter-Christian horrific annihilation as long as it’s not motivated by religious militancy.

Should you claim that Africans are savages anyways and their Christianity is spurious and unrecognized, and that Africans’ actions as Christians don’t count, you know what you’ll be branded.

Devout Christian notables in Rwanda caused the death of 1,000,000 Christians in the most heinous, reprehensible, horrific and diabolic fashion. Now if you wanna be selective and call them African, lesser Christians, do post. Of course one has to admire the interventionist, tangible stance the Anglican Church and the worlds’ Christians took at the time.

A bit dated a piece of Christian on Christian extermination you retort? Very well. You’re not gonna tell this board the Serbs and Croatians were Buddhists and merely cutting off each others heads in the 90s for the betterment of a proud Slav race, are ya? We’re not even gonna include what the Serbs did to the Bosnians because decapitating Muslim heads by Serbs is mandated by the UN, so no problem there.

When Muslims seek to learn savagery, innovative torture methods and the art of evisceration they visit Christians in high places. Only when you tell the board both religions encompass unspeakable evils like other wise Christians on this board, will you get a Slrupy.

Besides, Islam should get a break on violence because it’s still a much younger religion than Christianity, you started decapitating your brothers and sisters’ heads centuries before Muslims, and at a rhythm that’ll put the Anbar people to shame, ask Queen Margot.

Anyways, this sectarian violence in Iraq isn’t a regional pandemic, nor does it spring from fundamental hatred between Shiites and Sunnis. It’s confined to Iraq and is purposely manufactured as a tactic to regain what’ lost and kick the US out (it’s working too). It’s a mere means to an end, NOT a monumental campaign to vanquish the other sect and its ethos.

Before the Americans came, none of this **** was going on. And the Americans’ insistence on hanging Saddam didn’t help matters either. It’s a violent process that all dictatorships with various ethnicities and sects go though after the fall of a strong man, just like Tito’s Yugoslavia, it’ll settle down.

[Abbott]

Hehe, the old register a new account to make a political post trick. Feel better?

[Mr Shtick]

Originally posted by Cpl Steiner:

"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."

The Iranians would never argue with that, especially when the perpetrators of that mistake are dumb British naval officers.

Examine the above a bit further, in 2004 the Brits send 8 sailors into murky Shatt Al Arab waters and have them picked up by Iranian Guards’ boats. No big stink, incident resolved amicably.

FF to 07, in the midst of unprecedented tensions between the coalition and Iran and on the eve of the imminent passing of UN sanctions, the genius Brits send 15 more sailors into the same murky waters without robust support to look for stolen cars. I mean that Frigate Commander must be Benny Hill or Mr. Bean.

As if the above didn’t ring any alarm bells, you had Ayatollah Khamini just a few days earlier telegraph to the US & Britain “you do illegal, we do illegal.” And to top it all, the sailors elect not to resist and surrender like sheep.

What in the feck does it matter if they were a few meters in or few meters out, it’s disputed waters darn it, you know if the Iranians wanna play this, they can demonstrate GPS crap that suits them too. That hillbilly frigate commander shoulda known the Iranians would “never interrupt” his “mistake.”

British commanders are so stupid, they shoulda known the Iranians are notorious for payback, they never let anything slide: in the 80s when the Israelis assassinated then-Hizbullah’s chairman, Sheik Moussaoui, the same elements of a Quds force in its infancy bombed the Israeli embassy in Argentina to smithereens within a short interval.

This US-led chicanery vs. the Iranians in Iraq and the disappearance of Revolutionary Guards personnel won’t go unpunished, especially if the Mullahs become convinced hostilities are imminent, they won’t sit around and wait like dumb Saddam for Shock & Crap.

By the way, if you seek “gratitude”, buy a Polynesian monkey that resembles you.

[Cpl Steiner]

Mr Shtick (aka Lone Syrian I presume),

Here we go again. If you support a country that kidnaps a defenseless 26 year old girl and parades her on TV after pursuading her to tell lies against her own people after God knows what unspeakable threats against her person then what does that make you?

[Cpl Steiner]

Originally posted by Mr Shtick:

By the way, if you seek “gratitude”, buy a Polynesian monkey that resembles you.

So if I come to your door with a begging bowl asking for charity and then once I've received your help I threaten to burn down your house and kill you and your family that's ok is it? How very Muslim of you.

[Wicky]

Oh Dear LoneSyrian is back

[Cpl Steiner]

Lol. What ever happened to that guy? Did he ever get picked up?

[YankeeDog]

I really doubt Mr. S is LS, unless he's hired a ghost writer. LS's English composition and grammar skills were not of the same level as Mr. S's posts. (Side note: in this limited regard, I am not digging on LS. English was not his first language, and his command of English was far better than any second language I speak).

Alas, competent composition and grammar does not guarantee engaging discourse. It seems this thread, like so many others on similar subjects, has gotten a bit overripe.

Cheers,

YD

[Mr Shtick]

Originally posted by Cpl Steiner:

Mr Shtick (aka Lone Syrian I presume),

Here we go again. If you support a country that kidnaps a defenseless 26 year old girl and parades her on TV after pursuading her to tell lies against her own people after God knows what unspeakable threats against her person then what does that make you?

Oh mon dieux Steiner, whya, whya that makes me, that makes me, that makes ma heart broken, it renders it asunder, especially when she was stuffing her fat face, and especially after the allied airpower incinerated half a million Iraqis.

Don’t you lay your sanctimonious, vile, sympathy jerkin’ disease on me pal.

Nor should you “presume”, presumption got your “Blue Lagoon” “Endless Love” bitch nabbed in the first place.

Defenseless? You mean she’s undergoing the horror of the Haditha 14-year old girl who was gang raped and cremated alive by your cousins?

SHE'S A HOSTILE ENEMY COMBATANT IN EMEMY WATERS WHO'LL BE RELEASED TOMORROW, FOR CRYIN' OUT LOUD.

So if I come to your door with a begging bowl asking for charity

Yes the likes a you do come to my door, because begging is the stuff of the Brits, I see your drunken kind begging for scraps at the gate of my Dubai mansion all the time. That’s the extent of my knowledge about begging, personally I’ve enough wealth to buy and sell the likes a you till death does you part, and hopefully soon, you and that “defenseless” assface you fell in love with.

Personally, I was born a king with more cash than god, the only gratitude I owe is to my wife’s DD cup, I wouldn’t know your “Abu Hamzah” and his world from a kosher ham sandwich.

[Battlefront.com]

Lone Syrian, what's your purpose in life? Apparently not much. You refuse to do any sort of self examination. You refuse to take as hard a look at your own religion and culture as you do the West's. You refuse to have a serious intellectual conversation as a result. You refuse to even be civil. What you don't refuse to be is an intellectual coward, afraid of your own shadow. I got some bad news for you... the some 600,000 dead Muslims in Iraq since the invasion, killed by their fellow Muslims in complete defiance of the West's wishes, is your shadow. The civil war in Lebanon is your shadow. The eternal confilct with Israel is your shadow. Iran's presence on both sides of you casts two shadows. No wonder you're afraid to look around you and try to understand what is going on. It's the one thing that makes sense about you.

Steve

[Cpl Steiner]

Mr Shtick,

To match your argument I would have to sacrifice all my principles and lower myself to your own vile and bigoted level. As I am not prepared to bring such shame on myself I therefore withdraw from the fight and declare you the undisputed victor. Congratulations.