Bush and his Faith

[Hedgehog]

A recent post by Beach made me think of especially a phrase in Matthew(Whoa!! )...

GWB claims he is an active Christian, also that he's feeling the Lord, he also claims he reads the Bible a lot. Assuming he's telling the truth, this makes for some interesting take on Bush's War On Terror, and his general foreign policy.

Try for a moment to forget whether or not you are a Christian, or if you support Bush or not.

Here are words from the scripture that Bush reads.

You have heard that it has been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say to you, That you resist not evil: but whosoever shall hit you on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." (Matthew)

You have heard that it has been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate your enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you. (Matthew)

An Atheist, or a Jew eg, wouldn't have words like this to live by.

But Bush, claiming he is an active Christian, does.

So my question is, how can Bush claim to be an active Christian, if he doesn't try to follow the words of the scripture?

I mean, where is the love for the terrorists? The love for the "enemies" of USA, that he's repeatedly spoken of?

I'm not saying he should show love for terrorists.

But then, he shouldn't claim to be a Christian, or that he leads a Christian life.

Be consequent.

-Hedge

[Stark]

Hed brother fundamental christianity, they have their own bibel, the one that says: Tho shall not murder (not kill, but murder)

[240 is Back]

IRAN is begging us to have peace talks.  Syria is begging us for talks.  North Korea is begging us for talks.  We refuse.  Would Jesus refuse peace talks when they might avoid war?

[BRUCE]

IRAN is begging us to have peace talks.  Syria is begging us for talks.  North Korea is begging us for talks.  We refuse.  Would Jesus refuse peace talks when they might avoid war?

What? Do you actually believe that?

Iran, led by their crazed dictator, is threatening to wipe Israel off the map.  In case you forgot, they're an ally of ours.

Syria aided and abetted Saddam during his stint as leader of Iraq.  They also want Israel destroyed.

North Korea just went atomic.  They'd probably nuke your backyard tomorrow if they thought they could.

Why you try and align, then defend such nations is a mystery to me.  Do you desire to live there?

[gtbro1]

A recent post by Beach made me think of especially a phrase in Matthew(Whoa!! )...

GWB claims he is an active Christian, also that he's feeling the Lord, he also claims he reads the Bible a lot. Assuming he's telling the truth, this makes for some interesting take on Bush's War On Terror, and his general foreign policy.

Try for a moment to forget whether or not you are a Christian, or if you support Bush or not.

Here are words from the scripture that Bush reads.

You have heard that it has been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say to you, That you resist not evil: but whosoever shall hit you on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." (Matthew)

You have heard that it has been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate your enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you. (Matthew)

An Atheist, or a Jew eg, wouldn't have words like this to live by.

But Bush, claiming he is an active Christian, does.

So my question is, how can Bush claim to be an active Christian, if he doesn't try to follow the words of the scripture?

I mean, where is the love for the terrorists? The love for the "enemies" of USA, that he's repeatedly spoken of?

I'm not saying he should show love for terrorists.

But then, he shouldn't claim to be a Christian, or that he leads a Christian life.

Be consequent.

-Hedge

   Bush does love the terrorists. That is why he is going after them. He wants to kill them all so they can go get their 17 virgins or whatever it is they get.

[240 is Back]

Iran, led by their crazed dictator, is threatening to wipe Israel off the map.  In case you forgot, they're an ally of ours.

So?  How many Israeli troops are on the ground in Afghanistan and iraq at the moment?  Yikes.

Syria aided and abetted Saddam during his stint as leader of Iraq.  They also want Israel destroyed.

So?  We've never done any shady shit?  We need them under control, and negotiations can do that.  please tell me you're not using a grudge to prevent future diplomacy. 

North Korea just went atomic.  They'd probably nuke your backyard tomorrow if they thought they could.

And what has Bush done to stop them?  They're 5 years ahead of Iran in terms of nuke development.  They fired nukes at hawaii on the 4th of July.  They set off a nuke and gave China 20 min warning and us, zero.  I haven't noticed your string of "attack N Korea threads".  Why is this?

Why you try and align, then defend such nations is a mystery to me.  Do you desire to live there?

I'm not defending shit.  I'm telling you that anyone with a brain - and all of our leaders throughout history - have attempted to employ DIPLOMACY before they started dropping bombs.  The standard line is "but, but, but they're evil".  But Russia was plenty evil, even setting up nukes 40 miles from US soil.  Skipping diplomacy there would have led to WWIII. 

If you were in JFK's shoes, would you have negotiated with the Russians?  Or just launched nukes?

[Mr. Intenseone]

IRAN is begging us to have peace talks.  Syria is begging us for talks.  North Korea is begging us for talks.  We refuse.  Would Jesus refuse peace talks when they might avoid war?

Yet Iran ignores UN sanctions and sides with Chavez, Ill and Castro.........nice !!

[BRUCE]

So?  How many Israeli troops are on the ground in Afghanistan and iraq at the moment?  Yikes.

So?  We've never done any shady shit?  We need them under control, and negotiations can do that.  please tell me you're not using a grudge to prevent future diplomacy. 

And what has Bush done to stop them?  They're 5 years ahead of Iran in terms of nuke development.  They fired nukes at hawaii on the 4th of July.  They set off a nuke and gave China 20 min warning and us, zero.  I haven't noticed your string of "attack N Korea threads".  Why is this?

I'm not defending shit.  I'm telling you that anyone with a brain - and all of our leaders throughout history - have attempted to employ DIPLOMACY before they started dropping bombs.  The standard line is "but, but, but they're evil".  But Russia was plenty evil, even setting up nukes 40 miles from US soil.  Skipping diplomacy there would have led to WWIII. 

If you were in JFK's shoes, would you have negotiated with the Russians?  Or just launched nukes?

Oh yes, you've got it figured out now, Rob.  Let's talk them out of it!

Here you go, let's see you negotiate with this terrorist:

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/archive/archive?ArchiveId=15816


"The establishment of the Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world," the president told a conference in Tehran on Wednesday, entitled The World without Zionism.
"The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land," he said.
"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, referring to Iran's revolutionary leader Ayat Allah Khomeini.

Your fondness for tyrants and despots is frightening.

[240 is Back]

If Iran does anything bad, I condone nuking them into fiberglass.

But if all they've done is talk trash, so the hell what?

Do you seriously want to spill US blood battling 70 million iraqis because their leader talked shit?

Do ya?

[BRUCE]

If Iran does anything bad, I condone nuking them into fiberglass.

But if all they've done is talk trash, so the hell what?

Do you seriously want to spill US blood battling 70 million iraqis because their leader talked shit?

Do ya?

Sigh.  First you outline them as a target for peace talks (i.e. recognising them a threat), and then you say they're just 'trash' talkers.  I knew you didn't believe your own hype.

[gtbro1]

Yet Iran ignores UN sanctions and sides with Chavez, Ill and Castro.........nice !!

    IRAN = OIL

    KOREA = Rubber Dog Shit and cheap auto parts

[BRUCE]

   IRAN = OIL

    KOREA = Rubber Dog Shit and cheap auto parts

I think you're confusing North and South.  And there are better and cheaper ways of getting oil.

[240 is Back]

Sigh.  First you outline them as a target for peace talks (i.e. recognising them a threat), and then you say they're just 'trash' talkers.  I knew you didn't believe your own hype.

They're a modern nation - any modern nation is a threat.

I don't believe there is EVER a scenario when diplomacy should not be employed.  Even on the brink of war, both nations know a victory will often be phyrric and will look for an "out".

Come on, it's incredibly stupid to start a war without negotiations.  The bilateral Iraq group called for talks.  The dems want talks.  Why is this neocon group the only group who detests talks?

[gtbro1]

I think you're confusing North and South.  And there are better and cheaper ways of getting oil.

it was a joke.

PLEASE don't tell me you think we are in IRAQ for ANYTHING other than oil or Bush's ego.

[BRUCE]

it was a joke. (an inaccurate one)

PLEASE don't tell me you think we are in IRAQ for ANYTHING other than oil or Bush's ego.

Gee, you make it sound like to disagree with your view would be silly or something 

If we're in Iraq for oil, we're doing a real bad job of things, my friend.  Try and use your sense of reason, rather than conspiracy, to guide you.

[BRUCE]

They're a modern nation - any modern nation is a threat.

I don't believe there is EVER a scenario when diplomacy should not be employed.  Even on the brink of war, both nations know a victory will often be phyrric and will look for an "out".

Come on, it's incredibly stupid to start a war without negotiations.  The bilateral Iraq group called for talks.  The dems want talks.  Why is this neocon group the only group who detests talks?

A nation with nuclear capabilities, a hatred of us, and a leader ready and willing to destroy our allies.  If you think this is just any other country in the modern world you're lost.  And there you go talking them up, and down, all in the same argument.  Get things clear in your head before hitting those keys.

[240 is Back]

Gee, you make it sound like to disagree with your view would be silly or something 

If we're in Iraq for oil, we're doing a real bad job of things, my friend.  Try and use your sense of reason, rather than conspiracy, to guide you.

We've been in Iraq less than 5 years.  Bush and Gates have already said it's going to be decades.  I think you're being short-sighted.  There are 3t in crude unprocessed, and $40 trillion in saleable oil under them (at 75 a barrel pricetag).  Sitting under them.  And we're setting up 14 military bases along the path of the oil pipeline.

it's pointless to argue this.  

[BRUCE]

We've been in Iraq less than 5 years.  Bush and Gates have already said it's going to be decades.  I think you're being short-sighted.  There are 3t in crude unprocessed, and $40 trillion in saleable oil under them (at 75 a barrel pricetag).  Sitting under them.  And we're setting up 14 military bases along the path of the oil pipeline.

it's pointless to argue this.  

Yes, I know its uncomfortable to have your ideas challenged, so I'll accept if you no longer want to be involved with this.  Let's just give it a bit of 'wait and see' with the oil okay?

[gtbro1]

Gee, you make it sound like to disagree with your view would be silly or something 

If we're in Iraq for oil, we're doing a real bad job of things, my friend.  Try and use your sense of reason, rather than conspiracy, to guide you.

Personally,I think the biggest reason we went into Iraq was Bush wanting to get Sadam. I think he was wanting an excuse and the WMD  thing was his chance.

[240 is Back]

Saddam is dead.

We're still paying haliburton to build the pipeline.  We're still building 14+ permanent US bases right along that pipeline. 

[BRUCE]

Saddam is dead.

We're still paying haliburton to build the pipeline.  We're still building 14+ permanent US bases right along that pipeline. 

Yes, protecting wealth for Iraqi people, how vile.  Perhaps we should allow terrorists or neighbouring countries to move in and take it?

[240 is Back]

Yes, protecting wealth for Iraqi people, how vile.  Perhaps we should allow terrorists or neighbouring countries to move in and take it?

Is it the same with the Afghan oil pipeline?  Are we building that for the Afghan people?

[240 is Back]

A nation with nuclear capabilities, a hatred of us, and a leader ready and willing to destroy our allies. 

North Korea.  Why haven't we invaded them, and why aren't they even on the list?


nuclear capabilities, Check!

a hatred of us, Check!

and a leader ready and willing to destroy our allies, Check!

I'll add:

ICBMs tested and close to working.
Detonated nukes on their soil.
nation very poor, which increases chance of sale of weapons
nation very poor, which increases chance of action sooner, rather than later.

[BRUCE]

Is it the same with the Afghan oil pipeline?  Are we building that for the Afghan people?

Now you're catching on.  Please tell me more about how we have improved the lives of Afghanis in recent times.

[BRUCE]

North Korea.  Why haven't we invaded them, and why aren't they even on the list?


nuclear capabilities, Check!

a hatred of us, Check!

and a leader ready and willing to destroy our allies, Check!

I'll add:

ICBMs tested and close to working.
Detonated nukes on their soil.
nation very poor, which increases chance of sale of weapons
nation very poor, which increases chance of action sooner, rather than later.

Rob! I agree with you! Calm down!

North Korea scares me more than your conspiracies ever could, but we're not going to solve the problem with them by talking.  We've told them, it's very simple really:

'Build nuclear arms, and there will be no further discussions, we will make life hard for you'

Is that ambiguous?  Is anything unclear?  Are they listening?

I'm all for disarming these crazies, but we need the participation of countries like China, Japan and South Korea.  The world would be a better place with one less nuclear armed socialist state.