John The ENTIRE rationale for going into Iraq was a LIE
1. There was/are NO WMD’s in Iraq
2. Iraq was not about to develope ‘ nookular’ weapons
3. Iraq had NOTHING to do do with 9/11

John you are basically a mercenary for the Oil interests and for Israeli expansionism. The Israeli’s call it “Eretz Israel” or “Greater Israel’ ALL the land from the Euprhates to the Nile.

You have NO moral ground to stand on.
Do you want to sound like those German soldiers who at their war crimes trials replied “I was only following orders”.

You are in a tough position because, as a soldier, you have basically signed away your liberties as a US citizen.

It would take a lot of guts for you to do what is right.  You have your conscience to live with.

May God help you to do what is right .

Daniel Patricks - 21 September 2008 03:24 PM

John you are basically a mercenary for the Oil interests and for Israeli expansionism. The Israeli’s call it “Eretz Israel” or “Greater Israel’ ALL the land from the Euprhates to the Nile.

You have NO moral ground to stand on.

Hi Daniel,

What exactly is your basis of morality founded on ? The above quote sounds like it’s come straight out of an anti-Zionist leftist pamphlet.

1. There was/are NO WMD’s in Iraq

This is going over old grounds here - I think that previous discussions are in the ‘dead horses’ folder - so I won’t be entering into an on-going debate again. However I have this news report in my files :

September 09, 2005

BAGHDAD: Former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has admitted ordering the attack that killed more than 180,000 Kurds, an official of the Iraqi Special Tribunal said yesterday.

Not only did he admit ordering the attack against Kurds in the north of the country, but he boasted that the killings were legal and justified.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case, said Saddam made the statement last month during questioning.

He goes on is trial before the tribunal on October 19.

The official said Saddam demanded a court decide if he was justified in ordering the so-called Anfal campaign in 1987-88, which resulted in the ethnic cleansing of numerous Kurdish communities in the north of Iraq......

Saddam did possess WMD’s - and he used them. He admitted so himself. And just ask those who survived the attempt at Kurdish cleansing who were witnesses to the slaughter of 180,000 through Saddam’s gas attacks if their countrymen were killed by a WMD or not.  Biological warfare is a WMD. History cannot be denied.

Daniel Patricks - 21 September 2008 03:24 PM

John The ENTIRE rationale for going into Iraq was a LIE
1. There was/are NO WMD’s in Iraq
2. Iraq was not about to develope ‘ nookular’ weapons
3. Iraq had NOTHING to do do with 9/11

John you are basically a mercenary for the Oil interests and for Israeli expansionism. The Israeli’s call it “Eretz Israel” or “Greater Israel’ ALL the land from the Euprhates to the Nile.

You have NO moral ground to stand on.
Do you want to sound like those German soldiers who at their war crimes trials replied “I was only following orders”.

You are in a tough position because, as a soldier, you have basically signed away your liberties as a US citizen.

It would take a lot of guts for you to do what is right.  You have your conscience to live with.

May God help you to do what is right .

Daniel
A little less strident please.  John asked for thoughtful opinions, not attacks that accuse him of being immoral.  By all means argue your case, but do it with a little more respect and sensitivity.
Bob

Hi John,

John Bryant - 10 June 2008 11:07 PM

now I’m off again to the middle east, this time Afghanistan.  As an evangelical Christian, I personally think it is right with going over there and doing my job, serving my country in the defence force.

…

As a Christian, should I really be involved in what I am doing?  Should we have really gone to these places in the first place?  Like I said before I’m confident I’m doing the right thing but open to correction if theologically right.

One of my best mates (Christian) was in Afghanistan around 2 years ago - a Singapore army lieutenant at the time, now a captain. He participated in the peace-keeping efforts there, and dabbled in journalism and war studies as well.

One of the things the experience appears to have given him is a firm handle on what is going on at ground level, not only there but also in neighbouring countries, such as Pakistan. I think it was good for him to be in the thick of things and really get to know and understand the issues at stake - not to mention the civilian lives at stake - in a way that we who’ve never gone there can’t do.

TZ.

Sorry if i seemed a little strident. I was in the military during Vietnam on a spy-ship similar to the Pueblo which the Koreans captured, imprisoned and tortured the men on board, and the Liberty which the Israeli’s attempted to sink at the beginning of the 6-day war in 1967 killing 34 US sailors and wounding 175 others.

I remember being discharged in late 1966 after my tour and arguing with friends in San Francisco State in favor of the Vietnam war and the “domino theory”. Remember that one? Well. it’s being served up again as ‘leftovers’ only this time it’s called the War on Terror.

The last I remember is Jesus saying ‘if my kingdom were of this world then would my servants fight that I should not be delivered unto the Jews”.Jn 18:36

Well, yeah Saddam did have poisonous gas because the US gave it to him. But the guy as screwed up and evil as he was was no threat to world peace. After a 10 year war with Iran, he couldn’t even beat the Iranian army headed up by a bunch of Mullahs.

I will stand by my assertion that the US is there to gain hegemony over the world oil supply and because Israel believes it is heir to all the land from the Euphrates to the Nile rivers which, by the way is represented on the Israeli flag by the two blue horizontal lines, one above the star the Euphrates and one below the Nile.

The Leftist versus Rightest dialect is contrived and controlled by the powers that be.  It’s like the current presidential race in the US should one vote for Obama who favors killing the unborn or McCain who wants to kill the born?

I didn’t know that Christians were supposed to be pro-Zionist--where do you read that in the New testament?

Hi Daniel,
Thanks for explaining a little where you’re coming from.  Again let me say that there is no problem with you expressing your views.  I only wanted us to be kind to others who are engaged in military service (or who have been in the past like you) who are seeking to act in good conscience.  As to Christians being pro-Zionist, I don’t read it anywhere in the NT.  In fact, I don’t equate the modern state of Israel with the Israel of the Bible at all.  Now before that sets the cat amongst the pidgeons, let’s make sure we stay on thread here, i.e., what do we think of John B and others currently serving in Afghanistan?
Bob

Daniel Patricks - 22 September 2008 09:38 AM

Sorry if i seemed a little strident. I was in the military during Vietnam on a spy-ship similar to the Pueblo which the Koreans captured, imprisoned and tortured the men on board, and the Liberty which the Israeli’s attempted to sink at the beginning of the 6-day war in 1967 killing 34 US sailors and wounding 175 others.

Hi Daniel,

You’ve certainly been through some interesting times. However, Israel’s attack on the Liberty was not deliberate - but rather an unfortunate accident in the middle of a full-on war setting :

The accidental attack, though tragic, is one of many common in war. In 1967 alone, “friendly fire” killed 5,373 Americans fighting in Vietnam. Unfortunately, this incident has attracted conspiracy theorists who have generated a series of “exposes”, but in the end all of the exposers have been themselves exposed as hoaxes.

Most tragic of all, some of the surviving crew have taken up the issue claiming a deliberate attack, contradicting their own sworn testimony during the investigations immediately after the event. A documentary on the History Channel, broadcast August 9, 2001 was very poorly researched and gave further distribution to some of these long debunked claims.

Despite those who want to keep this incident alive as a “cover up”, the fact is that all available evidence is fully consistent with the original explanations: the attack was an accident of war.

Liberty incident link

Bob reminded us to ;

let’s make sure we stay on thread here, i.e., what do we think of John B and others currently serving in Afghanistan?

In a world where evil men seek to ‘bully’ and dominate others , I am thankful that troops ( from many countries ) are prepared to risk their very lives. We all have seen how evil the Taliban are. They condemn the west for the western youth using drugs - but have no qualms about cashing-in on the drug industry by growing and distributing it - all in the alleged name of Allah. What evil hypocrites and murderers they are. And then we have their mates Al-queda who with their ‘religious zeal’ have slaughtered many 1,000’s of innocents - most of whom are Muslims ( see the carnage carried out in Pakistan alone ).

For evil to succeed, all it takes is for ‘good’ men to do nothing. Look at how World War 2 came about because no-one stood up to Hitler at the beginning.

We need to be thankful that our troops are there and we need to uphold them in our prayers. Our societies need police to uphold our laws. And similarly, our soldiers are attempting to uphold world laws against those ‘outlaws’ who wish only to bring destruction to those who are not in their fold. Imagine a world without any police or soldiers to protect society - evil would run amok.

Especially let’s continue to pray for Christians and chaplains over there - in Afghanistan in particular where John is headed. I once heard someone say that there are no atheists in fox-holes. There must be lots of opportunities to talk about the gospel to fellow soldiers who go out on patrol each day not knowing if that day will be their last. They must have incredible resolve to be there doing what they do - but also they need to know where they will spend eternity. We’re praying for you John.

Cheers, Kevin

Kevin, I know it may be hard for you to believe but some of the good guys are also the bad guys.

Below, is another link on the USS Liberty. It is a recent interview with the late Capt. Ward Boston who was the investigating officer into the Liberty incident.

http://judicial-inc.biz/te_llawi_uss_liberty.htm

Daniel,
I note your apology does not actually address your personal attack on John, especially your emotionally loaded comment about it taking a lot of guts to do what is right.  Rather, you are sorry that your words were a little strident or harsh. 

From where I sit it looks like you have hijacked this thread to pour vitriol and give your own conspiracy theories on the US government’s foreign policy agenda, rather than addressing John’s legitimate concern. 

As a currently serving Australian military officer and a Christian I will make a couple of comments.  I am quite comfortable that my position to serve in the military does not contradict God’s word in the New Testament. May I suggest you read the link Jeremy Halcrow provided to the paper on A Time for War by the theologian and ethicist Andrew Cameron. 

I am however, intrigued with your pacifist position of God. How do you reconcile this position when you read the OT, assuming you hold the doctrinal truth that God does not change. 

That said, I respect your decision to be a pacificist. That is your right, and as a military man serving a democratically elected government, I will defend your right to hold this position.  However, at what stage do you cease being a pacifist? 

Is it when your country’s signficant interests come under threat overseas?
Is it when your borders are breached by hostile forces?
Is it when your city is attacked?
Is it when armed soldiers come down your street?
Is it when you stand by and watch your wife and children violated in your own house?

At what stage do you say I will take up arms? 
A true pacifist will stand by and watch each of these activities without raising a finger.
By the way, John is an Australian soldier, not a US citizen.

Andrew

Andrew, you have identified one of the real dilemmas for both the pacifist and the militarist.  Just because I cannot say absolutely if and when I would cease to be a pacifist as per your string of questions does not mean that I forfeit the right to hold a pacifist view.

The dilemma for the militarist is similar.  If you are going to take up arms to protect your own borders, then why not act pre-emptively far away from your boarders so that the threat doesn’t come closer to home.

There is much biblical evidence that suggests that God supports the idea of redemptive violence, but I suggest that such an interpretation is actually a reflection on human fallenness.  We are called on to clothe ourselves with much better things that violence and war - things that create harmony and peace between all people.  A gun can never become an icon of peace.

As a military man you must be in command of various kinds of military weapons, all of which are designed specifically to kill.  It be able to argue that the use of these weapons was mostly in self-defence, but since our military are carrying their weapons in other people’s countries the question could be asked - who is threatening whom?

At the end of the day, as they say, we are all faced with a personal moral decision about whether the military option is one we are prepared to take or not.  There is certainly a well balanced array of theological papers and books on either side of the debate.

Andrew--I am not a pacifist. What I have a problem with is this pre-emptive war most of which is based on the wrong reasons and/or lies. This can only lead to a really bad conclusion.

Conspiracy ‘theories’? Well, this current worldwide “war on terror’ began with a conspiracy theory that the US Government put out, much of which sounds dumber than any grade B movie plot.

John asked for advice and counsel on his miltiary service--I gave mine, others gave their advice.  I also gave it to my sons who I advised not to go near this war at all and that it is a worse lie than Vietnam.

Daniel Patricks - 23 September 2008 07:07 PM

Andrew--I am not a pacifist. What I have a problem with is this pre-emptive war most of which is based on the wrong reasons and/or lies. This can only lead to a really bad conclusion.

Conspiracy ‘theories’? Well, this current worldwide “war on terror’ began with a conspiracy theory that the US Government put out, much of which sounds dumber than any grade B movie plot.

John asked for advice and counsel on his miltiary service--I gave mine, others gave their advice.  I also gave it to my sons who I advised not to go near this war at all and that it is a worse lie than Vietnam.

Daniel
I think everyone here respects your right to your views - and I understand that you are not a pacifist.  But once again I point out that John’s question had nothing to do with Iraq.  He told us by way of background that he had served in Iraq, but the “advice and counsel” he asked for was regarding his current tour in Afghanistan.
Bob

Hi Bob
John was asking about more than his current tour in Afghanistan. He said:

As a Christian, should I really be involved in what I am doing?  Should we have really gone to these places in the first place?  Like I said before I’m confident I’m doing the right thing but open to correction if theologically right.

“should WE really have gone (past tense) to these places (plural) in the first place?

“these placeS” meaning both Iraq and Afghanistan!

He asked if what he was doing was “theologically correct” and was “open to correction” if it was not.

So from the way he worded his post it is evident that he is asking about more than just heading off to Afghanistan. He is asking about the whole deal, should we be in “these places” at all? My answer is emphatically --NO! Sooner or later, if he survives, he may also come to that conclusion. but maybe not.  I still have friends who were in Vietnam who don’t get that war either.

It never ceases to amaze me how far reaching the deception of the “war on terror” goes. But then I think back when I was an ignorant 17 year old joining the Navy.  When we headed for Vietnam, I had no idea on earth where it was-- and even after getting out I was still gung-ho about that war to “stop communism in the orient” and prevent the “domino theory” from becoming reality. It took me several years to come to an understanding of what that was all about.

I think a good motto when listening to government leaders either here or there or anywhere is ‘believe nothing and question everything” --Oh yeah, and if you don’t have the means to do research you can pretty well be right most of the time if you just believe the opposite of what they are telling you, And make sure THEIR children are on the front lines! Not like that lying sack Hilary Clinton or Bush/Chenny whose daughters should be riding around in an unarmoured Humvee in Baghdad not partying or going to school.