# News & Current Events > World News & Affairs >  Our Responsibility In Iraq

## TomL

I've been thinking.  I have been hearing how bad it is in Iraq since the U.S. military moved out.  I am not going to rehash whether or not we should have or should not have went to war with Iraq.  That fact is we did.  

Before our intervention in Iraq, Saddam Hussein ran that country with an iron first, and there was relative peace.  Since our intervention, we left a soft government in control.  I thought this would happen.

We caused this problem and we have to fix it.  What I think we should do is go back in and take over the country, and make it a U.S. Territory.  Build a huge base there, as we have done with other U.S Territories like Guam.  Then we can rule Iraq with an iron fist the way it was under Saddam Hussein.  

I only suggest this because the problems that now exist in Iraq are our fault.  People are being killed today that should not be, and wouldn't be if it weren't for our intervention.  The blood of Iraqis from now on is on our hands, thanks to George W. Bush, who should be held accountable for crimes against humanity, and will be at the throne of God some day, unless he repents, and confesses to the nation that what he did was wrong.  

Unfortunately, I don't believe there is anyone in power, or will be in power anytime soon, in this Country that will hold George W. Bush accountable for his crimes.  

However, the fact is, the United States is responsible for what is happening in Iraq today, and we need to do something about it.

----------


## trey4sports

I don't think that is a good use of taxpayer funds.

----------


## ryanmkeisling

Are you crazy?  We need to leave them to fix their own problems and learn our lesson. By your reasoning we would be fixing many problems in many places we have screwed things up.  Iraq was not the first plus I think we still have private contractors there trying to create just the situation you are advocating for.  Lets just leave them alone and offer help we can actually give.

----------


## TomL

> I don't think that is a good use of taxpayer funds.


You're probably right.

----------


## TomL

> Are you crazy?  We need to leave them to fix their own problems and learn our lesson. By your reasoning we would be fixing many problems in many places we have screwed things up.  Iraq was not the first plus I think we still have private contractors there trying to create just the situation you are advocating for.  Lets just leave them alone and offer help we can actually give.


The problems they are having is because of what the United States did there.  And yes, if we have done something that is causing the deaths of innocent human beings, you bet we need to fix it.

----------


## Root

Remember that government, as soft as they might be, wanted our armed forces out.  Obama tried to keep our "peacekeepers" there.

It's their problem to figure out how to end the violence now.  Not the US taxpayer.

----------


## ryanmkeisling

> The problems they are having is because of what the United States did there.  And yes, if we have done something that is causing the deaths of innocent human beings, you bet we need to fix it.


I agree we have done wrong there but more intervention will only make it worse.  We have to much blood on our hands already. You can bet the Iraqis attitude is they just want to be left alone because they never wanted us there in the first place.  There are other forms of help we can offer them beyond control and more manipulation.  IMHO.  

I am not claiming I know what should be done, but I will say what I think and I think it is time for USA to leave well alone and let others be free.  We have our own problems with freedom we need to fix here, and I would prefer we concentrate on that.

----------


## pipewerKz

> However, the fact is, the United States *policy makers are responsible* for what is happening in Iraq today, and we *they need to do something about it.*


Fixed.

----------


## MrTudo

Continued occupations of foreign countries, there ya go. 

Whew

----------


## spudea

There has been massive bloodshed in that area of the world for thousands of years. We didn't cause that $#@!.

The only way to fix it is to choose a side and wipe out the other side. There is no possibility of peaceful co-existance between Sunni and Shia factions.

----------


## satchelmcqueen

we started crap in that area in 1953. we need to leave and get out totally. we have no purpose in being there. it needs to end.

----------


## TomL

> Remember that government, as soft as they might be, wanted our armed forces out.  Obama tried to keep our "peacekeepers" there.
> 
> It's their problem to figure out how to end the violence now.  Not the US taxpayer.


Before I reply to your comment, welcome aboard.  Glad to have you.

Let me use a metaphor.  If I come to your house and break all your windows while going after a burgler near your house, should I just let you fix them?  Do I not bear any responsibility for the broken windows?

I believe if we break something we should fix it.

----------


## TomL

> Continued occupations of foreign countries, there ya go. 
> 
> Whew


Not a foreign country, but a US TERRITORY!

----------


## Lafayette

> Before I reply to your comment, welcome aboard.  Glad to have you.
> 
> Let me use a metaphor.  If I come to your house and break all your windows while going after a burgler near your house, should I just let you fix them?  Do I not bear any responsibility for the broken windows?
> 
> I believe if we break something we should fix it.


The problem is if you came into my house and broke my windows then in the process of fixing them you burnt my house down i'd tell you to get the F**k out.

Which is what every Iraqi an their Muslim friends with a gun or bomb has been telling us for 9 years, and now officially the Iraqi government.


Now, i'd suggest you stop casing "burglars" of your own creation around that way no ones windows get broken.

----------


## TomL

Let me tell you, I am as non-interventionist as anyone can be.  That is why I have come up with this idea.  Much of the world is suffering because of our interventionist foreign policy.  

As satchelmcqueen has pointed out, we have been intervening in the Middle East for some time.  It actually goes back to after WWI.  When the League of Nations was formed, the map of the Middle East was drawn.  And those that drew that map did not take into consideration the various factions in the Middle East.  

Then after WWII, the United Nations was formed, and, as if the Middle East wasn't screwed up enough, the UN displaced the Palestinians and put Israel in their country.  

For whatever part we played in the forming of the Middle East after WWI, and then after WWII, and for interventions since, we must bear the responsibility.  

We are directly responsible for the mess Iraq is in.  We should not have gone to war, and George W Bush should be held accountable for his crimes.  But I don't see that happening.  The fact remains we are responsible for the deaths in Iraq today.  

You all believe in personal responsibility, do you not?  What about national responsibility?

----------


## GuerrillaXXI

> I believe if we break something we should fix it.


I understand where you're coming from. On the one hand I think you have the right attitude. Far too often we see Americans who are vehemently opposed to admitting that "their country" (i.e., the US government) makes any mistakes at all in regards to foreign policy. It's nice to see people who are willing to put the responsibility where it belongs.

There's another way to look at this, though. We may have removed a government that was preventing sectarian violence, but the ultimate moral responsibility for unjust violence always rests with those who are actually carrying it out. We're not forcing the Iraqis to kill each other. 

Yes, the US government (and all who supported the Iraq invasion/occupation) did a very evil thing, but what's done is done. We can't stay there forever, right? And if the US does stay, you can be sure it won't be for the benefit of the Iraqis anyway -- "our" government is hardly honorable enough for that. So IMO the ball is now in the Iraqis' court. It's up to them to make their country into something better than it is today.

----------


## ryanmkeisling

> Before I reply to your comment, welcome aboard.  Glad to have you.
> 
> Let me use a metaphor.  If I come to your house and break all your windows while going after a burgler near your house, should I just let you fix them?  Do I not bear any responsibility for the broken windows?
> 
> I believe if we break something we should fix it.


You should let me fix them if you don't know what you are doing.  Whether you were going after a burglar or not, once I get the windows fixed I am gonna be pissed at you so you better just leave me to fix my house, maybe you could pay for them, but if I have an oilfield in my back yard, I do not need your money and will probably just tell you to leave, you've done enough damage chasing your burglar.  It is after all my property.  And in the case of the burglar, you let him in my house to begin with or led him to my neighborhood.

In the case of Iraq, the US has been hurting/manipulating those people for decades in the name of resource hegemony, it is time to apologize and leave them alone.  No offense but this analogy fails on many levels

----------


## TomL

> I understand where you're coming from. On the one hand I think you have the right attitude. Far too often we see Americans who are vehemently opposed to admitting that "their country" (i.e., the US government) makes any mistakes at all in regards to foreign policy. It's nice to see people who are willing to put the responsibility where it belongs.
> 
> There's another way to look at this, though. We may have removed a government that was preventing sectarian violence, but the ultimate moral responsibility for unjust violence always rests with those who are actually carrying it out. We're not forcing the Iraqis to kill each other. 
> 
> Yes, the US government (and all who supported the Iraq invasion/occupation) did a very evil thing, but what's done is done. We can't stay there forever, right? And if the US does stay, you can be sure it won't be for the benefit of the Iraqis anyway -- "our" government is hardly honorable enough for that. So IMO the ball is now in the Iraqis' court. It's up to them to make their country into something better than it is today.



Now your's is a logical response.  I like that.  Weighing one thing and another is how I got this idea.

I am a noninterventionist, and have advocated us leaving Iraq and Afghanistan for a long time.  I have been supportive of us leaving Iraq.  BUT!  As I see it, we have caused greater harm by leaving than if we would have stayed.  People are dying over there that should not be dying.  And it is our fault.  No matter how one wants to sugar coat it, we are responsible for those deaths.  

I have never been one to put money above human life.  We need to do what we can to repair the damage we have done.  I believe our interventionist foreign policy is responsible for millions of deaths in the last 100 years.  It simply must stop.  

Just changing our foreign policy is not enough.  We must find a way to correct our foreign policy mistakes.  Perhaps we should petition the United Nations to change the Middle East map to pre-1913.

I know we can never bring back those who have died, but we need to take steps to make sure our foreign policy mistakes will no longer be responsible for any more deaths.  And that includes the deaths on 9-11.

----------


## RM918

The only responsibility we have to Iraq is to make sure we take all of our $#@! with us on the way out.

We have spent decades and untold amounts of lives and cash on trying to 'fix' things. There was no obvious screw-up and now we can go, "Ok, ok, we messed up, let's seriously try to fix this." This was actually the government trying to fix things! This is what you get when you ask them to 'fix' something, and it's high time that lesson was learned.

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> You all believe in personal responsibility, do you not?  What about national responsibility?


Do not equate personal responsibility with collectivism.  I did not agree (nor did you) to politically and militarily intervene in Iraq.  Therefore, I should not have been forced to fund the war and I most certainly should not be forced to go along with your suggested solution.  You do not end oppression by maintaining it, which is what your plan essentially calls for.

----------


## phill4paul

Let me be the first to be direct and state TOML you are just well and truly ficked. This is our position. It is Dr. Pauls position...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rf0DA-IzJyI

'We the people' don't own it. "We the pepople' are correcting it.

  Edit: Yer frikken nutso if you think we should make Iraq a U.S. territory. Seriously.

----------


## Kuthreck

I believe that our mission is over.  10 years, 10 Mfing years. Move on mission failed.

----------


## kuckfeynes

Whatever immediate violence may occur due to the draw down, prolonging a sustained presence there would surely be more destructive and cause more instability in the long run. 

It is amazing to me that after a decade of this particular war, and 60 years of this foreign policy, people still don't understand this.

----------


## ryanmkeisling

> Whatever immediate violence may occur due to the draw down, prolonging a sustained presence there would surely be more destructive and cause more instability in the long run. 
> 
> It is amazing to me that after a decade of this particular war, and 60 years of this foreign policy, people still don't understand this.


I am not convinced the OP understands much beyond he doesn't like all the killing that goes on.

----------


## Acala

That's a mighty big "we" you got going there, OP.  But let's be clear: I didn't go to Iraq.  I didn't overthrow any government.  I didn't voluntarily support or encourage anyone else to do so.  I am not responsible.  Repeat - I am not responsible for what is going on in Iraq.  If you feel that YOU are, by all means go "fix" the problem.  But leave me, my money, and my children out of it. 

By your reasoning, the US could NEVER back off its role as corrupt world policeman.  That simply will not work.  I suggest you focus on preventing the US from doing any more harm in the future since undoing past harm is not possible.

----------


## LawnWake

I actually agree with you that the American government has a moral responsibility to help Iraq. They've created the mess they're in, so they should fix it. Punishing Iraqis for someone else's wrongdoing is messed up.

Except the problem is.. the American government _can't_ fix it, they can only make the problem worse and the American taxpayer's shouldn't be held responsible for it either.

Really, the fairest thing to do is to punish the Bush administration and hold every politician who's voted for the Iraq war financially responsible for what happened. But that's so... unlikely to happen. Let's just have the Iraqi citizens hate America for a while and the American government should just stop worrying about it. Keep the mistake in the past and learn from it. I know it's not fair to have Iraqis pay for a mistake that a foreign government made, but life isn't always fair.

----------


## TomL

First off, may I say, I don't mind when someone disagrees with me.  But I am bothered by rude or vulgar comments.  If you can't make your point without  those type of comments then as far as I am concerned they are worthless and I will not respond to them.  Most comments, however, have been reasoned and are deserving of a response.

As a Christian, I believe in repentance, confession and restitution.  I believe the Bible teaches those things.  If I break a window, I should admit to it, and pay for the repair of the window.  If I hit a parked car with my car, I should leave a note.  It's called taking responsibility for you actions, and making amends.

I also believe the Bible teaches national responsibility.  "The nation is blessed whose God is the Lord."  And we have seen on several occasions in the Old Testament where God has held nations responsible for national actions.   God has often dealt with collectives.  If you wish to debate that, we can do that in the religion forum.

Is the United States a Christian nation?  Are we really "One Nation Under God"?  If so, then we, as a nation, should behave as such.  Instead we have caused many problems in the world with our interventionist foreign policy.  Many in other nations have dies because of it, and I believe we should repent as a nation.  We should confess our wrongdoings as a nation.  And we need to make restitution, as much as we can, as a nation.

Too the contrary, we are a nation at war with God.  You can read about that here: http://wayoftruth.motion-forum.net/t...t-war-with-god    Our foreign policy is just one way we, as a nation, violate God's word.  And God is holding us responsible in various ways.  It is possible that 9-11 is a part of God's judgement on  America.  

It is for this reason we need to take responsibility for our actions as a nation, eventhough not all of us have been in favor of the the actions of this nation, we are still a part of this nation.  We elect, or allow to be elected, those that have abused and misused their power for their own personal gain.  And the longer it is allowed to be continued the more we will be the recipient of the wrath of God.  

I too would prefer a non-interventionist approach, if we can find a non-interventionist way to correct what we have done, not just in Iraq, but throughout the world.  

My idea of making Iraq a U.S. Territory is just that, and idea.  I am open to better idea if you have one.  But I don't believe a "leave well enough alone," approach will satisfy God.  God has never allowed for that.  He has always insisted upon national repentance, especially with His chosen people, Israel.  Finally, God had his fill of Israel's sinfulness that he sent the Roman armies to totally destroy Israel in 70AD.  Will God allow the United States to be destroyed as well?   That is what we have in store if we do not repent as a nation.

----------


## Icymudpuppy

Our Options....

1. Install another brutal dictator who will rule with an Iron fist like Saddam to keep things under control temporarily until he decides to bite the hand that fed him... (we tried this already... worked for 20 years (1971-1991, but is responsible for blowback and Gulf war)

2. Occupy them forever and ever and ever and ever...... (this will result in A LOT of death and lose a lot of money and won't help a damn thing... See evidence the last 8.5 years...Tried that, didn't work)

3. Leave it alone... Either the people of Iraq will find a solution, it will split into three ethnically and religiously separate nations of Shia, Sunni, and Kurd, or the UN will get involved.  In any case, it is not our problem.  The Iraqi's have wanted us gone since 2003.  I was there when Saddam was captured.  Overnight it went from "Thank you for helping us topple his regime I hope you find him soon".... to .... "Get your foreign occupiers out of our country, we don't need you or want you, and now that you've found your puppet and turned him over to us, GTFO!"  It's been bad in Iraq ever since.

Now, they can opt to join the USA as a territory, but that is for them to decide.  Not us.  They won't.  They are proud of their historical roots.  Why would the birthplace of civilization (babylon) become subordinate to some new startup nation like ours that is already showing signs of pending collapse after only 230 years.

----------


## LawnWake

> First off, may I say, I don't mind when someone disagrees with me.  But I am bothered by rude or vulgar comments.  If you can't make your point without  those type of comments then as far as I am concerned they are worthless and I will not respond to them.  Most comments, however, have been reasoned and are deserving of a response.
> 
> As a Christian, I believe in repentance, confession and restitution.  I believe the Bible teaches those things.  If I break a window, I should admit to it, and pay for the repair of the window.  If I hit a parked car with my car, I should leave a note.  It's called taking responsibility for you actions, and making amends.
> 
> I also believe the Bible teaches national responsibility.  "The nation is blessed whose God is the Lord."  And we have seen on several occasions in the Old Testament where God has held nations responsible for national actions.   God has often dealt with collectives.  If you wish to debate that, we can do that in the religion forum.
> 
> Is the United States a Christian nation?  Are we really "One Nation Under God"?  If so, then we, as a nation, should behave as such.  Instead we have caused many problems in the world with our interventionist foreign policy.  Many in other nations have dies because of it, and I believe we should repent as a nation.  We should confess our wrongdoings as a nation.  And we need to make restitution, as much as we can, as a nation.
> 
> Too the contrary, we are a nation at war with God.  You can read about that here: http://wayoftruth.motion-forum.net/t...t-war-with-god    Our foreign policy is just one way we, as a nation, violate God's word.  And God is holding us responsible in various ways.  It is possible that 9-11 is a part of God's judgement on  America.  
> ...


So you're saying that agnostics, atheists, pagans and other people of non-abrahamic religions need to be forced to endorse what you perceive as christian ideals?

----------


## erowe1

1) If my house just got ransacked by a bunch of drunks, I don't want them to stick around pretending to help. I want them gone.
2) We did not replace tyranny with a "soft" government. We replaced it with worse tyranny. Iraq used to be secular, now it's explicitly Islamic in its constitution. Christians have never had it so bad there.
3) Who is this "we" that you think should rule Iraq with an iron fist? Certainly not me.

----------


## jmdrake

> As a Christian, I believe in repentance, confession and restitution.  I believe the Bible teaches those things.  If I break a window, I should admit to it, and pay for the repair of the window.  If I hit a parked car with my car, I should leave a note.  It's called taking responsibility for you actions, and making amends.


I am a Christian as well.  As a Christian do you believe in staying where you are not wanted?  Here's what Jesus said about overstaying your welcome.

_Luke 9:5
If people do not welcome you, leave their town and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them._

The Iraqi's have made it clear.  They *do not want us to stay and "fix" their country*.  At least the majority Shia do not.  The Christians might want us to stay.  The Christians also would have preferred that we left Saddam in power since he was protecting their community.  But the Shia want us out.  The Iraqi president Al Malaki negotiated with Bush that we be out by December 11, 2011.  Obama deserves neither credit nor blame by getting us out when he did.  But stupid republicans will give him credit and stupid democrats will give us blame.




> My idea of making Iraq a U.S. Territory is just that, and idea.  I am open to better idea if you have one.  But I don't believe a "leave well enough alone," approach will satisfy God.  God has never allowed for that.


If you think that God wants us to occupy another sovereign nation against it's will then I suggest you go back and read your Bible.  Turn off the television and the radio and just read it.  Also read some books on non-violence.  If you want to help Iraq volunteer to be a missionary.  Work under whatever government evolves.  Realize that you'll be risking your life, but no more than the soldiers would have to risk their life for some U.S. "territory" that the people of that nation (Iraq) *do not want*.




> He has always insisted upon national repentance, especially with His chosen people, Israel.


Repentance means changing your ways.  Trying to make Iraq a U.S. territory is *not* repentance.  It's committing the same sin all over again.  It would be like a Christian who went to strip clubs before accepting Christ, but then continued to go later using the rationalization that he was there to "witness" to the strippers and "share God's love" through $10s and $20s with Bible verses written on them.




> Finally, God had his fill of Israel's sinfulness that he sent the Roman armies to totally destroy Israel in 70AD.  Will God allow the United States to be destroyed as well?   That is what we have in store if we do not repent as a nation.


The Roman empire was destroyed because it kept fighting expansionist wars and eventually went broke.  Guess what's happening to the U.S.?

----------


## Jovan Galtic

Well, TomL, I respectfully disagree. What you don't understand is that when US forces are somewhere, they may have support of some people (usually minority), but also very strong opposition of majority. That fuels hatred towards the USA and also hatred between those two groups, which results in terrorism and bloodier regional conflicts. The best thing the USA can do is to get out of there immediately and never look back. What happens is responsibility of the people there.

Also, I disagree that the Bible teaches "national responsibility". Bible teaches personal responsibility, you are responsible for your own sins and repentance. People who made decisions to invade Iraq and commit crimes are personally responsible, not you and other US citizens. You are only responsible if you tolerate their actions and do nothing. As a US citizen, your responsibility is to bring them to justice. Not to go back to Iraq and make things worse.

----------


## jmdrake

> So you're saying that agnostics, atheists, pagans and other people of non-abrahamic religions need to be forced to endorse what you perceive as christian ideals?


Just to be clear, the ideals expressed in the OP are not the teachings of Christ.

_
Luke 9:5
If people do not welcome you, leave their town and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.”_

That said, I welcome this kind of debate because it's what we have to face with dealing with the general public.  I've heard these ideas expressed before.  We need to be able to explain why this thinking is off base.

----------


## LawnWake

> Just to be clear, the ideals expressed in the OP are not the teachings of Christ.
> 
> _
> Luke 9:5
> If people do not welcome you, leave their town and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.”_
> 
> That said, I welcome this kind of debate because it's what we have to face with dealing with the general public.  I've heard these ideas expressed before.  We need to be able to explain why this thinking is off base.


Hence the "what you perceive as christian ideals" part of my post. >.> Regardless of what the christian position on it may be, forcing non-christians to live by christian values is theological tyranny to me. It's like forcing jews to eat bacon.

----------


## Icymudpuppy

> Also, I disagree that the Bible teaches "national responsibility". Bible teaches personal responsibility, you are responsible for your own sins and repentance. People who made decisions to invade Iraq and commit crimes are personally responsible, not you and other US citizens. You are only responsible if you tolerate their actions and do nothing. As a US citizen, your responsibility is to bring them to justice. Not to go back to Iraq and make things worse.


The OLD testament is about the Hebrew's national responsibility.  OP needs to realize that the Jesus brought a NEW Covenant to be shared with all the people of the world, and that the biblical Israel is not a nation of Jews, but the promised salvation of all humanity.

----------


## Jovan Galtic

> The OLD testament is about the Hebrew's national responsibility.  OP needs to realize that the Jesus brought a NEW Covenant to be shared with all the people of the world, and that the biblical Israel is not a nation of Jews, but the promised salvation of all humanity.


Exactly Jack. In general, the OT is just a historical book for Christians. Lord Jesus didn't say a word about "nations" and "states" (other than in parables), his Gospel is all about personal responsibility. It looks to me that many American (and other) churches distort Gospel to glorify the state.

----------


## erowe1

> Exactly Jack. In general, the OT is just a historical book for Christians. Lord Jesus didn't say a word about "nations" and "states" (other than in parables), his Gospel is all about personal responsibility. It looks to me that many American (and other) churches distort Gospel to glorify the state.


That's not true.




> And Jesus said to them, "Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."


-Matthew 19:28

----------


## jkr

> I've been thinking.  ...However, the fact is, the United States is responsible for what is happening in Iraq today, and we need to do something about it.


yeah.

LEAVE.

----------


## Jovan Galtic

> And Jesus said to them, "Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."
> 
> -Matthew 19:28


This is about the future world, after the Second Coming and the Resurrection. So, first - it doesn't apply to the current world. Second, all eschatological statements like this use symbolical language - "throne", "twelve thrones", "twelve tribes of Israel" are not literal, but symbolical. It is not about the state of Israel. Moreover, elsewhere is said: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus". So there are no nations in the Kingdom of God. Jews and Greeks are one and the same - people.

Correct interpretation is that His disciples will will judge the world.

----------


## erowe1

> This is about the future world, after the Second Coming and the Resurrection. So, first - it doesn't apply to the current world.


I agree with that much.




> Correct interpretation is that His disciples will will judge the world.


That sounds like the state to me.

----------


## TomL

> I am a Christian as well.  As a Christian do you believe in staying where you are not wanted?  Here's what Jesus said about overstaying your welcome.
> 
> _Luke 9:5
> If people do not welcome you, leave their town and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.”_
> 
> The Iraqi's have made it clear.  They *do not want us to stay and "fix" their country*.  At least the majority Shia do not.  The Christians might want us to stay.  The Christians also would have preferred that we left Saddam in power since he was protecting their community.  But the Shia want us out.  The Iraqi president Al Malaki negotiated with Bush that we be out by December 11, 2011.  Obama deserves neither credit nor blame by getting us out when he did.  But stupid republicans will give him credit and stupid democrats will give us blame.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



First, Luke 9.5 has no bearing on this situation.  Now if you suggest we send in missionaries, and a country says they don't want them, that would be the same.

It seems you admit that things are worse off for Christians in Iraq since our intervention.  It is likely that Christians will be killed that wouldn't have under Saddam Hussein, or with our forces there.  Would you agree?

Since I gave no credit to Obama, I agree.

Repentance does not mean changing your ways.  It means to "change your mind, afterwards."  You can check that out in Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.  Of course, changing your mind will change your actions.  So you might say, I changed my mind.  We left that place in a shambles of our making. 

I have studied the Bible for most of my life since I was 7 years old.  I am going on 56 now.  I can't think of anything in the Bible specifically fitting this situation.  But, Jesus said, "Love your enemies."  We did not do that in Iraq.  We need to now.  The question is, how do we do that?

----------


## erowe1

> First, Luke 9.5 has no bearing on this situation.  Now if you suggest we send in missionaries, and a country says they don't want them, that would be the same.
> 
> It seems you admit that things are worse off for Christians in Iraq since our intervention.  It is likely that Christians will be killed that wouldn't have under Saddam Hussein, or with our forces there.  Would you agree?
> 
> Since I gave no credit to Obama, I agree.
> 
> Repentance does not mean changing your ways.  It means to "change your mind, afterwards."  You can check that out in Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.  Of course, changing your mind will change your actions.  So you might say, I changed my mind.  We left that place in a shambles of our making. 
> 
> I have studied the Bible for most of my life since I was 7 years old.  I am going on 56 now.  I can't think of anything in the Bible specifically fitting this situation.  But, Jesus said, "Love your enemies."  We did not do that in Iraq.  We need to now.  The question is, how do we do that?


Again, you keep using this word "we." Who is this "we"?

----------


## TomL

> The OLD testament is about the Hebrew's national responsibility.  OP needs to realize that the Jesus brought a NEW Covenant to be shared with all the people of the world, and that the biblical Israel is not a nation of Jews, but the promised salvation of all humanity.


I not only understand that, I have written about it in several article in the Christian Forums at Son of David Forums: http://sonofdavid.myfreeforum.org/index.php

----------


## Jovan Galtic

Well, religious discussions should be banned on the internet, but I hope we continue like brothers in faith... 




> That sounds like the state to me.


It is not a state because that judgement is not by force. It is unconditional love which makes everyone see himself as he really is. It is like suddenly turning on the light in a dark room full of people which makes everyone see himself and everyone else... Then one is ashamed because of his own conscience. Hence, Christos and his disciples are "judging the world" not by force, but with their love and virtues.

It is explained very nice here, if you have some time for reading: http://www.orthodoxpress.org/parish/river_of_fire.htm

----------


## jmdrake

> First, Luke 9.5 has no bearing on this situation.  Now if you suggest we send in missionaries, and a country says they don't want them, that would be the same.


The principle is *exactly* the same.  Don't stay where you're not wanted.  Regardless at least I've come up with a verse for my position.  Please find *a single verse* to support your position that God wants us to militarily occupy Iraq.  If you don't have one then you must admit that you have less Biblical support for your position than I have for mine.




> It seems you admit that things are worse off for Christians in Iraq since our intervention.  It is likely that Christians will be killed that wouldn't have under Saddam Hussein, or with our forces there.  Would you agree?


Most have already left.  They went to Syria.  (You know.  The nation we are trying to overthrow now?)  They shouldn't have needed to flee to Syria.  We should have opened our arms and welcomed them here.  *That* is our Christian responsibility.  Instead we helped resettle Kurds (most in middle TN near where I live) because that was more "politically correct" and fit in with the "Evil Saddam killing the Kurds" narrative.  The few that are left in Iraq should leave.  We would only make their lives worse by occupying Iraq just so they could stay.





> Since I gave no credit to Obama, I agree.


Good.  But you're missing the most important part.  *The Iraqi people do not want us to stay.  Therefore it would be violating Christian teachings to stay.*




> Repentance does not mean changing your ways.  It means to "change your mind, afterwards."  You can check that out in Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.  Of course, changing your mind will change your actions.  So you might say, I changed my mind.  We left that place in a shambles of our making.


You need a new dictionary.

_1: to turn from sin and dedicate oneself to the amendment of one's life
2a : to feel regret or contrition b : to change one's mind_ 

Turning from sin = changing your ways.  If you sin, then "change your mind" about sin, but keep on willfully sinning you have not repented.




> I have studied the Bible for most of my life since I was 7 years old.  I am going on 56 now.  I can't think of anything in the Bible specifically fitting this situation.  But, Jesus said, "Love your enemies."  We did not do that in Iraq.  We need to now.  The question is, how do we do that?


You cannot show love by forcing yourself on someone else.  That's called rape, not love.

----------


## Jovan Galtic

At the end of the day - all of this has nothing to do with Christianity. *Every state is the enemy of Christianity* and can not be "christian" other than people in power abusing the Gospel to manipulate other people.

"My Kingdom is not of this world".

----------


## jmdrake

> I agree with that much.
> 
> 
> 
> That sounds like the state to me.


Yeah.  The key difference is how this state is established and by whom.

_Daniel 2:34

While you were watching, a rock was cut out, but not by human hands. It struck the statue on its feet of iron and clay and smashed them._

_John 18:36

Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."_

If Christians would realize that their only duty in establishing Christ's kingdom is to establish it in our own hearts and then invite others to do the same then the world would be a better place.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> I've been thinking.  I have been hearing how bad it is in Iraq since the U.S. military moved out.  I am not going to rehash whether or not we should have or should not have went to war with Iraq.  That fact is we did.  
> 
> Before our intervention in Iraq, Saddam Hussein ran that country with an iron first, and there was relative peace.  Since our intervention, we left a soft government in control.  I thought this would happen.
> 
> We caused this problem and we have to fix it.  What I think we should do is go back in and take over the country, and make it a U.S. Territory.  Build a huge base there, as we have done with other U.S Territories like Guam.  Then we can rule Iraq with an iron fist the way it was under Saddam Hussein.  
> 
> I only suggest this because the problems that now exist in Iraq are our fault.  People are being killed today that should not be, and wouldn't be if it weren't for our intervention.  The blood of Iraqis from now on is on our hands, thanks to George W. Bush, who should be held accountable for crimes against humanity, and will be at the throne of God some day, unless he repents, and confesses to the nation that what he did was wrong.  
> 
> Unfortunately, I don't believe there is anyone in power, or will be in power anytime soon, in this Country that will hold George W. Bush accountable for his crimes.  
> ...


The media has pushed this narrative upon you, and it appears you bought it hook, line and sinker. They want to make it look like the US needs to be heavily involved, but that is not true. They do not want us there. They do not want "help" from the US government.

And secondly, your hypothesis that the "US ruling Iraq with an iron fist would be better" is so wrong it is truly scary. it would not be good for anyone! It would only make the situation worse. It would cost the US taxpayers, it would cost military lives, it would cost Iraqi lives, it would take away Iraqi freedom and liberty, it would go one step further towards making the world a totalitarian Police State, where peopl have no rights at all.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.

----------


## Kuthreck



----------


## jmdrake

> The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.


+rep.  Adding to sig:

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> +rep.  Adding to sig:

----------

