Jump to content

iran..... does not play well with others.


Recommended Posts

I found this recently.....long read but I thought worthwhile.

 

A Call To Prophecy:

Tell People the Truth About Terrorism

 

by Dr. Robert M. Bowman, (ex colonel in the US military)

Presiding Bishop, United Catholic Church

(Originally printed in October, 1998)

 

Prophets are always unpopular, because they say hard things. They speak for God — usually indicating God’s displeasure with what the people and their political and religious leaders were doing.

 

Boy, do we need some strong prophesying today. There is plenty going on that I’m quite sure God is very displeased about: immorality and deceit in high places, for example. And no, I’m not talking about Monica Lewinsky. God would probably not have gotten Nathan involved in chastising David if adultery and deceit were all that was involved. But David went beyond that. He was responsible for the death of Bathsheba’s husband. It was this premeditated murder, brought on by greed, selfishness, envy, and passion, that got God and Nathan into the act.

 

Similarly today, it is not infidelity, but murder and violence that stir the heart of God. I am talking about the bombing of our embassies in Africa and about our cruise missile attacks on Afghanistan and Sudan. And it is not Clinton’s dissembling about his sexual pecadillos, but his lying to the American people about the roots of terrorism that calls out for repentance.

 

First, terrorism is wrong. Whether it is in the Middle East or Northern Ireland or Oklahoma City, it is wrong. There are always reasons for such violence. But there is never justification. It is always wrong. It is always displeasing to God. It is always a sin.

 

What is terrorism?

 

It is the use of fear, violence, and intimidation to achieve an end. We usually think of it as a tool of small, frustrated groups unable to achieve their ends by other means. But the dictionary doesn’t limit it to that. Mine says that one meaning of the word "terrorism" is a system of government that uses fear to rule. We usually think of it as violence by the weak against the strong. But according to the dictionary, it is just as likely to be violence by the strong against the weak.

 

So the use of death squads by the military government of El Salvador or Honduras or Guatemala or Argentina against impoverished peasants is terrorism. The use by the government of China of tanks against students in Tienanmen Square is terrorism. The bombing of buses in Tel Aviv by Hamas is terrorism. But so is the bulldozing of Palestinian houses by Israel. The bombing of U.S. embassies is terrorism. But so was the mining of the harbor in Nicaragua by Ronald Reagan, the bombing of Baghdad by George Bush, and in all probability the cruise missile attacks by Bill Clinton against targets inAfghanistan and Sudan. The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was terrorism; and so is the possession of nuclear weapons and the threat to use them.

 

It is not my job to pronounce God’s displeasure with the violent acts of terrorists in Arab countries halfway around the world. That’s for their prophets to do. Our job is to speak truth to power right here in our own country.

 

As one committed to a consistent pro-life ethic, I do not believe that the use of deadly force is ever the correct response to a problem. With Cardinal Mahony of Los Angeles, the late Cardinal Bernardin of Chicago, and many others, I oppose terrorism, war, the death penalty, euthanasia, abortion, the denial of the necessities of life (food, shelter, water, basic health care, and dignity) to the powerless, and all other violations of life. This is what we call a "seamless garment." This is not dogma. We do not condemn those who do not agree with us. But we believe that it is in accord with the will of God as revealed in Jesus of Nazareth, and we maintain our right to attempt to convince others that this is truth.

 

I therefore condemn our recent cruise missile attacks as violations of the will of God. Were they also violations of international law? I think probably so, but that’s for international lawyers to debate. Was that "pharmaceutical plant" making chemical weapons, as our government claims, or medicines as the Sudanese claim? I don’t know. I haven’t seen the evidence or the intelligence data. We may never know. Was the bombing of our embassies worse, causing more death and injury? Of course. Hopefully, some Muslim prophet will preach against that. I am not attempting to judge the military appropriateness or political justification for the cruise missile attack. I am merely saying that it was a use of deadly violence, against the consistent pro-life ethic which I proclaim, and (according to my belief) against the will of God.

 

But there is another matter which concerns me even more, because it bears on the future direction of this country. President Clinton did not tell the American people the truth of why we are the targets of terrorism. He said that we are the target because we stand for democracy, freedom, and human rights in the world. Nonsense! We are the target of terrorists because we stand for dictatorship, bondage, and human exploitation in the world. We are the target of terrorists because we are hated. And we are hated because we have done hateful things.

 

In how many countries have agents of our government deposed popularly-elected leaders and replaced them with puppet military dictators who were willing to sell out their own people to American multinational corporations?

 

We did it in Iran when the U.S. Marines and the CIA deposed Mossadegh because he wanted to nationalize the oil industry. We replaced him with the Shah, and trained, armed, and paid his hated Savak national guard, which enslaved and brutalized the people of Iran ... all to protect the financial interests of our oil companies. Is it any wonder there are people in Iran who hate us?

 

We did it in Chile when we deposed Allende, democratically elected by the people to introduce communism. We replaced him with the brutal right-wing military dictator, General Pinochet. Chile has still not recovered.

 

We did it in Vietnam when we thwarted democratic elections in the South which would have united the country under Ho Chi Minh. We replaced him with a series of ineffectual puppet crooks who invited us to come in and slaughter their people.

 

We did it in Iraq, where we killed a quarter of a million civilians in a failed attempt to topple Saddam Hussein, and where we have killed a million since then with our sanctions. About half of these innocent victims have been children under the age of five.

 

And, of course, how many times have we done it in Nicaragua and all the other banana republics of Latin America? Time after time we have ousted popular leaders who wanted the riches of the land to be shared by the people who worked it. We replaced them with murderous tyrants who would sell out and control their own people so that the wealth of the land could be taken out by the likes of Domino sugar, the United Fruit Company, Folgers, and Chiquita Banana.

 

In country after country, we have thwarted democracy, stifled freedom, and trampled human rights. That’s why we are hated around the world. And that’s why we are the target of terrorists.

 

People in Canada enjoy better democracy, more freedom, and greater human rights than we do. So do the people of Norway and Sweden. Have you heard of Canadian embassies being bombed? Or Norwegian embassies? Or Swedish embassies. No.

 

We are not hated because we practice democracy, freedom, and human rights. We are hated because we deny these things to people in third world countries whose resources are coveted by our multinational corporations.

 

Tell people the truth, Mr. President ... about terrorism, not about poor Monica. You and your mid-life libido and zippergate will fade from memory with your presidency. But if the lies about terrorism go unchallenged, then the terror war now unleashed will likely continue until it destroys us.

 

The threat of nuclear terrorism is closing in upon us. Chemical terrorism is close at hand, and biological terrorism is a future danger. None of our thousands of nuclear weapons can protect us from these threats. These idols of plutonium, titanium, and steel are impotent. No "Star Wars" system ... no matter how technically advanced, no matter how many trillions of dollars is poured into it ... can protect us from even a single terrorist bomb.

 

Not one weapon in our vast arsenal can shield us from a nuclear weapon delivered in a sailboat or a Cessna or a suitcase or a Ryder rental truck.

 

Not a penny of the 273 billion dollars a year we spend on so-called defense can actually defend us against a terrorist bomb.

 

Nothing in our enormous military establishment can actually give us one whit of real security. That is a military fact. It reminds me of God’s message to us in psalm 33: "A king is not saved by his mighty army. A warrior is not saved by his great strength. A war horse is a vain hope for victory, and with its might it cannot save."

 

As a retired lieutenant colonel and a frequent lecturer on national security issues, I often quoted that psalm. And the obvious reaction to it is, "Then what can we do? How can we be secure? Is there nothing we can do to provide security for our people?

 

There is. It is found just a page or two later in the book of Psalms, in psalm 37: "Trust in the Lord and do good, that you may dwell in the land and have security." That’s it. It’s so simple. "Trust in the Lord and do good, that you may dwell in the land and have security."

 

Back in the Cold War, it wasn’t easy to sell this approach to security. Faced with another nuclear superpower (or at least, so we were told), it was tempting to hold onto our weapon idolatry. It was easy to think that only our armed forces and their superior technology kept us safe. Even I found it difficult to give up the concept of nuclear deterrence. But now things are different. The Roman Catholic bishops of the United States are retreating from their conditional acceptance of deterrence. Seventy of them have signed a letter saying that even the possession of nuclear weapons is no longer moral. Sixty retired generals have said that our security will be enhanced by nuclear abolition.

 

And the "Colonel Bowman" part of me now agrees with the "Bishop Bowman" part of me that psalm 37 is our best path to security. Getting rid of our nuclear weapons — nilaterally if necessary — will enhance our security. Drastically altering our foreign policy in line with psalm 37 will ensure it.

 

In short, we must change our ways. We no longer face another nuclear superpower. We have run out of real enemies. Our defense budget is 26 times as much as that of all our potential adversaries combined. The only real threat we face is that of terrorism. And if we understand the reason that threat exists (and this is why it is so crucial that the American people be told the truth), then the way to protect against that threat becomes clear. We change our ways.

 

Instead of sending our sons and daughters around the world to kill Arabs so we can have the oil under their sand, we send them to rebuild their infrastructure, supply clean water, and feed starving children.

 

Instead of continuing to kill thousands of Iraqi children every day with our sanctions, we help Iraqis rebuild their electric powerplants, their water treatment facilities, their hospitals — all the things we destroyed in our war against them and prevented them from rebuilding with our sanctions.

 

Instead of seeking to be king of the hill, we become a responsible member of the family of nations. Instead of stationing hundreds of thousands of troops around the world to protect the financial interests of our multinational corporations (they prefer the term "national interests"), we bring them home and expand the Peace Corps.

 

Instead of training terrorists and death squads in the techniques of torture and assassination, we close the School of the Americas. Instead of supporting military dictatorships, we support true democracy — the right of the people to choose their own leaders. Instead of supporting insurrection, destabilization, assassination, and terror around the world, we abolish the CIA and give the money to relief agencies.

 

In short, we do good instead of evil. We become the good guys, once again.

 

If we abolished our armed forces and used our resources to feed the hungry, cure the sick, and care for the needy — both at home and around the world — who would try to stop us? Who would hate us? Who would want to bomb us?

 

The threat of terrorism would vanish. "Trust in the Lord and do good, that you may dwell in the land and have security."

 

That is the truth, Mr. President. That is what the American people need to hear. We are good people. We only need to be told the truth and given the vision. You can do it, Mr. President. The big money people from the multinational corporations and banks paid for your election. But they have given up on you. Forget them. Divorce yourself from the greed which has caused such an unjust division of the fruits of creation. Seek to end the injustice rather than perpetuating it with violence and intimidation. Refrain from terrorism, even in response to the same. Stop the killing. Stop the justifying. Stop the retaliating. Put people first. Tell them the truth, and lead them in God’s way.

 

(This article is excerpted from a sermon given by Bishop Bowman on August 23, 1998. Portions were published in the Oct 2, 1998 issue of National Catholic Reporter on page 17.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 106
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

'Fact' my fanny......I would like to see you back up that 'fact' if you can :rolleyes:

 

This is typical of the right wing supporters. Make a statement and add 'fact' to the end. It may convince you that it is 'fact' but I prefer hard evidence.

You dont think its a fact that those two bombs dropped caused Japan less destruction than a full invasion....Go look at some pictures of Europe right after WW2. I would rather have two cities devastated than an entire country.
Link to post
Share on other sites

i cant read all that sir t, sorry, i dont have it in me. but i assume the general gist is that the president is bad and a liar and thats the root cause, right?

 

If we abolished our armed forces

we would have to be the biggest :censored: idiots on the planet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh please! You getting your meds prescribed by Chopdoc or something?

 

There is no such thing as the Bush government, The "Bush government" controls but one faction of our entire government that is built up around millions of people. He simply cannot say, "hey lets nuke Iran". It needs to be approved by many people, many that he has no control over. Influence yes, but only because hes president. Yes he would have to approve a nuclear strike but his order would, in cases other than in the extreme case would not be enough and would likely get him removed from office by congress.
Link to post
Share on other sites

interesting read sir t, and he has some good points and much of it is true but

 

People in Canada enjoy better democracy, more freedom, and greater human rights than we do

hes pretty much on crack with that statement. Better democracy? More freedom? greater human rights?

 

where we killed a quarter of a million civilians in a failed attempt to topple Saddam Hussein,

this also shows a lack of knowledge on the subject and the war

Link to post
Share on other sites

interesting read sir t, and he has some good points and much of it is true but

 

 

 

hes pretty much on crack with that statement. Better democracy? More freedom? greater human rights?

 

 

 

this also shows a lack of knowledge on the subject and the war

If you say so. :rolleyes:

 

 

 

 

Angela.....I wouldn't accept everything he says either. However, the overall message is bang on accurate in my opinion.

By all means America shoud keep it's armed forces....just take away their bullets :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

if I say so? It was pretty much my area of study for the last four years

That's good enough for me. Now I'll accept whatever you say unquestioningly even when you fail to support your points.

 

I hadn't realized that you had studied Canadian democracy for four years.

 

That a quarter-million Iraqis were killed in an attempt to overthrow Saddam is a point that will stand or fail regardless of someone's knowledge of war.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the author of the paper failed to support his statement that canadian democracy is "better" in any way. Its his opinion, I presented mine. I havent found anything better about it, I find little wrong with it other than being a bit different.

 

 

 

The point I was making about the 1/4 million Iraqis wasnt that they didnt die it was the part that 1. The US did it and 2. That it was an attempt to overthrow Saddam.

 

First off the US didnt go into the first war by itself, nor did it go in without the approval and request of local arab countries. Secondly the first war was not an effort to dispose of Saddam, it was an effort to remove him from Kuwait and prevent him from invading Saudi Arabia. The US did want to remove him, but the war effort was not an attempt to do so. To say otherwise he is either telling a lie or doesnt know the facts surrounding the war itself.

 

so back to that fact standing?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If we abolished our armed forces and used our resources to feed the hungry, cure the sick, and care for the needy — both at home and around the world — who would try to stop us? Who would hate us? Who would want to bomb us?

 

people with guns and bombs who want our wealth or our land

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

back to iran

Edited by one2gamble
Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you going over there to fight then? You seem hellish keen to start another war if someone else is doing the killing and the dying, but I wonder how gung-ho you would be in the face of someone filled with equal fervour was determined to kill you as you invaded their country. The USA has no right to dictate what the world does, politically, economically, or militarily. In fact I recall the colonies, as they were once called, getting really :filtered: off being dictated to, and being willing to risk everything for freedom. Please note that those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it, and maybe we will all live a little longer.

Might makes right, and we're right.

 

And if you disagree, you'll do well to heed my warning--start building that bomb-shelter. Because when our honest neocon leaders finally concoct enough lies to convince a sufficient number of gullible Americans to start another war, we just might start dropping those bombs. We have the absoute right to bomb any people our trustworthy and trigger-happy neocon leaders deem a threat to our society. And that's a fact--Angela said so.

 

And you, Sir T, you are downright unAmerican, and dangerous besides. Hell, you probably admire that well-known liberal pinko, Winston Churchill, who once demonstrated his anti-American bias by saying, "Jaw, jaw, jaw is better than war, war, war." When our neocom vigilantes cast their suspicious eyes across the globe to identify those who are a threat to peace in America, there is no way they are going to miss you. Just a friendly word of advice, my friend: Start digging.

 

Never forget--might makes right, and we are right. And for those who disagree, BOOM.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That post disproves the theory that you Spams don't understand irony or satire Rhizome! A few more like you in world politics and we will all sleep safer. Like all good satire, it revolves around some scary reality, and the common prayer should be: 'May (enter deity or icon of choice) protect us from stupid people with weapons' B)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read this thread and still think that Iran is less of a threat to the world than India and Pakistan are... hell even North Korea has not been mentioned. If you guys are so keen to actually achieve something why don't you fix the situation between India and Pakistan relating to their dispute over Kashmere or fix North Korea? :erm:

Link to post
Share on other sites

So war is the answer to everything?

 

Do we really want to level North Korea since they have (is it confirmed?) potential nuclear weapons?

 

And if something serious happens in Pakistan/India, I'm sure it will be the start of WWIII.

I mentioned N.Korea. And Pakistan. And Iran.

 

Why don''t we bomb them since they harbor potential terrorists? :mrsgreen:

Link to post
Share on other sites

you honestly think we dont attack them cause they can fight back? :rolleyes:

 

we should be attacking them. like yesterday.

And why attack India?

 

They are our allies? Shall we invade Canada, England, and China too?

Link to post
Share on other sites

india is right in the terrorist mix. the other countries you listed are not. saudi is our "allie" too and that should be what the us is most ashamed of. they are a foe. they should be our arch foe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

india is right in the terrorist mix.  the other countries you listed are not.  saudi is our "allie" too and that should be what the us is most ashamed of.  they are a foe.  they should be our arch foe.

Do you think India's gov't willingly harbors terrorists? I believe Manmohan Singh and GWB are quite confident in each other's trust.

 

Edit: Grammar.

Edited by DK64_MASTER
Link to post
Share on other sites

And why attack India?

 

They are our allies?  Shall we invade Canada, England, and China too?

I asked for a fix.. not to bomb them. :)

 

 

 

Angela show me some proof that India has any connection to any terrorist.. or are you just posting more crap again?

Edited by Intratech
Link to post
Share on other sites

Every country is in the terrorist mix, level them all, George said so, so it must be true.

 

We are the only ones responsible enough to produce, sell, hoard and use weapons of mass destruction.

 

No one should ever be allowed to use nuclear power, and country doing so other then the US is doing it for evil purposes, George said so it is true.

 

All people who live in the middle east not of Jewish decent, and not wealthy oil barons are terrorists and part of the axis of evil.

 

The axis of evil now encompasses any and all country's who dare to be so bold as to want to run their own affairs, and who have the audacity to tell George to butt out.

 

Level them all, to hell with the millions of innocent woman children and everyday people who will be killed and maimed in the process, after all they are just a bunch of dumb sand nigers, and should know better then to think they are smart enough to handle their own decisions and lives.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Every country is in the terrorist mix, level them all, George said so, so it must be true.

 

We are the only ones responsible enough to produce, sell, hoard and use weapons of mass destruction.

 

No one should ever be allowed to use nuclear power, and country doing so other then the US is doing it for evil purposes, George said so it is true.

 

All people who live in the middle east not of Jewish decent, and not wealthy oil barons are terrorists and part of the axis of evil.

 

The axis of evil now encompasses any and all country's who dare to be so bold as to want to run their own affairs, and who have the audacity to tell George to butt out.

 

Level them all, to hell with the millions of innocent woman children and everyday people who will be killed and maimed in the process, after all they are just a bunch of dumb sand nigers, and should know better then to think they are smart enough to handle their own decisions and lives.

ouch :blink:

 

that much sarcasm hurts me ears... :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...