Is the War on Iraq Immoral ?

[Bart Fishermans]

Have you ever asked yourself : Is the War on Iraq Immoral ?

Not only is Bush's war on Iraq a hideous mistake doing more harm than good but most , if not all of the church leaders say that the War on Iraq is immoral.
Not only have many thousands died but the amount of money spent on the war is absurd.
George Bush was told before he invaded Iraq by church leaders not to do it yet he did not listen to good sound advice and continued.
There have been more appeals by church leaders to Bush for a transition of US troops from Iraq and even those request have been mostly ignored.

I believe, of great inner turmoil for the majority of the American people. There is a new morality coming out of the Bush administration -- fundamentalist religious views; a holier-than-thou attitude towards the rest of the world -- that is not classically American. This was said by Neil Young. Singer and song writer.

[WESTERN RANGER]

Bush and his acolites all claim to be Christians,in fact these slugs couldn't be
further from true Christians.These war zealots are using Christianity as a flag
of convienience for their own greedy twisted aims.They have wrapped themselves in so many different colours as to render their choices impotent.A
former Marine wrote into google a few weeks ago,and because he was opposed to this imoral dirty little war he was slaughtered by the right wing stay at home heroes,whe populate that webpage.This man had Silver/bronze
stars,the congressional medal of hounour you name it,after the shit was flung
at him he was sorry he had ever been daft enough to fight for that crowd.Bush must be the top of the list when it comes to utterly shameless
cowards,when his time came he fucked of to the Air National Guard and learned how to pilot obsolete aircraft.Airplanes in fact which had been took out of active service and decommisioned.G.H.W.Bush saw to all this and as you only go to fight in active airframes G.W.Bush stayed in the good lod U.S.A
the full cowardly and shamefull dodges are explained in plenty other publicatio
~ns and are too long to go into detail here.Needless to say he was never ever
under any sort of enemy threat,pretty much the same as the other "Chickenhawks" who surround the soft bastard.Only General Colin Powel
earned his spurs,but lost all respect at the U.N. whilst pointing out to the world two portaloos and claimed they were W.M.D.factories.Also he committed the "DEADLY"sin of his own reckoning in going in without a exit stra
~tegy in place.The question of the wars morality depends on your view of the
world,according to big picture future policy then Bush was right.However in all
things war in particular things go wrong,and these fools thought the Iraqis will
be that gratefull that the main American force could be out of there in a year.
They simply hadn't bargained on a civil war,only the removal of Saddam and
his crazy dangerous sons.The Iraqis could have access to but not controll over their own black gold which would keep America at the top until it runs out,China could have been held in check by the threat of oil embargoes.The U.S.knows the shitty wages/lifestyle/conditions of Asian workers would never
wash in the west so they "HAD"to do something,and grabing two thirds of the
planets oil seemed to be easy.The planet didn't need radiating for this outcome.This will take far more able politicians than G.W.Bush my biggest hope is that he/she turn up real quick and i don't mean Bushes gas chamber
loving sibling j.e.b.

[andyf]

OIL!

Errr..... thats it guys.

I've asked myself many times why they did it, we've heard about WMD, a moral reason etc etc., but it all boils down to "Energy Security". Learn that phrase, you'll be hearing it a lot

The EU has just started talks with Turkey to join the EU. Why? No one in the EU wants them in. What is the agenda?

Well, Turkey in the EU gives the EU a border with Iraq!!!!

Iraq has lots of oil. That oil can be piped through Turkey, rather than shipped around the Gulf/Suez. Gets it into the EU neatly. Stops the yanks getting their paws on it.

The troops are only still in Iraq because civil war in iraq would cut 10% of the world oil supply.

Andyf

[Bart Fishermans]

Bush and his acolites all claim to be Christians,in fact these slugs couldn't be further from true Christians.
I almost convinced Bush is the anti-Christ.
Iraq has lots of oil. That oil can be piped through Turkey, rather than shipped around the Gulf/Suez. Gets it into the EU neatly. Stops the yanks getting their paws on it.
I'd love to see that happen because if the USA runs out of oil , it will be crippled, then it won't be able to start any more wars.

[WESTERN RANGER]

The entire matter has been solved and shown up for what it realy is all about
on this very collum.Why was it that the so called educated ruling classes with
their access to all this expensive intelligence were duped by monkey man???
Germany and France should be congratulated how easy it would have been for
them to do a Tony and tounge Bushies arse.The aftermath is the dangerous
thing,someone real good will need to come along and correct this damage.

[Bart Fishermans]

I just thought I'd add this quote .........
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
Edmund Bourke (1729-97).
I saw that quote at the end of a movie called "Hitler. The Rise of Evil".

I'm sure there are a lot of good men around at the moment trying to put an end to Bush's evil Regime and even though the media is trying to stop 'men of good will' trying to stop Bush's lies , good will triumph over evil in the end. Bush will be destroyed and peace will finally be ours.

[WESTERN RANGER]

The quote you use is very apt.Millions of Americans/British/Australian people
have sat on their shit pits and done fuck all.Bullys are the worst kind of creep
the populations of these countries believed Bush Bastard when he said about
Iraqs W.M.D.remember them? These idiotic morons believed the shithouse because he was President!!!!!! Arseholes all of them,they all belong to the flat
earth society.

[Bart Fishermans]

You're 100% right.
I'm watching a weekly documentary on President Jimmy Carter. It seems as though he was the best president America has ever had. He got into office without money , so I'll be waiting for part 2 of the documentary next week to see how he handled international events.

[WESTERN RANGER]

You know bart fishermans the more i look at our chosen "leaders" it fills me with utter despair.These men/women are nowhere near good enough to run the Lego Land Themepark let alone the Planets destiny.For one theres the Catholic church [although i am a regular attender]refusing to back the ideas
on birthcontroll? What kind of madness is this? The overpopulation is destroying the fertile areas through overproduction.Then theres the NEO/CONS What Nightmare did this coven of Antichrists spring from? Bush well
personally it all went pear shaped with Nixon and his ghost still stalk the White
house and the Repug Farty.Religeon has of course played a mighty big part in
this deathly mixture.I come to the conclusion man isn't fit to take care of his
own affairs,someone like Klatu from the fiftys flick [The day the Earth stood
still] and his breed of Robot Police.The alternative is Nuclear obliteration and
the end of all we hold precious,i earnestly hope this doesn't happen but it's
not looking to clever is it?

[veerar]

It is,indeed!Many of the answers to this can be found in the thread,"WWII and Iraq,there is no comparison".Please see the thread"Trial of non-western war Criminals-Is it fair?",also.
The sleeping Giants China and Russia,have so far been playing a diplomatic game,enjoyig the notoriety of the western nations,by committing in Iraq.I doubt whether Chna will enter the war directly or indirectly,because she is more interested in wresting Taiwan,without bloodshed,it seems.She may also be interested in catching up with Hongkong,Taiwan and the West in development.But if she,does,God save the World!Pakistan cannot be igmored with her nukes to come to the aid of an Islamic nation,under pressure from,OIC.The situation is very dangerous.
A better caption could have been "Isn't the war on Iraq immoral?".

[janahitwadi]

It is wrong to say Mr. Bush should have taken advise of Church. This way you are legalising interference of religion in politics. All wars are because of greediness and are immoral. So aggression on Iraq is also immoral.

To avoid oil causing war, solution is expedite alternative to oil. Deploy all resources for this.

[Bart Fishermans]

It makes me feel like spewing everytime I think of Bush and his war on Iraq. I don't want to bring religion into this discussion . I know I used the word immoral but I could have used another word which does not bring the church into this discussion but only your own conscience.

So the next question I have is.:
Is Hanging George Bush immoral?
or....if you prefer.
Isn't Hanging George Bush immoral?

[andyf]

There is a gonvention that as Head of State one is immune from prosecution for actions carried out on behalf of the state. This, however, has been ignored with Milosevic and Sadam, and I think it should be repealed worldwide.

If politician are accountable to the law for what they do, they will think harder next time.

I want Bush AND Blair brought to trial.....but, since no trial can take place under US or UK law, there must be another route to justice for the thousadnds killed, orphaned and maimed. I know what I would do.....

[TellMeMore]

Have you ever asked yourself : Is the War on Iraq Immoral ?

Not only is Bush's war on Iraq a hideous mistake doing more harm than good but most , if not all of the church leaders say that the War on Iraq is immoral.
Not only have many thousands died but the amount of money spent on the war is absurd.
George Bush was told before he invaded Iraq by church leaders not to do it yet he did not listen to good sound advice and continued.
There have been more appeals by church leaders to Bush for a transition of US troops from Iraq and even those request have been mostly ignored.

This was said by Neil Young. Singer and song writer.

In whose morality?
Neil Young, that well-known philosopher and guru.
Idiot.

[Back2reality]

Good is what is good for my own kin. Bad is what harms my kin. This age old guage works for every living creature except domesticated animals - who it would work for if they obeyed it.
It works for me too though....

The war in Iraq is bad for my kin. (I am of Germanic Northern European stock and identify with this group) so it is immoral. It puts us in danger of terrorist attacks, it increases refugees into Britain, it increases the threat of nuclear war, it causes the planet to suffer globally from the pollution caused, it costs us financially, it costs us in lives of our soldiers, it strengthens our real enemies:NWO:rolleyes:

Benefits for my kind: none

The war in Iraq is good for Israel and for the families of the owners of corporations that benefit financially - and any others that benefit financially like Blair and most other politicians.

[Spades]

Good is what is good for my own kin. Bad is what harms my kin. This age old guage works for every living creature except domesticated animals - who it would work for if they obeyed it.
It works for me too though....

The war in Iraq is bad for my kin. (I am of Germanic Northern European stock and identify with this group) so it is immoral. It puts us in danger of terrorist attacks, it increases refugees into Britain, it increases the threat of nuclear war, it causes the planet to suffer globally from the pollution caused, it costs us financially, it costs us in lives of our soldiers, it strengthens our real enemies:NWO:rolleyes:

Benefits for my kind: none

The war in Iraq is good for Israel and for the families of the owners of corporations that benefit financially - and any others that benefit financially like Blair and most other politicians.

Ummm, it asked if it was immoral, not if it didnt give you a material boost. You are not answering the question correctly here.

It saddens me that no one will want to stand up for what is right when the time comes but cry against those that do. There were atrocities committed by Saddam, who will try to deny this? I think it is immoral to propose the death of the president just because you jump to your own conclusions about people's motives. You all sicken me.

Jaha, did you ever stop to realize that what is to stop an evil man from doing massive harm to the world if you are not able to touch him? We live through means of prevention and thats it, there is not straight fix to something once it happens. Saddam lost the claim to leading a country the moment he defied the agreements that had ended the Gulf War.

[William]

This seems an easy one to me. At the start of the war, removing Saddam and capturing him was moral, and was a great achievement. However, the deadly insurgency which racks Iraq at present, killing thousands every month, makes the continued presence of coalition forces immoral. Power should be returned to the Iraqis, and the insurgency will stop.

[WESTERN RANGER]

Spades. The War in Iraq then Iran then Pakistan is no good for anybody my friend.All it will result in is destruction possibly of Continents of people.The lying
cowardly fool G.W.Bush who avoided serving his country during Vietnam,has started something which might never be stopped.Bush should have stayed ****ed and Coked up in the Bar in Texas he used to live in.By the way does anybody remember W.M.D.s I am sure they were once important !!! ask Osama.Another once famous guy who doesn't register a mention no more.Strange huh !!!!

[Spades]

This seems an easy one to me. At the start of the war, removing Saddam and capturing him was moral, and was a great achievement. However, the deadly insurgency which racks Iraq at present, killing thousands every month, makes the continued presence of coalition forces immoral. Power should be returned to the Iraqis, and the insurgency will stop.

Yes, responsibility needs to be shifted to the Iraqi's but that is a harder task than some make it out to be.

Ranger, There generally isnt very many pro's for War other than it might solve a problem. There are no guarantee's, and when you say that it is no good for anybody than you are wrong (because you went way off base). I am sure that some of the people that had brothers or sisters killed by Saddam thought it was good for them. Try not to go overboard like this. You are being misinformed, bush said something along the lines that British reports believe that Saddam was trying to acquire Yellow-cake uranium. Don't stretch the truth. Angry rants like that prove nothing.

[Dr.Rizzy]

Spades, let me ask you a different question: Should Iran attack Iraq? Before you all too hastily answer yes, realize that after nearly a decade of war with Iraq in which we, the US funded Iraq in their killing of Iranians with chemical weapons, Iranian armies are too weak to attack Iraq again due to the fact that they had to concede defeat in the first war. Thus Iran can't attack Iraq.

Now on to the question of whether our war is moral. If Iran, given the great suffering they have endured at the face of the Iraqis must sit and go through international diplomatic channels to deal with their grievances with Iraq then do we, Saddam's accomplices throughout the years of his terror (see Noam Chomsky "Hegemony or Survival") have any greater right to attack? Not unless you make the concession that might makes right and that the mighty dictate morality.

Here's another scenario. In 1961-1969 the US used terrorist tactics against Cuba. Does Cuba have the right to attack the US? The question is ludicrous seeing as how Cuba doesn't have the ability. But, the minute the ability is there, in the case of US vs. Iraq suddenly a case is made.:eek:

I apologize if I bomabarded all of you with a very charged argument but I came to these forums to test my ideas so as to eliminate "groupthink" in my own thoughts. Please challenge me back. Respectfully Dr. Rizzy:)

[Spades]

Spades, let me ask you a different question: Should Iran attack Iraq? Before you all too hastily answer yes, realize that after nearly a decade of war with Iraq in which we, the US funded Iraq in their killing of Iranians with chemical weapons, Iranian armies are too weak to attack Iraq again due to the fact that they had to concede defeat in the first war. Thus Iran can't attack Iraq.
The Iranians are a different group of people than the U.S. and religious motivations fill a lot of their heads. Are they any non-religious reasons why Iran should attack Iraq?


Now on to the question of whether our war is moral. If Iran, given the great suffering they have endured at the face of the Iraqis must sit and go through international diplomatic channels to deal with their grievances with Iraq then do we, Saddam's accomplices throughout the years of his terror (see Noam Chomsky "Hegemony or Survival") have any greater right to attack? Not unless you make the concession that might makes right and that the mighty dictate morality. Well we had different reasons to attack Saddam. For instance I can make the argument that technically the Gulf War was never over because Saddam did not honor the ceasefire agreement. Or the Various UN resolutions that he didn't uphold. Beyond that we have genocide, stealing from the Oil for Food program. It's more complicated than might makes right. People have different opinions of what is right and wrong and thats really all we can act upon. Besides if you are refering to the UN then they have not done their part of upholding these resolutions and stopping alot of what Saddam did to be worth the consideration.


Here's another scenario. In 1961-1969 the US used terrorist tactics against Cuba. Does Cuba have the right to attack the US? The question is ludicrous seeing as how Cuba doesn't have the ability. But, the minute the ability is there, in the case of US vs. Iraq suddenly a case is made.:eek:

I apologize if I bomabarded all of you with a very charged argument but I came to these forums to test my ideas so as to eliminate "groupthink" in my own thoughts. Please challenge me back. Respectfully Dr. Rizzy:)

I am sure if Cuba could win a fight against us they would have tried. It was a conflict of ideas, because Castro isn't somebody we wanted as our neighbor. Maybe might makes right, but we believe that it is dangerous to have certain people in power positions. Prevention is all that we have to save lives after all.

No worries, I like friendly debates its the heated ones that I do not care for to much.

[Dr.Rizzy]

It is good that you bring up the oil for food program and the genocide since these are two topics where we may have been misinformed by our media. In Hegemony or Survival pgs 126-128 (and on these pages Chomsky cites his sources) Chomsky disputes that Saddam stole from the oil for food program, as opposed to the sanctions having severe effects. As for the genocide keep in mind that we, the US, aided and abetted Saddam in most of his genocidal actions since he was our ally.

Respectfully, I think you may have also missed the point on the Cuba argument. You noted that Cuba would attack us if they had the power, and that we attack Iraq because we have the power, but this says that the ability to say whether a war is "moral" or not is a luxury of the strong. It may be perfectly immoral may be the case of Iraq, but it will only be declared so if the once powerful side loses its swagger. By no means do I wish school children to be taught that might makes right, only that their leaders must be restrained lest it be so.

It has been good debating with you. My best wishes as always.
Dr. Rizzy

[TellMeMore]

Yes - Jesus
Yes - Allah
Yes - Amnesty International

No - Ghenghis Khan
No - Adolf Hitler
No - Julius Ceasar
No - Napoleon
No - Tony Blair

Moral? What does that mean? - TellMeMore

Whose morality? Moral standards depend upon when, where and who you are.

[Spades]

Well, I had presumed that when saddam was stealing from the program was generally believed by most even the U.N. So how exactly does Chomsky contradict this idea. If I have time maybe I'll go check these pages out but that might not be for awhile.

While I think might makes right is wrong it's how things are done, a victor of the war won't turn around and say oh your right. Just like the victors are the ones who right the history. So if we feel someone is dangerous or immoral and should attack them, but if we know we are not strong enough then we will probably not risk a war with them, even if they commit immoral acts. But if they are dangerous for instance genocide or ignoring ceasefire agreements then we have a reason to attack them and then we evaluate if we have the might or not. In Iraq's case we did. I don't advocate teaching school children this, and they should understand that decisions of force are made by the society and not the individual.

[william ward]

Radical Religious Doctrine In U.S. Military.
Cuerpo: The U.S. military is becoming injected with even more intense fascist activities as radical Christian groups are pumping violent ideaologies and even video games into the troops stationed in Iraq. They are being fed, with complete approval by the Bush regime, video games where "soldiers of God" blast away those who are not Christians and they are being preached to by loudmouths who claim we are in a new "Crusade."

Max Blumenthal: The Nation.com:

Actor Stephen Baldwin, the youngest member of the famous Baldwin brothers, is no longer playing PaulyShore's sidekick in comedy masterpieces like Biodome. He has a much more serious calling these days.

Baldwin became a right-wing, born-again Christian after the 9/11 attacks, and now is the star of Operation Straight Up (OSU), an evangelical entertainment troupe that actively proselytizes among active-duty members of the US military. As an official arm of the Defense Department's America Supports You program, OSU plans to mail copies of the controversial apocalyptic video game, Left Behind: Eternal Forces to soldiers serving in Iraq. OSU is also scheduled to embark on a "Military Crusade in Iraq" in the near future.

"We feel the forces of heaven have encouraged us to perform multiple crusades that will sweep through this war torn region," OSU declares on its website about its planned trip to Iraq. "We'll hold the only religious crusade of its size in the dangerous land of Iraq."

The Defense Department's Chaplain's Office, which oversees OSU's activities, has not responded to calls seeking comment.

"The constitution has been assaulted and brutalized," Mikey Weinstein, former Reagan Administration White House counsel, ex-Air Force judge advocate (JAG), and founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, told me. "Thanks to the influence of extreme Christian fundamentalism, the wall separating church and state is nothing but smoke and debris. And OSU is the IED that exploded the wall separating church and state in the Pentagon and throughout our military." Weinstein continued: "The fact that they would even consider taking their crusade to a Muslim country shows the threat to our national security and to the constitution and everyone that loves it."

On the surface, OSU appears as a traditional entertainment troupe that brings cheer to American troops around the globe. Founded by champion kickboxer Jonathan Spinks, OSU performs comedy, acrobatic stunts and strongman displays. Its roster of entertainers includes a former WNBA star, the Flying Wallendas, a ventriloquist, and former boxing champ Evander Holyfield. "We make no bones about the fact that we are speaking directly to the soldiers of the greatest fighting force of in the world," OSU proclaims. "No ‘mamsie pamsie' stuff here!"

But behind OSU's anodyne promises of wholesome fun for military families, the organization promotes an apocalyptic brand of evangelical Christianity to active duty US soldiers serving in Muslim-dominated regions of the Middle East. Displayed prominently on the "What We Believe" section of OSU's website is a passage from the Book of Revelations (Revelation 19:20; 20:10-15) that has become the bedrock of the Christian right's End Times theology: "The devil and his angels, the beast and the false prophet, and whosoever is not found written in the Book of Life, shall be consigned to everlasting punishment in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."

With the endorsement of the Defense Department, OSU is mailing "Freedom Packages" to soldiers serving in Iraq. These are not your grandfather's care packages, however. Besides pairs of white socks and boxes of baby wipes (included at the apparent suggestion of Iran-Contra felon Oliver North, according to OSU) OSU's care packages contain the controversial Left Behind: Eternal Forces video game. The game is inspired by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins' bestselling pulp fiction series about a blood-soaked Battle of Armageddon pitting born-again Christians against anybody who does not adhere to their particular theology. In LaHaye's and Jenkins' books, the non-believers are ultimately condemned to "everlasting punishment" while the evangelicals are "raptured" up to heaven.

The Left Behind videogame is a real-time strategy game that makes players commanders of a virtual evangelical army in a post-apocalyptic landscape that looks strikingly like New York City after 9/11. With tanks, helicopters and a fearsome arsenal of automatic weapons at their disposal, Left Behind players wage a violent war against United Nations-like peacekeepers who, according to LaHaye's interpretation of Revelation, represent the armies of the Antichrist. Each time a Left Behind player kills a UN soldier, their virtual character exclaims, "Praise the Lord!" To win the game, players must kill or convert all the non-believers left behind after the rapture. They also have the option of reversing roles and commanding the forces of the Antichrist. (Video preview here).

Producers of the Left Behind videogame were faced with a storm of controversy after Christian blogger Jonathan Hutson exposed its eliminationist overtones in a series of posts on the website Talk2Action. Statements by the Anti-Defamation League, the Conference on American Islamic Relations, the Christian Alliance for Progress, and others condemned the game and demanded that Walmart pull it from its shelves. Even Marvin Olasky, the evangelical publisher, intellectual author of "compassionate conservatism," and a force behind the George W. Bush Administration's White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives," denounced the Left Behind videogame. In a blog post on the website of his World Magazine, Olasky described the game's content as akin to "the way homicidal Muslims think." As a result of the fallout, Left Behind Games fired its senior VP and released three board members.

This controversy has not deterred OSU from encouraging US troops to play virtual rounds of kill or convert after a hard day of house-to-house searches and counterinsurgency warfare against Iraqi insurgents. What's more, OSU's "Freedom Packages" include a copy of evangelical pastor Jonathan McDowell's More Than A Carpenter -- a book advertised as "one of the most powerful evangelism tools worldwide" -- that is double-published in Arabic. Considering that only a handful of American troops speak Arabic, the book is ostensibly intended for proselytizing efforts among Iraqi civilians.

OSU has cultivated support from the Department of Defense for years. After a private October, 2005 meeting between OSU's Spinks and Defense Department officials, OSU was invited to perform inside the Pentagon. This week, Pentagon employees and active duty service members are expected to enjoy a breakfast with Spinks and Baldwin, followed by an OSU performance in which they will receive "spiritual encouragement via a Biblical message." The events will be held respectively in the Pentagon Executive Dining Room and the Pentagon Auditorium.

Spreading the Gospel to US troops is only one of many crusades Baldwin has waged in the name of the Lord. During 2006, Baldwin frequently stationed himself on the sidewalk outside a pornographic video store in New York. There, he photographed the license plates of people entering the store and threatened to publish an ad in a Nyack paper publicizing the names of those who patronized the store. "In my position, I just don't think I'm supposed to keep my faith to myself," Baldwin told a group of Texas Southern Baptists in 2004. "I'm just doing what the Lord's telling me to do."

Soon after his appearance at the Pentagon, Baldwin ships out to Iraq for OSU's "Military Crusade." With its cadre of celebrity entertainers pushing End Times theology, and the overt support of the Defense Department, OSU is hoping to transform Bush's surge into a battle of biblical proportions.

They just can't keep their faith to themselves.

[veerar]

Have you ever asked yourself : Is the War on Iraq Immoral ?

Not only is Bush's war on Iraq a hideous mistake doing more harm than good but most , if not all of the church leaders say that the War on Iraq is immoral.
Not only have many thousands died but the amount of money spent on the war is absurd.
George Bush was told before he invaded Iraq by church leaders not to do it yet he did not listen to good sound advice and continued.
There have been more appeals by church leaders to Bush for a transition of US troops from Iraq and even those request have been mostly ignored.

This was said by Neil Young. Singer and song writer.
Not only is it immoral.but it is one of the greatest tragedies in modern times,perhaps,comparable,only to the Holocast.The USA has shown that no nation can be trusted,as regards the fate of the innocent and defenceless citizens of a weaker nation.
The USA has lost the goodwill of all the right-thinking and reasonable persons of the entire world.