How do you define a just war?

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

This is not a flame bait. I'm really curious as to the opinions of DUers.

[HawkerHurricane]

1. Any war in self defense

is 'just'.

Beyond that, I have to think about it.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

3. I agree 100 percent.

War should always be the last option, but if you have to defend yourself, then war is sometimes necessary.

[DulceDecorum]

5. The awful crime

Well, take this for what little it will profit you. As I look at you ambassador Mollari, I see a great hand reaching out of the stars. The hand is your hand. And I hear sounds. The sounds of billions of people calling your name."
"My followers?"
"Your victims."
Elric and Londo, The Geometry of Shadows

http://www.iraqpeaceteam.org/photos/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=mauger&page=3
In the shelter there were no adult males--only women with their children. As you go through the tour, you think about dreams that were annihilated and the families that were destroyed. You see children that never got to grow up and experience what life was all about--the joys of marriage, or falling in love or graduating from the university. Of all the things I saw during my visit to Iraq, the Amariyah bomb shelter was the most troubling. It saddens me when I think about how all those people were killed in such a wanton and senseless manner. I look around. people have tears in their eyes.
We ask the guide questions: "How many people died here?" "Four-hundred and eight," she replies. I try to piece together what has happened here. At 4:00 in the morning, most of the victims were sleeping in bunk-beds stacked along the walls. The first 2000 pound bomb carried a shaped charge that cut through 12 feet of reinforced concrete and exploded, peeling away the protective cover. It left a large hole in the roof of the shelter and destroyed the electrical system. The chaos inside the darkened shelter must have been unimaginable. The bomb shelter doors were electronically controlled, so the doors were sealed shut. The remaining survivors were trapped in the shelter. Neighborhood residents heard screams as people tried to get out of the shelter. There was nothing they could do to help. Six minutes later, the second bomb traveled through the hole made by the first bomb. The explosion from the second bomb shattered doors and windows in homes around the neighborhood. The screaming immediately stopped.
The flash of the explosion was hot enough to sear foot- and handprints to the walls. Human remains and clothing shreds hung from the ceiling. Everything combustible--clothes, hair, blankets--caught on fire. When the rescuers opened the doors to the shelter, They saw scenes of incredible carnage. Nearly all the bodies were charred into blackness. in some cases the heat had been so great that entire limbs were burned off. some Rescue workers collapsed in grief, dropping corpses; some vomited from the stench of the still-smoldering bodies.
"The target was destroyed as intended” -- Brigadier General Richard Neil coldly and blandly stated at a news briefing in Saudi Arabia. The U.S. military knew what this structure was for. months before the attack the intelligence specialists consulted with the designers and contractors who built the shelter so they could more effectively penetrate its defenses.
After we left the shelter, I walked back to the bus and saw a group of children playing across the street. several of the kids were chasing after a red ball, kicking it around. As I watched them, I couldn't help but wonder what the future would hold for them. I wondered if they had had relatives killed in the shelter. I wondered if they would ever again be forced to experience the nightmare of U.S. bombing and what had occurred here ten years ago. In a way, I felt responsible for them. I watched them for a few minutes. then I joined the others and climbed on to the bus.
http://www.visualstatisticsillustrated.com/Current%20Issues/Bomb%20Shelter/Bomb%20Shelter.htm

"The blood is already on my hands. Right or wrong, .. I must follow the path .. to its end."
Londo, Knives

**** **** **** ****

"I thought the purpose of filing these reports was to provide accurate intelligence."
"Vir, intelligence has nothing to do with politics."
Vir and Londo, Point of No Return

LAST YEAR the U.S. intelligence community produced a formal estimate concluding that Iraq possessed large stocks of chemical and biological weapons and that it had reconstituted its nuclear bomb program. But a concerted postwar search by a U.S. survey team so far has found no weapons or nuclear program -- only suspicious facilities and a continuing intention to acquire such arms.
"So what's the difference?" President Bush demanded of ABC's Diane Sawyer in an interview broadcast Tuesday. "The possibility that could acquire weapons. If he were to acquire weapons, he would be the danger." In fact, the difference is much larger than that -- and the president's cavalier dismissal of it is shocking.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13783-2003Dec18.html

"Why does any advanced civilization seek to destroy less advanced one? Because the land is strategically valuable, because there are resources that can be cultivated and exploited, but most of all, simply because they can."
G'Kar, And Now For a Word

**** **** **** ****

"Only an idiot fights a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne of the kingdom of idiot would fight a war on twelve fronts."
"We can handle it. Our resources are greater than you think."
Londo and Lord Refa, Ceremonies of Light and Dark

US Military Personnel Wounded in Iraq & Afghanistan:
A Running Log
http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/wounded/

7,500 soldiers wounded since April 2003
http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/111103B.shtml

I was shocked and angered at how bad it really has become when I found out how many of the service men hate being in Iraq and want nothing to do with rebuilding and policing the devastated nation. From the conversations I had, many soldiers never wanted to go over to Iraq and fight, and the ones who had were now convinced of the awful crime that had been committed against Iraq and our own troops. I was told very few soldiers now believe in staying in Iraq, or want to stay in the country and serve any more days.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0310/S00195.htm

"Mollari. What did he say, really?"
"He said .. that we are both damned."
"Well. It's a small enough price to pay for immortality."
Lord Refa and Londo, The Coming of Shadows

**** **** **** ****

"You will fall upon one another like wolves. It will make what we did pale by comparison. The billions who live forever will be a monument to my work, and the billions who are murdered to buy that immortality will be the continuance of my work. Not like us? You will become us. That's my monument."
Ja'Dur (Deathwalker), Deathwalker

Salvatore "Sammy the Bull" Gravano views his homicidal history in a cultural context, like the moral relativism of war.
"I watched a guy (on TV) who dropped a bomb on Hiroshima," he said. "Killed 100,000 people in one day. What's that about?"
http://www.azcentral.com/news/specials/bull/0227sammy.html

According to President Harry Truman, one direct consequence was the decision of the Japanese to surrender — after the Soviet Union declared war on Japan on Aug. 8 and the U.S. dropped a second atomic bomb on the city of Nagasaki on Aug. 9. But others have insisted that the atomic bombings were not necessary to end the war.
It is an interesting and relevant fact that this controversy was initiated in 1945 by conservatives such as Time magazine publisher Henry Luce, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, New York Times military correspondent Hanson Baldwin and David Lawrence, editor of U.S. News, who wrote in October 1945: "Competent testimony exists to prove that Japan was seeking to surrender many weeks before the atomic bomb came."
This is a view that historical research has confirmed. The discovery of President Truman's handwritten private diary, for example, revealed that on July 18, 1945, he had read a "telegram from Jap Emperor asking for peace…. Believe Japs will fold up before Russia comes in. I am sure they will when Manhattan appears over their homeland." And again, on Aug. 3, 1945, Walter Brown, an aide to Secretary of State James F. Byrnes, noted in his diary that Truman and his aides "agreed Japs looking for peace…. "
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1217-06.htm

"So is that what it's about, pride? It's not enough that we have beaten them, we have to break them?"
"Yes, I'm sorry, I thought you understood that. I don't want our people to go through this again in another hundred years. There's a way things are done, Vir, nothing personal."
Vir and Londo, A Day in the Strife

"What are a few million lives compared to the glory of becoming a living god?"
Emperor Cartagia, The Hour of the Wolf

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

8. I see you're as big a B5 fan as I am..

All those quotes hit it right on the head.

[RH]

10. War would usually involve two or more parties.

How then would they both act in self defense?

[Bridget Burke]

12. They don't both act in self defense.

For the aggressor, there is no just war. Here are the charges used against the Nazi leadership at Nuremberg:

"Count One: Conspiracy to Wage Aggressive War
The 'common plan or conspiracy' charge was designed to get around the problem of how to deal with crimes committed before the war. The defendants charged under Count One were accused of agreeing to commit crimes......

"Count Two: Waging Aggressive War, or 'Crimes Against Peace'
This evidence was presented by the British prosecutors and was defined in the indictment as 'the planning, preparation, initiation, and waging of wars of aggression, which were also wars in violation of international treaties, agreements, and assurances.'"

www.courttv.com/archive/casefiles/nuremberg/indictments.html

[Frodo]

2. Make sure there is absolutely no peace involved.

Then it's "just" war.


:-)

[teach1st]

4. When more people will die without the war

In addition to self-defense, war could be necessary when it can be shown that more people will die in the absence of the war than will die in the war.

Of course, it's hard to tell , what with lying about war being so popular.

[DulceDecorum]

6. So more Iraqis would die WITHOUT the war?

Or more US soldiers would die WITHOUT the war?

Or more Halliburton wives would have to forego designer shoes WITHOUT the war?

Name the group that is better off BECAUSE of the war.
I dare you.

[teach1st]

7. Nobody showed

Nobody showed that more people would die without a war in Iraq. Nobody showed that it was a necessary war. I'm not sure I see your point.

One of the few examples I can think of where it can be argued that a war had saved lives is WW II.

[DulceDecorum]

19. Really? Whose lives?

Remind me again, who dropped an atomic bomb on a city filled with civilians?
TWICE?

Was America’s war on Japan A JUST WAR? Assuredly. Were U.S. vital interests threatened by Japan? No. Provoking war with Japan was FDR’s back door to the war he wanted—with Hitler in Europe.
After a meeting with FDR, Nov. 25, Secretary of War Henry Stimson wrote in his diary that the main question is “how we maneuver them into the position of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves.” That is the American way to war.
http://www.amconmag.com/09_08_03/buchanan.html

Remind me,
who it was who set the stage for the current butchery in Iraq
by planning to fly planes into buildings
allegedly because those inside had aluminum tubes
which constituted a weapon of mass destruction.

On August 12, 1944, Ensign Joe P. Kennedy, Jr. volunteered for a highly risky mission officially called "Operation Aphrodite" (also known as "Project Anvil") to pilot a PB4Y-1, the Navy version of the B-24, loaded with 21,470 pounds of explosives – a flying bomb -- across the English channel towards the German V-1 missile sites on the other side. His orders were to aim his plane at the sites and bail out before the plane was exploded by radio from an accompanying plane. On this mission Col. Elliot Roosevelt, the President's son, was in the control escort plane. Immediately after its take-off from Winfarthing-Fersfield airfield Roosevelt detonated the bomber killing Kennedy and the other officer on the plane, Lt. Wilford J. Willy. Joe Kennedy, Sr. always believed that FDR had arranged the death of his son. We have the anomalous case of a US President murdering the brother of a future US President. In 1974, after Truman's death, Merle Miller published a 1961 interview with Truman done on tape in front of three witnesses in his best seller entitled Plain Speaking: An Oral Biography of Harry S. Truman. Truman, according to Miller, was in Boston in 1944 in the Ritz-Carlton hitting up Joseph Kennedy for campaign funds for FDR's run for fourth term, and "Old man Kennedy started throwing rocks at Roosevelt, saying he'd caused the war and so on. And then he said, 'Harry, what the hell are you doing campaigning for that crippled son of a bitch that killed my son Joe?'"
http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/fdr.html

I did not fully grasp what you meant about a war SAVING lives.
Perhaps you can enlighten me.
http://www.deoxy.org/wc/wc-death.htm
http://www.deoxy.org/wc/warcrime.htm

During the Persian Gulf War in 1991, the multi-national force led by the United States crushed the Iraqi army with overwhelming fighting power. During this short war, the US military lost 148 soldiers in actual combat. Families rejoiced when their victorious husbands, wives, sons and daughters returned home safely. But joy quickly turned to fear when many of those soldiers began complaining of physical problems. Thousands died. Radiation from DU munitions and a variety of chemical toxins had invaded and were destroying their bodies.
http://www.chugoku-np.co.jp/abom/uran/us_e/000404.html

:bounce: HALLIBURTON RULES :bounce:

[RH]

11. Newsflash.

You will all die anyway.

!

Justice based on an unprovable hypothesis?

Give me justice with proof please.

:loveya:

[DulceDecorum]

21. So?

We should slaughter others before we go?

Have you yet encountered this well known saying?

THOU SHALT NOT KILL.

[Bridget Burke]

9. Defensive war.

Intervention to prevent genocide should be considered but ought to be carried out by international coalition, so there can be no suspicion of the selfish motives of one country.

[DulceDecorum]

13. The UK and the US

have so much blood on their hands that it is questionable as to whether it can be measured.
And as for the tears they have caused to be shed,
behold the Seven Seas.

And I am not just referring to their latest excursion into the realm of sadistic butchery.



Downes v. Bidwell
182 U.S. 244
May 27, 1901
5-4 split
Opinion written by J. Brown.
"There are certain principles of natural justice inherent in the Anglo-Saxon character, which need no expression in constitutions or statutes to give them effect or to secure dependencies against legislation manifestly hostile to their real interests."
<182 U.S. 244 at 280>
http://www.ark-of-salvation.org/hooven_downes.htm

[RH]

14. Intervention

sounds fine in theory.

But how would the concept then apply for instance to the following estimates?


Jozef Stalin's purges killed 13,000,000.
Adolf Hitler's henchmen systematically killed 12,000,000 during World War II
Mao Tze Dong's cultural revolution killed 11,000,000.
Hideki Tojo killed 5,000,000 civilians during WWII)
Pol Pot's regime killed 1,700,000
Kim Il Sung's purges and concentration camps killed 1.6 million.
Menghitsu killed 1,500,000 in Ethiopia, 1975-78.
Ismail Enver killed 1,200,000 (Turkey, 1915).
Charles DeGaulle killed 1,000,000 Algerians after WWII
Yakubu Gowon killed 1,000,000 in Biafra, 1967-1970.

[DulceDecorum]

15. And WHO

supplied ALL those murderers with the means to kill all those people?

[LARED]

17. Tell us

who supplied the means.

[leftofthedial]

16. self defense

or any war that results in the annihilation of the neocon movement.

[DulceDecorum]

20. Lead me not into temptation

(and deliver me from neo-cons!!)

[leftofthedial]

26. we can dream!

they can't take that from us.

[LARED]

18. How's this --- "Just War Tradition"

"We make war that we may live in peace," Aristotle

http://www.google.com/url?sa=U&start=15&q=http://pewforum.org/just-war/&e=1102

[DulceDecorum]

22. And this one...

They whore that they may live in virginity.

[LARED]

23. Not a good analogy

"We make war that we may live in peace,

Correctly implies that sometime war is a necessity to be able to live in peace. History is replete with examples.

Now the idea that;

They whore that they may live in virginity

makes no sense. Once you whore, virginity is lost. Never to be regained.

What is your opinion of this statement.

After Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, should we just have surrenderd?

[DulceDecorum]

24. Firstly,

Pearl Harbor was NOT in the USA.
Hawaii was NOWHERE NEAR becoming a state when that happened.

Secondly,
Pearl Harbor was a MILITARY TARGET.
I am not sure if there was anyone left on base TO surrender.

Thirdly,
the "attack" was provoked by the USA.

And Fourthly,
the US KNEW the Japanese were coming and
the top brass ALLOWED the attack to occur.
With friends like these...

Chew on this:
The New York Times reported claims of some eyewitnesses in Nairobi that the truck used in the embassy bombing had American diplomatic license plates. Another eyewitness claimed that the man who leaped from the truck and threw a hand grenade just before the bomb blast was wearing a blue uniform identical to that worn by embassy guards.
Even more striking is a report carried in the Washington Post Wednesday, based on a leak from the CIA in which the agency claimed to have foiled two recent attempts to bomb American embassies in the Middle East. The Post article quotes Robert Oakley, the former State Department coordinator for counter terrorism, on the US efforts to infiltrate terrorist groups targeting American facilities.
According to the Post: "He recalled an episode in the mid-1980s when U.S. intelligence recruited a terrorist who had been assigned to bomb an American embassy in Europe. The putative bomber, Oakley said, was allowed to detonate a bomb inside the embassy compound in such a way that little damage was done, far removed from US personnel, so that his relationship with US intelligence was not exposed."
http://www.wsws.org/news/1998/aug1998/bomb-a13.shtml

Wanna talk about Oklahoma?
Or Atlanta?
Or the first WTC bombing?

A just war is one waged by those who just want to wage war.

And as for the dough-nuts,
someone has to come between our daughters and the Gropenator.
http://www.bettybowers.com/crackwhores.html
http://www.bettybowers.com/cracknews.html
They compassionately whore, so that we may live liberally in virginity.

[LARED]

25. OK

Pearl Harbor was NOT in the USA.

No one said it was, and as you correctly point out

Pearl Harbor was a MILITARY TARGET.

And last time I checked attacking a military target could be considered an act of war. Especially considering the strategic importance of Pearl Harbor and the huge loss of American life and property.

the "attack" was provoked by the USA.

So assuming you really believe this, were the Japanese engaging in a just war? Will they get the same blistering vitriol you reserve for America?

the US KNEW the Japanese were coming and the top brass ALLOWED the attack to occur.

I've read quite a bit about this issue. My conclusion is that the attack was not allowed to occur.

Wanna talk about Oklahoma?
Or Atlanta?
Or the first WTC bombing?

No, not really. Do these have something to do with the definition of a just war?

A just war is one waged by those who just want to wage war.

Can I assume that you beleive if a nation is attacked they should just beg for mercy. Do you think America should still be a colony of England?

BTW, the World Socialist Web Site is not exactly considered a reliable unbiased source.

[DulceDecorum]

27. The man from U.N.C.L.E. Sam

Lared wrote:
Can I assume that you believe if a nation is attacked they should just beg for mercy. Do you think America should still be a colony of England?

Well, so far the Iraqis do not seem to be begging for mercy,
not that the average Coalition soldier would give them any.
http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news1/fisk10.html
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5365.htm

As for colonies of England,
where do you stand on the question of Ireland?

And why are NATIONS
such as Puerto Rico, Liberia, Guam
- the list goes on -
maintained as COLONIES of the US?

The US Virgin Islands,
to this very day,
are legally qualified to bear the epithet "slave republic."
What the hell is the Congress of the US doing owning slaves in 2004?

And how should Congress react if these slaves rebel against their masters
in the name of Freedom?
Some of them live in New Hampshire,
you know,
and they have seen the license plates.

You intimated that I am cutting the Japanese slack.
The heck I am.
I know damn well what took place in Formosa.
But what I am saying is this,
when it comes to starting wars in all corners of the globe
the Japanese must bow,
for they are NOT the master.
And when it comes to killing thousands of CIVILIANS in a single day,
both a US mob hit man,
and French executioner who is the son of an executioner,
condemn that act.

Hey Lared,
is Newsmax considered a reliable unbiased source?

In 2002, the U.S. military reportedly offered to use the Lotus Eater fungus on Afghan opium crops. The plan was to use U.S. control of Afghan airspace to seed the fungus from highflying C-130 Hercules transports.
Yet the Bush administration reportedly turned down the idea. According to high-level intelligence sources, the plan to end opium production inside Afghanistan was nixed by the CIA. The reason given was quite simple.
Apparently, there are several large factions inside Afghanistan and Pakistan, friendly to the U.S., that directly depend on funding from opium. These factions threatened to overthrow the Afghan and Pakistani governments if they were not allowed to continue trafficking heroin and opium.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/9/26/150144.shtml

Curious isn't it,
how the CIA cannot get Bush* to use "good" intelligence
and are forced to stand by powerlessly while their agent is outed,
but all of a sudden,
when it comes to the Poppy,
the CIA is calling the shots.
Sounds like the CIA is a subsidiary of the British East India Company.
Doesn't it?

[LARED]

28. Let's try this a different way

I believe that there have been times when war is justified. You seem to believe that war is never justified.

Is that correct? If it is, that's fine and dandy by me. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but if you are going to have an opinion you need to provide some semblance of an argument to explain why you hold that opinion

I cannot provide an exact definition of what criteria defines a "Just War," but I believe the war against Nazi Germany is as close to a war in modern times that fits the notion of a Just War. Why? Because a sovereign people has a right to exist according to their will, not the will of a dictator.

So here's my question; If there is no such thing as a just war, what would have been the proper response of Europe to Hitler?


Now that that out of the way I have some comments

Well, so far the Iraqis do not seem to be begging for mercy,
not that the average Coalition soldier would give them any.

While there are bad eggs everywhere the average coalition soldier is a decent human being. Frankly you should be ashamed of yourself.

As for colonies of England,
where do you stand on the question of Ireland?

Tell you what, you answer my question and then I'll answer yours.

And why are NATIONS such as Puerto Rico, Liberia, Guam - the list goes on - maintained as COLONIES of the US?

Well I do know the PR has been given the chance to free itself from our burdensome bonds a number of times via the ballot box, and the people of PR can't seem to vote themselves independence.

And when it comes to killing thousands of CIVILIANS in a single day,

I think the overall killer award goes to Stalin. He did take a number of years to get to the top so to speak.

is Newsmax considered a reliable unbiased source?

No.

[DulceDecorum]

29. Juice

Lared says:
I cannot provide an exact definition of what criteria defines a "Just War," but I believe the war against Nazi Germany is as close to a war in modern times that fits the notion of a Just War. Why? Because a sovereign people has a right to exist according to their will, not the will of a dictator.

Hmmmmm
A sovereign people has a right to exist according to their will, not the will of a dictator.
Hmmmmm
http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/2002/10/29_Dictator.html
Hmmmmm
http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/2002/06/17_Dictatorship.html
Hmmmmm
A sovereign people has a right to exist according to their will, not the will of a dictator.

Lared,
you are absolutely correct when you say
A sovereign people has a right to exist according to their will, not the will of a dictator.
The Germans did not get rid of their Nazis and see what it got them.
Lared,
what do you suggest we do about the American Nazis?
Quick, before someone like Osama bin Laden decides to wage a "Just War" against the entire nation! Why? Because a sovereign people has a right to exist according to their will, not the will of a dictator.

Lared says:
While there are bad eggs everywhere the average coalition soldier is a decent human being. Frankly you should be ashamed of yourself.

What of the average Iraqi civilian?
Are they not decent human beings also?
Then why are they being slaughtered by day and by night?
Where is the justice in that war?
You have Saddam.
Why do you remain?
Frankly, the ENTIRE Coalition should be ashamed of itself.
http://www.rense.com/general47/cpa.htm
http://www.netpoets.com/classic/poems/054001.htm

Lared says:
Well I do know the PR has been given the chance to free itself from our burdensome bonds a number of times via the ballot box, and the people of PR can't seem to vote themselves independence.

Hahahahaha.
Oooh, you made my sides hurt.
"...the people of PR can't seem to vote themselves independence."
That is SO funny!!!

ANYBODY who has a PR mailing address,
CANNOT VOTE
in any Federal Election
DESPITE the fact that
THEY ARE REAL US citizens.
If you go there to live,
YOU will lose your right to vote in presidential elections.

Puerto Rico is now permitted to send a representative into Congress
PROVIDED
said Representative conduct himself as a DEAF-MUTE.
Said Representative is NOT permitted so say ANYTHING AT ALL,
EVER
unless of course, he is informing the Puerto Ricans of how they are being screwed.
En espanol por favor.

A Puerto Rican VOTE!!!
For INDEPENDENCE!!!
Hah,
you must have conveniently forgotten all about
the "splendid little war."

Opinion at Harvard was divided. President Eliot's name led a list of 86 faculty members opposed to intervention in Cuba. Eliot's cousin Charles Eliot Norton, A.B. 1846, professor of the history of art, condemned the impending war as needless, inglorious, and criminal. Local politicians suggested that Norton be tarred and feathered. Citing Benjamin Franklin's dictum that "there never was a good war," Norton told a Cambridge church group that war "is evil in itself, it is evil in its never-ending train of consequences....IF A WAR BE UNDERTAKEN FOR THE MOST RIGHTEOUS END, BEFORE THE RESOURCES OF PEACE HAVE BEEN TRIED AND FOUND VAIN TO TO SECURE IT, THAT WAR HAS NO DEFENSE; IT IS A NATIONAL CRIME.
<snip>
On the eve of the Fourth of July, four Spanish warships tried to run an American naval blockade of Santiago harbor. They were driven ashore by the U.S. Atlantic flotilla. Santiago surrendered a fortnight later. General Nelson Miles, LL.D. 1896, left to lead AN UNAUTHORIZED INVASION OF THE SPANISH ISLAND OF PUERTO RICO. Spain sued for peace in late July. Ambassador John Hay, writing from London to Theodore Roosevelt, declared that from start to finish it had been "a splendid little war."
The Treaty of Paris, signed in December, transferred much of Spain's dwindling empire to the United States. Congress's war resolution had renounced U.S. claims to Cuba, but the island remained under military rule for more than three years, and the navy retained a large base at Guantanamo. Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and Guam became U.S. dependencies. Expansionist zeal had led Congress to annex Hawaii in July, and in 1899 the United States and Germany would divide the archipelago of Samoa. America was now a major stakeholder in the Far East.
http://www.harvard-magazine.com/issues/nd98/war.html

As for colonies of England,
where do you stand on the question of Ireland?
Lared says:
Tell you what, you answer my question and then I'll answer yours.
TRANSLATION:
We will NEVER get an answer out of him.

And when it comes to killing thousands of CIVILIANS in a single day,
Lared says:
I think the overall killer award goes to Stalin. He did take a number of years to get to the top so to speak.

YEARS.
How many deaths did the US military cause last week?
And how long has it been since Stalin was decommissioned?
The ONLY one
who may have killed more than the US military is
Warmaster Jha'dur
and they are gaining on her mythical record.

[LARED]

30. You get one more chance to answer the question

If there is no such thing as a just war, what would have been the proper response of Europe to Hitler?

Come'on DD, I know you can do it?

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DulceDecorum]

36. Prevention

is better than cure.

The answer to Lared's question is still partially classified.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/1326958.stm
http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Hess
http://www.rense.com/general46/hess.htm
http://www.rense.com/general46/evii.htm

It is not good policy to look too closely into the affairs of one Adolf Hitler.
http://www1.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2004-01/07/content_296513.htm
http://truthout.org/docs_04/010704A.shtml

Let us focus our attention on Saddam Hussein.

In a speech to students on the eve of a two-day NATO summit, Mr Bush compared the challenge of the Iraqi President to the Nazi invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1938, which led to World War II.
"IGNORING DANGERS OR EXCUSING AGGRESSION MAY TEMPORARILY AVERT CONFLICT, BUT THEY DON'T BRING ABOUT TRUE PEACE," he said.
Suggesting that terrorism was as dangerous as Hitler in the 1940s, Mr Bush told the teenagers: "We face perils we've never thought about, perils we've never seen before. They're just as dangerous as those perils that your fathers and mothers and grandfathers and grandmothers faced."
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/11/21/1037697805270.html

Arabs who admire Saddam – and there are plenty in Jordan – believe Iraq cannot hold out for more than a week. Some are convinced the US 3rd Infantry Division will be in Baghdad in three days, the British with them. It's a fair bet that hundreds, if not thousands, of Iraqis will die. But in the civil unrest that follows, what are we going to do? Are American and British troops to defend the homes of Baath party officials whom the mobs want to hang?
Far more seriously, what happens after that? What do we do when Iraqis – not ex-Baathists but anti-Saddam Iraqis – demand our withdrawal? For be sure this will happen. In the Shia mosques of Kerbala and An Najaf, they are not going to welcome Anglo-American forces. The Kurds will want a price for their co-operation. A state perhaps? A federation? The Sunnis will need our protection. They will also, in due time, demand our withdrawal. Iraq is a tough, violent state and General Tommy Franks is no General MacArthur.
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0127-06.htm

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
http://www.rense.com/general47/usecon.htm
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/News/Editorial%20%2F%20Commentary/B4793E46BEFAC4A786256E15003E074D?OpenDocument&Headline=The%20weapons%20that%20weren't
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2004/01/12_405.html

[LARED]

37. A clue at last

You state "Prevention is better than the cure."

Can I take this to mean there is no such thing as a just war because all war can be prevented?

[DulceDecorum]

38. Take it

any way you want.
Incidentally, does the word "diplomacy" mean anything to you?

It is my turn to ask YOU questions, Lared.
Let us talk about the Iraq War.
The Pre-emptive War.
http://www.counterpunch.org/katz02282003.html

They said that THEY could not wait for the UN to conclude their search for the Weapons of Mass Destruction.
They said that WE must wait a long time for them to search for the Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Now they have said that there are NO Weapons of Mass Destruction and that there NEVER WERE any Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Washington -- The Bush administration has quietly withdrawn from Iraq a 400-member military team whose job was to scour the country for military equipment, according to senior government officials.
The step was described by some military officials as a sign that the administration might have lowered its sights and no longer expected to uncover the caches of chemical and biological weapons that the White House cited as a principal reason for going to war last March.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2004/01/08/MNGGL45PMN1.DTL

Saddam-a-like has been captured and both he and the hole he hid in are in US custody.
So WHO are they fighting in Iraq?
And WHY?
And where is the justice in THAT war?
And WHY in God's name, should we attack Syria,
or Iran,
Or Saudi Arabia,
or Egypt?

PS.
I really believe that the Iraq War could have been avoided
and most of people on this planet agree with me.
http://www.antiwar.com/ips/lobe010904b.html
And I see NO reason to attack all those other countries.
Do you?

[LARED]

39. More clues

Terrific.

Diplomacy? Sure I know what it means.

But does this mean that you believe that because war may be avoided via diplomacy there is no such thing as a just war. Or do you believe something else?

Before we move to my turn, I really would like to figure out why your think there is no such thing as a just war. Can you explain you thoughts regarding this without trying to change the subject?

[DulceDecorum]

40. I have told you before

and I am telling you AGAIN
that
IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT DULCEDECORUM DOES OR DOES NOT THINK.
Reality is all that matters.

And you have YET to answer a question to my satisfaction.

You gave us a link.
Did you bother to read it?
Firstly, it consists of so-called-Christian theologians trying to justify their blatant disrespect of the Lord their God and his Ten Commandments.
The Sixth Commandment states flately THOU SHALT NOT KILL.
And that is ALL there is to say on the subject.
Now you can twist and turn and spin but that does NOT alter the fact that the Lord God said point blank THOU SHALT NOT KILL.
And that is all there is to it.
Case closed.

As for those who are bound and determined
to DISOBEY their Lord God
and to commit murders in His Holy Name,
THEY may attempt to claim justification in the words of Thomas Aquinas.
Check out Thomas's bio.
Modern day shrinks would probably prescribe him a handful of meds three times a day.
As it, is his body has been reverentially dismembered and the pieces repose in at least two seperate countries and we are stuck with his Summa Theologica which is his vision of The Way It Is.
In other words,
Thomas is telling us all what to believe and how to worship
- and somehow, all this time,
DulceDecorum was under the impression that that particular task was reserved for the Divine One, alone.
Thomas is deeply respected by some Catholic factions and has greatly influenced the papacy.
These are the same people who have recently proposed turning Queen Isabella,
the patron of Chistopher Columbus,
the force behind the Conquistadores,
and the instigator of the Spanish Inquisition,
into a saint.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,661242,00.html

Pope John Paul II has also publicly recognized the contributions of Queen Isabella in the areas of human rights and evangelization.
http://www.queenisabel.com/isabelnews_b.html

These are also the same people who decided in 1969, that St. Christopher, who had been behaving himself for YEARS should be "defrocked" since they now do not think that he ever actually existed.
http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=36

These are the same people who mistreated Galileo Galilei for daring to suggest that the earth was not fixed in the heavens but instead, revolved around the sun.

Tried on "vehement suspicion of heresy," Galileo was forced to swear that he "abjured, cursed and detested" the errors of his work, which extended the findings of the Polish astronomer Nicholaus Copernicus that the Earth Moves.
Legend insists that as he finished his abject, life-saving confession of his errors to the black-cowled Inquisitors, Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
http://www.dslnorthwest.net/~danwilcox/galileo.html

As you well know, popes cannot make mistakes,
http://www.heresyhouse.com/quiz/spoiler02.html
and so it was an anomaly, when John Paul stated 1992, that the ruling against Galileo was an error resulting from "tragic mutual incomprehension."
This tragic mutual incomprehension is probable what DulceDecorum is suffering from when confronted with Aquinas' arguments in favour of wholesale human slaughter.
Now, DulceDecorum is going to be nice today and refrain from pointing out similarities in the lives and deaths of Father Geogan and Jeffrey Dahmer. DulceDecorum is going to make a valiant attempt to critique the article that Lared provided for our entertainment.
JUST WAR TRADITION
http://pewforum.org/just-war/

The author starts off by mentioning Augustine of Hippo (354-430).

St. Augustine of Hippo is the patron of brewers because of his conversion from a former life of loose living, which included parties, entertainment, and worldly ambitions. His complete turnaround and conversion has been an inspiration to many who struggle with a particular vice or habit they long to break.
http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=418
So we are off to a great beginning.

St. Augustine apparently got some of his ideas from St. Paul.
http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=91
Now, St. Paul -formerly known as Saul- is very involved in the events that led to the demise of St. Steven, the patron saint of stomemasons.
http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=NIV&passage=Acts+7%3A54-59
As a matter of fact, Saul (St. Paul) is the person who took it upon himself to guard the coats of the people who were stoning Steven - the first martyr- to death. Saul, wasn't about to cast any stones himself but he certainly was going to do everything in his power to make sure that someone else killed Steven.
This behavior is TYPICAl of those who send others off into battle and I do believe that there is a special place reserved for them all.
So now we have have great middle.

In modern times, just war principles, frequently divorced from their religious origins, have been encoded in international laws governing armed conflict, such as the Geneva Conventions, as well as in American military doctrine and practice.
http://pewforum.org/just-war/
WOW Lared!!
THAT is a quote from your link.

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land;
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlevi.html
U.S. Ratification of the Geneva Convention (1882)
The U.S. Congress ratified the Geneva Convention in (1882), which gave the American Red Cross an official basis for inclusion in the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. Following years of extensive lobbying by Clara Barton and like-minded individuals, President James Garfield agreed that the 1864 Geneva Convention Treaty (Treaty of Geneva) should be signed. However, he was assassinated before he could sign the document.
On March 1, 1882, President Chester A. Arthur signed the treaty. The Senate ratified it on March 16, 1882. The United States was the 32nd nation to sign the document, agreeing to protect the wounded during wartime.
http://www.redcross.org/museum/pre1900a.html
Pierre-Richard Prosper was nominated by President Bush on May 16, 2001. He was confirmed by the Senate on July 11 and sworn in as Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues on Friday, the 13th of July.
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/biog/4417.htm
The Geneva Conventions are outdated and need to be rewritten to deal with the threat of international terrorism, the United States ambassador for war crimes said yesterday.
http://vredessite.nl/andernieuws/2002/week09/02-22_convention.html

So much for the Constitution of the United States.
So much for the Geneva Conventions.

Art. 148.
The law of war does not allow proclaiming either an individual belonging to the hostile army, or a citizen, or a subject of the hostile government, an outlaw, who may be slain without trial by any captor, any more than the modern law of peace allows such intentional outlawry; on the contrary, it abhors such outrage. The sternest retaliation should follow the murder committed in consequence of such proclamation, made by whatever authority. Civilized nations look with horror upon offers of rewards for the assassination of enemies as relapses into barbarism.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lieber.htm
Filed: 24/09/2001)
US raises reward for bin Laden to $30m
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/24/wbin24.xml
Thursday, July 3, 2003 Posted: 6:54 PM EDT (2254 GMT)
(CNN) -- The United States is offering a $25 million reward for information that either leads to the capture of Saddam Hussein or confirms that the former Iraqi leader is dead, U.S. officials announced Thursday.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/07/03/sprj.irq.main/
Tuesday, July 22, 2003 Posted: 6:22 PM EDT (2222 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan issued the following statement Tuesday, following the announcement that two of Saddam Hussein's sons were killed in a firefight with U.S. troops in Iraq:
"We were pleased to learn from the Department of Defense of today's action against Uday and Qusay Hussein.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/22/sprj.irq.statement/index.html

So much for the
Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field, prepared by Francis Lieber, LL.D.

International lawyers and anti-war campaigners reacted with astonishment yesterday after the influential Pentagon hawk Richard Perle conceded that the invasion of Iraq had been illegal.
In a startling break with the official White House and Downing Street lines, Mr Perle told an audience in London: "I think in this case international law stood in the way of doing the right thing."
President George Bush has consistently argued that the war was legal either because of existing UN security council resolutions on Iraq - also the British government's publicly stated view - or as an act of self-defence permitted by international law.
<snip>
"They're just not interested in international law, are they?" said Linda Hugl, a spokeswoman for the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, which launched a high court challenge to the war's legality last year. "It's only when the law suits them that they want to use it."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1089158,00.html

So much for "just war."
And then look at the other junk that they stuck in this document.
let us juxtapose this with the wars of the 21 Century.

LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY
Gore Won.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/01/11/12_gorewon.html

JUST CAUSE
Yet, unless Pentagon inspectors are missing huge stockpiles, the United States launched a war without an immediate threat to national security. In doing so, we aborted an effective United Nations inspection program.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/156000_inspected.html
Evidence that the search for WMD has been all but abandoned, and increasingly frank admissions in Washington that the threat from Saddam's regime was exaggerated in the run-up to war, have scarcely dented the Bush administration's popularity. But while the White House can say that WMD was never the main reason it sought "regime change" in Iraq, the danger of Saddam's alleged weapons was central to Tony Blair's case for war, both legally and politically.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=480031

RIGHT INTENTION
"The fundamental issue is, the day after Saddam is removed, the Iraqi oil industry is open for grabs, and it will depend upon the government of Iraq to decide how it will dispense that resource," says oil consultant Rob Sobhani, a professor at Georgetown University in Washington. "Certainly, American companies would be in a very, very strong position to compete for the right." (ABC News). On May 9, 2003, the European Union's EU Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid, Poul Nielson, visited with the U.S. military commander in Baghdad, and said that the U.S. "will appropriate the oil. It is very difficult to see how this would make sense in any other way. I think that the United States is on its way to becoming a member of OPEC." (Reuters).
http://www.uwec.edu/grossmzc/philligr.html
"But then Murawiec lights out for the extreme foreign policy territory, recommending that we threaten Medina and Mecca, home to Islam's most holy places, if they don't see it our way. Ultimately, he champions a takeover of Saudi Arabia. The last slide in the deck, titled 'Grand strategy for the Middle East,' abandons the outrageous for the incomprehensible.
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j080902.html
Abbas said that at Aqaba, Bush promised to speak with Sharon about the siege on Arafat. He said nobody can speak to or pressure Sharon except the Americans.
According to Abbas, immediately thereafter Bush said: "God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them."
http://www.unknownnews.net/apocalypsenow.html
Whether or not each of these leaders is the Antichrist, each surely has a role in the last days described in the Book of Revelation from the Bible. The common thread among all of these men is that they don't know Jesus Christ and are blind to what's coming. The Bible has never been wrong and it never will be.
http://www.raptureready.us/antichrist.htm

LAST RESORT
"Our position on this is that if America has proof, we are ready for the trial of Osama bin Laden in light of the evidence," Zaeef said. Asked if the Taliban were ready to hand bin Laden over, he snapped "No" but his translator said, "No, not without evidence."
The envoy also said he had no information on bin Laden's current whereabouts.
Zaeef said he was sorry people died in the suicide jet attacks last week, but called for the United Nations to investigate the attacks and appealed to the United States not to endanger innocent people in a military retaliation.
He told reporters Bush's ultimatum poses great danger for Muslims.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/special/terror/response/1056820
U.S. President George W. Bush Sunday rejected the latest offer by the Taliban regime in Afghanistan to turn over suspected terrorist Osama bin Laden if the United States supplied sufficient evidence of his guilt.
"There's no need to negotiate," Bush said upon his arrival at the White House from the presidential retreat at Camp David, Maryland.
The bombing in Afghanistan would not stop unless the ruling Taliban "turn him over, turn his cohorts over, turn any hostages they hold over," he said.
"There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's guilty" in the recent terrorist attacks, Bush added.
http://fpeng.peopledaily.com.cn/200110/15/eng20011015_82256.html

How Bush Hopes to Pin Saddam
The White House is enlisting Congress and moving troops into position to strike if the Iraqi leader gives them the smallest excuse. Will the President get it?
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,352640,00.html
The cause of peace requires all free nations to recognize new and undeniable realities. In the 20th century, some chose to appease murderous dictators, whose threats were allowed to grow into genocide and global war. In this century, when evil men plot chemical, biological and nuclear terror, a policy of appeasement could bring destruction of a kind never before seen on this earth.
Terrorists and terror states do not reveal these threats with fair notice, in formal declarations -- and responding to such enemies only after they have struck first is not self-defense, it is suicide. The security of the world requires disarming Saddam Hussein now.
As we enforce the just demands of the world, we will also honor the deepest commitments of our country. Unlike Saddam Hussein, we believe the Iraqi people are deserving and capable of human liberty. And when the dictator has departed, they can set an example to all the Middle East of a vital and peaceful and self-governing nation.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030317-7.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/index.html

Britain and the US did everything to avoid a peaceful solution in Iraq and Afghanistan
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1082250,00.html

REASONABLE CHANCE OF SUCCESS
October 20, 2003
The idea that we can invade a country, conquer it, and then not incur any blowback is uniquely American in its "who me?" naivete. The advocates of a war policy that has turned into an unmitigated disaster are now trying to lay the consequences of their insane policies at the feet of the Peace Party, but it won't work.
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j102003.html

PROPORTIONALITY
U.S. planes trapped the long convoys by disabling vehicles in the front, and at the rear, and then pounded the resulting traffic jams for hours. "It was like shooting fish in a barrel," said one U.S. pilot. The horror is still there to see.
http://www.deoxy.org/wc/wc-death.htm

NONCOMBATANT IMMUNITY
In May, 1997, the International Action Center published a book of essays and lectures on depleted uranium: the contamination of the planet by the United States military. In addition to exposing the deadly duplicity of the Department of Defense, the book documents the genocide of Native Americans and Iraqis by military radiation, the connection between depleted uranium and Gulf War Syndrome, the underestimated dangers from low-level radiation, the legal ramifications of DU Production and Use, and the growing movement against DU.
http://www.iacenter.org/depleted/mettoc.htm

PROPORTIONATE MEANS
The US intends to shatter Iraq "physically, emotionally and psychologically" by raining down on its people as many as 800 cruise missiles in two days.
The Pentagon battle plan aims not only to crush Iraqi troops, but also wipe out power and water supplies in the capital, Baghdad.
It is based on a strategy known as "Shock and Awe", conceived at the National Defense University in Washington, in which between 300 and 400 cruise missiles would fall on Iraq each day for two consecutive days. It would be more than twice the number of missiles launched during the entire 40 days of the 1991 GulfWar.
"There will not be a safe place in Baghdad," a Pentagon official told America's CBS News after a briefing on the plan. "The sheer size of this has never been seen before, never been contemplated before."
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/01/25/1042911596206.html
Iraq: Shock and Awe II
The military sends a tough message as the CIA warns that Iraqis are starting to believe the insurgents
http://www.time.com/time/columnist/karon/article/0,9565,542507,00.html

Aaah,
what a wonderful and all-encompassig link you provided, Lared!
And what an ignominious end
we are witnessing to the theory of a "just war"
and the to lives of Iraqi insurgents
and the soldiers who have been sent to neutralize them.

[LARED]

41. Reality is all that matters.

The irony of it all

The Sixth Commandment states flately THOU SHALT NOT KILL.

True. But what exactly does kill mean?

And that is ALL there is to say on the subject.

Not really. Is it ok to kill bugs? How about victuals, How about in self defense?

Now you can twist and turn and spin but that does NOT alter the fact that the Lord God said point blank THOU SHALT NOT KILL.

Well, most bible scholars will tell you that you need to interpret scripture with scripture. For instance God commands "THOU SHALT NOT KILL" but he commands the Israelites to kill many times. So either God is a liar or DD may need to investigate this a bit more. In fact God sends an angle of death to smite all the first born in Egypt. How do you reconcile that DD?

Many would interpreter the commandment as an injunction not to murder, not take innocent blood.

And that is all there is to it.

It would seem not.

Case closed.

Seeing as DD states IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT DULCEDECORUM DOES OR DOES NOT THINK. why even bother to make that statment?

BTW. Is it possible you could limit the amount of information. I would like to understand your point of view, but I have no intention of spending hours reading throught stuff that is most likely a rabbit trail.

[DulceDecorum]

42. What exactly does kill mean?

Oh, I dunno,
why don't you go ask Cain?

Hey Lared,
you mentioned the bible.
Pray tell, what EXACTLY are you talking about?
Which bible?
Catholic? Protestant? Mormon? Jehovah's Witness?
Which one are you talking about?
Does it come WITH or WITHOUT the Apocrypha?

The apocrypha have been variously included and omitted from bibles over the course of the centuries. Protestant churches generally exclude the apocrypha (though the King James version of 1611 included them). The Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches include all of the apocrypha (except for the books of Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh), but refer to them as "deuterocanonical" books. In this context, the term "apocrypha" generally refers to writings entirely outside of the biblical canon and not considered inspired (such as the Gospel of Thomas). These same books are referred to by Protestants as the "pseudoepigrapha."
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/apocrypha_exp.html

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01601a.htm

It makes QUITE a BIG difference, you know, since that particular book has no errors in it and is factually correct.

Lared has seen fit to assault the scripture
with a claim of agnosticism,
let us then take counsel from the Gnostics.
Lared,
which of these two other versions of the commandments do you prefer?


And the Lord called unto Moses out of the mountain, saying, Come unto me, for I would give thee the Law for thy people, which shall be a covenant for the Children of Light.
And Moses went up unto God. And God spake all these words, saying,

I am the Law, thy God, which hath brought thee out from the depths of the bondage of darkness.
Thou shalt have no other Laws before me.
Thou shalt not make unto thee any image of the Law in heaven above or in the earth beneath. I am the invisible Law, without beginning and without end.
Thou shalt not make unto thee false laws, for I am the Law, and the whole Law of all laws. If thou forsake me, thou shalt be visited by disasters for generation upon generation.
If thou keepest my commandments, thou shalt enter the Infinite Garden where stands the Tree of Life in the midst of the Eternal Sea.
Thou shalt not violate the Law. The Law is thy God, who shall not hold thee guiltless.
Honor thy Earthly Mother, that thy days may be long upon the land, and honor thy Heavenly Father, that eternal life be thine in the heavens, for the earth and the heavens are given unto thee by the Law, which is thy God.
Thou shalt greet thy Earthly Mother on the morning of the Sabbath.
Thou shalt greet the Angel of Earth on the second morning.
Thou shalt greet the Angel of Life on the third morning.
Thou shalt greet the Angel of Joy on the fourth morning.
Thou shalt greet the Angel of Sun on the fifth morning.
Thou shalt greet the Angel of Water on the sixth morning.
Thou shalt greet the Angel of Air on the seventh morning.
All these Angels of the Earthly Mother shalt thou greet, and consecrate thyself to them, that thou mayest enter the Infinite Garden where stands the Tree of Life.
Thou shalt worship thy Heavenly Father on the evening of the Sabbath.
Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Eternal Life on the second evening.
Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Work on the third evening.
Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Peace on the fourth evening.
Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Power on the fifth evening,
Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Love on the sixth evening.
Thou shalt commune with the Angel of Wisdom on the seventh evening.
All these Angels of the Heavenly Father shalt thou commune with, that thy soul may bathe in the Fountain of Light, and enter into the Sea of Eternity.
The seventh day is the Sabbath: thou shalt remember it, keep it holy. The Sabbath is the day of the Light of the Law, thy God. In it thou shalt not do any work, but search the Light, the Kingdom of thy God, and all things shall be given unto thee.
For know ye that during six days thou shalt work with the Angels, but the seventh day shalt thou dwell in the Light of thy Lord, who is the holy Law.
Thou shalt not take the life from any living thing. Life comes only from God, who giveth it and taketh it away. Thou shalt not debase Love. It is the sacred gift of thy Heavenly Father.
Thou Shalt not trade thy Soul, the priceless gift of the loving God, for the riches of the world, which are as seeds sown on stony ground, having no root in themselves, and so enduring but for a little while.
Thou shalt not be a false witness of the Law, to use it against thy brother: Only God knoweth the beginning and the ending of all things, for his eye is single, and he is the holy Law.
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's possessions. The Law giveth unto thee much greater gifts, even the earth and the heavens, if thou keep the Commandments of the Lord thy God.
And Moses heard the voice of the Lord, and sealed within him the covenant that was between the Lord and the Children of Light.
http://www.thenazareneway.com/ten_commandments.htm


Essene Commandments
The Essene Law given by
Yahowshua ha Mashiakh
in the Gospel of the Nazarenes

"Hear O Israel , Thy God is One; Many are My seers, and My prophets. In me all live and move, and have subsistence.
You Shall not take away the life of any creature for your pleasure, nor for your profit, nor yet torment it.
You Shall not steal the goods of any, nor gather lands and riches to yourselves, beyond your need or use.
You shall not eat the flesh , nor drink the blood of any slaughtered creature, not yet anything which brings disorder to your health or senses.
You shall not make impure marriages, where love and health are not, nor yet corrupt yourselves, or any creature made pure by the holy.
You shall not bear false witness against any, nor willfully deceive any by a lie to hurt them.
You shall not do to others, as you would not that others should do to you.
You shall worship One eternal, the Father-Mother in heaven, of whom are all things, and reverence the holy name.
You shall revere your fathers and your mothers on earth, whose care is for you, and all the teachers of righteousness.
You shall cherish and protect the weak, and those who are oppressed, and all creatures that suffer wrong.
You shall work with your hands the things that are good and seemly; so will you eat the fruits of the earth, and live long in the land.
You will purify yourselves daily and rest the seventh day from labor, keeping holy the Sabbath and the festivals of your God.
You shall do to others, as you would that others should do to you."
http://www.essene.com/index2.html

Lared,
you seem to like sound bites, and quick, trite, wildly inaccurate answers to the deeper meaning of life, the universe and everything.
So the answer for you is
42.

"Forty-two!" yelled Loonquawl. "Is that all you've got to show for seven and a half million years' work?"
"I checked it very thoroughly," said the computer, "and that quite definitely is the answer. I think the problem, to be quite honest with you, is that you've never actually known what the question is."

PS.
That bit about killing for victuals is really obscene.
I used to LIKE fava beans, AND a nice Chianti.

[LARED]

43. ?????????

why don't you go ask Cain?

Why? How would he enlighten this thus far interesting discourse. You are aware that Cain's unfortunate incident occurred before the law was given. Make of that what you like?

Pray tell, what EXACTLY are you talking about? Which bible? Catholic? Protestant? Mormon? Jehovah's Witness? Which one are you talking about? Does it come WITH or WITHOUT the Apocrypha?

Actually I was using the 'original' Hebrew when looking up the word kill. Fascinating information about the Apocrypha, but what does it have to do with your opinion about a just war?

From Strong's concordance

H7523
øöç
râtsach
Total KJV Occurrences: 47

slayer, translated 17 times in Num_35:11, Num_35:25-28 (4), Deu_4:42, Deu_19:3-4 (2), Deu_19:6, Jos_20:3, Jos_20:5-6 (2), Jos_21:13, Jos_21:21, Jos_21:27, Jos_21:32, Jos_21:38

murderer, 13 times in Num_35:16-19 (7), Num_35:21 (2), Num_35:30-31 (2), 2Ki_6:32, Job_24:14

kill, 4 times in Exo_20:13, Num_35:27, Deu_4:42, Deu_5:17

murder, 3 times in Psa_94:6, Hos_6:9 (2)

slain, 3 times in Jdg_20:4, Psa_62:3, Pro_22:13

manslayer, 2 times Num_35:6, Num_35:12

death, 1 time Num_35:30

killed, 1 time 1Ki_21:19

killing, 1 time Hos_4:2

murderers, 1 time Isa_1:21

slayeth, 1 time Deu_22:26

So as you can see determining the precise meaning of kill in Hebrew as it is translated to English is not such simple matter. Let me add that it is quite clear from the old testament that the taking of a human life was acceptable under certain conditions.

Lared has seen fit to assault the scripture with a claim of agnosticism,

Really where did I do that. Lying about a poster is a no-no.

So I think we have established that you do not believe there can be a just war because it can always be avoided via diplomacy unless God tells people to kill each other?

Please feel free to correct this position as needed.

[DulceDecorum]

44. !!!!!!!!

Lared states:
Let me add that it is quite clear from the old testament that the taking of a human life was acceptable under certain conditions.

O'Reilly?
Whatever happened to "turn the other cheek?"
Oh, I AM sorry,
that comes from the New Testament
and the fellow who uttered those words was .....
killed.
I really do not know what other word to use.
Perhaps Strong's concordance can help me out.
However, I have been given to understand that
the crucifixion of Christ is really a VERY GOOD THING.
The BEST ever.

Unfortunately,
DulceDecorum is STILL hung up on that Sixth Commandment.
And so apparently was Pontius Pilate,
at least according to St Peter.
http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?passage=ACTS+3:12-14&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on

But we were talking about the Ten Commandments,
and killing.
Lared said:
You are aware that Cain's unfortunate incident occurred before the law was given.

Nevertheless, Cain was punished.
And yet,
the knowledge of this punishment has not served as a deterrent to future generations desirous of taking what does not belong to them.

The bible, in Exodus 32:25-29, says, "When Moses saw that the people had gone mad (in making the Golden Calf).... he stood at the gate of the camp and cried out: Who is to G-d, come to me!" All the Levites gathered around him. He told them, "Thus says the Lord, G-d of Israel, each of you prepare your sword on your thigh, pass back and forth through the camp and kill your own brother or your own friend or your relative." The Levites did as Moses commanded, and on that day there fell from the people about 3,000 men. Moses said to the Levites: "Dedicate yourselves to G-d today, for indeed each of you is dedicated through his son or his daughter and have brought on yourselves a blessing this day."
http://www.njop.org/html/KITISAH57612001.htm

EXODUS 25 Moses saw that the people were running wild and that Aaron had let them get out of control and so become a laughingstock to their enemies. 26 So he stood at the entrance to the camp and said, "Whoever is for the LORD , come to me." And all the Levites rallied to him.
27 Then he said to them, "This is what the LORD , the God of Israel, says: 'Each man strap a sword to his side. Go back and forth through the camp from one end to the other, each killing his brother and friend and neighbor.' " 28 The Levites did as Moses commanded, and that day about three thousand of the people died. 29 Then Moses said, "You have been set apart to the LORD today, for you were against your own sons and brothers, and he has blessed you this day."
30 The next day Moses said to the people, "You have committed a great sin. But now I will go up to the LORD ; perhaps I can make atonement for your sin."
http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?passage=EXOD+32&language=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on

Looks like a whole lot of people got killed BEFORE the law was actually given to them.
No shyness when it comes to punishment of that First Commandment.
However, then as now,
the LORD did not need puny humans to mete out His judgment.

EXODUS 5 Then the LORD came down in the cloud and stood there with him and proclaimed his name, the LORD . 6 And he passed in front of Moses, proclaiming, "The LORD , the LORD , the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, 7 maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation."

And that is
just ONE
of the many reasons why
thou had better not kill
if you know what is good for you.

EXODUS 27 Then the LORD said to Moses, "Write down these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel." 28 Moses was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights without eating bread or drinking water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant-the Ten Commandments.

29 When Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the two tablets of the Testimony in his hands, he was not aware that his face was radiant because he had spoken with the LORD . 30 When Aaron and all the Israelites saw Moses, his face was radiant, and they were afraid to come near him. 31 But Moses called to them; so Aaron and all the leaders of the community came back to him, and he spoke to them. 32 Afterward all the Israelites came near him, and he gave them all the commands the LORD had given him on Mount Sinai.

It appears that
Aaron,
http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/aaron.htm
the brother of Moses,
the high priest of Israel,
the man who actually MADE the Golden Calf,
was NOT killed
by his brother
or by his friend
or by his neighbor
as were all the others who had bowed to the Golden Calf.

It is quite clear from the old testament
that the taking of CERTAIN human life
was COMPLETELY unacceptable under ANY conditions.

And that is where the debate remains today.
Pearl Harbor was totally unacceptable.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki "saved lives."
September 11 was an atrocity.
Afghanistan and Iraq
(to be followed by Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, etc etc)
is a "just" and a "glorious" war because
the judeo-christian god is a bigger god.
Crusade - GOOD.
Jihad - BAD.
Peace on Earth?
Not, if Halliburton can help it.
Not in Lockheed's name.

"God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them,
and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam,
which I did,
and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East."
-— George W. Bush
http://www.unknownnews.net/apocalypsenow.html

[LARED]

45. Amazing Theology DD

Did you make it up yourself?

I said; Let me add that it is quite clear from the old testament that the taking of a human life was acceptable under certain conditions.

You then write about 850 word to justify this statement; It is quite clear from the old testament that the taking of CERTAIN human life was COMPLETELY unacceptable under ANY conditions.

(Btw, let me commend you on actually stating a conclusion about something, Praise the Lord :))

Unfortunately nothing I can discern in your 850 words actually substantiates anything in your conclusion?

So, as you state we are back to this

Pearl Harbor was totally unacceptable.

I would hope you would agree with that.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki "saved lives."

Well I think it saved American, Allied, and Japanese lives. So that statement sound good to me.

September 11 was an atrocity.

We agree.

Afghanistan and Iraq to be followed by Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, etc etc) is a "just" and a "glorious" war because the judeo-christian god is a bigger god.

Wow, do you really believe the American military is trying to conquer the Arab world? Do you? Also there is of course this notion that you are trying to spin that America fights this war as a crusade for the Christian God. Please take a reality pill. America is a very secular country. many people talk the talk about religion but few are willing to go to war defending God.

Crusade - GOOD.

DD, in case you are unaware the crusades were over about 7 or 8 hundred years ago. Please try and keep up.

Jihad - BAD.

If Jihad mean a Muslim is trying to kill me because I am an unbeliever (a present day issue) it is bad. Do you disagree?

Peace on Earth? Not, if Halliburton can help it. Not in Lockheed's name.

This bring us right back to the discussion of what make a just war. Do you have an opinion. you are you just testing out your new theology on me?

[DulceDecorum]

46. Sigh.....

Enough already.

[LARED]

31. You must be kidding

How many deaths did the US military cause last week? And how long has it been since Stalin was decommissioned? The ONLY one who may have killed more than the US military is Warmaster Jha'dur and they are gaining on her mythical record.

Actually the killing record of the US Military is small potatoes compared to some of history most prolific warmongers.

Please tell me you understand that Jha'dur is a fictional character on TV.

[DulceDecorum]

33. Warmaster Jha'dur

is reputed (in the TV series Babylon 5)
to have wiped out the populations of entire planets (plural.)

The US military has not YET wiped out the entire population of this planet.
I guess that is where Lared gets his "small potatoes" theory.

However,
the fact still remains,
that as long as the US military maintains a presence here,
Planet Earth CANNOT be considered to be
"Mostly Harmless."

[Lithos]

34. The US Military

Over the course of it's ENTIRE history is no where responsible for the same number of deaths caused during short time periods such as the Nazi Regime, Pol Pot, Stalin, Lenin, the Japanese of WWII, or one of several of Mao Tse Tung's purges. It is even possible that minor despots such as King Leopold's rape of the Belgian Congo may have caused more death and destruction.

While there is much to be said about Mr. Bush's use of the US Military in ways which only support the pain and suffering of civilians, increase his cronies profts, and promote a PNAC-style imperial dominance, gross comparisons are patently absurd and turn off any audience who might prove otherwise sympathetic.

L-

[DulceDecorum]

35. Mr. Bush

is NOT kosher.
Which fact is much to the detriment of the average grunt.

"Forward, the Light Brigade!"
Was there a man dismay'd?
Not tho' the soldier knew
Someone had blunder'd:
Their's not to make reply,
Their's not to reason why,
Their's but to do and die:
Into the valley of Death
Rode the six hundred.
http://eserver.org/poetry/light-brigade.html
THE CHARGE OF THE LIGHT BRIGADE
-- Alfred, Lord Tennyson

THERE were thirty million English who talked of England’s might,
There were twenty broken troopers who lacked a bed for the night.
They had neither food nor money, they had neither service nor trade;
They were only shiftless soldiers, the last of the Light Brigade.
http://www.kipling.org.uk/poems_brigade.htm
THE LAST OF THE LIGHT BRIGADE
-- Rudyard Kipling

This article
http://www.nhgazette.com/cgi-bin/NHGstore.cgi?user_action=detail&catalogno=NN_Bush_Nazi%20Link
indicates that the military machine and the average footsoldier do not necessarily hold the same worldview.
Nothing personal, just business.


The old Troop-Sergeant was spokesman, and "Beggin' your pardon," he said,
"You wrote o' the Light Brigade, sir. Here's all that isn't dead.
An' it's all come true what you wrote, sir, regardin' the mouth of hell;
For we're all of us nigh to the workhouse, an' we thought we'd call an' tell.

"No, thank you, we don't want food, sir; but couldn't you take an' write
A sort of 'to be continued' and 'see next page' o' the fight?
We think that someone has blundered, an' couldn't you tell 'em how?
You wrote we were heroes once, sir. Please, write we are starving now."
http://www.kipling.org.uk/poems_brigade.htm

I join the Disabled American Veterans in asking, ''Is there is no honor left in the hallowed halls of our government that you choose to dishonor the sacrifices of our nation's heroes and rob our programs--health care and disability compensation--to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy?''
Democrats in Congress are now fighting the president's proposal and are working to restore cuts in veterans' benefits and veterans' health care for the sake of our troops fighting in Iraq and the millions of veterans across the country. But this fight cannot be won unless veterans let the president and the Republican-controlled Congress know that they will not stand for these cuts.
Despite all the enthusiastic and well-deserved praise of our troops coming from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the Bush administration has failed to put its money where its mouth is.
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/il09_schakowsky/pr04_13_2003vets.html