Somalia Revisited

[Skirmisher]

So a cheering crowd kills, dismembers and hangs US contractors corpses from a bridge.

They are doing a good job of getting me close to just say fuck it and a carpet bomb the whole damned thing.

Yes yes I know thats what its intended to do....but just imagining it even if only for a minute allows some of the anger to dissipate.

Grrr...it makes me so angry that I let these cretins manipulate me so.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3587931.stm

[TheEschaton]

Shit, I know this guy from the CC Daily Show boards who was gonna go to Iraq as a civilian contractor, while all of us tried to convince him not to.

I wonder who they were.


-TheE-

[DeV]

Adults and children hacked the bodies to pieces, before lynching two of the charred remains from a bridge spanning the Euphrates River.
Scary shit.

[Parkbandit]

You know... I have a problem with killing innocent people... but I gotta tell you, if I had a bomb and saw this demonstration.

Fucking Kaboom... level the whole damn mob. They will only turn into suicide bombers anyway.

[Siefer]

That's what you get when 600 of your fellow countrymen die for another country. Another safe haven for terrorists and an ungrateful population who couldn't even protest during the previous regime. My respect for all persons who worship Allah has dropped to a new low. People need to stop criticizing the U.S. and open their eyes to the violent reality that is Islam.

*Umm, no. Do not wish death to ANYBODY. Not on these boards. You MAY wish death to all spiders, if you wish. ;) ~HarmNone*

[Edited on 4-1-2004 by HarmNone]

[DeV]

Wow Siefer.. lets continue to spread the hate why don't we. Would you like us all to chime in and up our hatred a bit?

[ThisOtherKingdom]

While it's a shame what happened to those people, how is the response "Let's drag them through OUR streets and hack them up!" or "Let's bomb them all!" any better of an action? I don't get it. I'm of the opinion that we should've never been involved there in the first place.

[pennywise]

Very few Islamic people are the extremist typified in that gruesome display. Islam is a very peaceful religion. In many respects, moreso than Christianity. They accept that they worship the same God as Christians and Jews, and do not treat them as alien or pagan as many Christians treat Muslims. They see them mainly as just behind the times, as Mohammad was the most recent prophet.

I am in no way justifying what was done to the contractors, merely pointing out that 95% of Islamic people are not extremist murderers. Christians and Jews both have they extremist, and at times violent, sects, yet they are not in your post as "a bane to civilized people everywhere".

[Siefer]

Sit back and condemn and criticize their actions in your armchairs and at the UN, you'll show those extremist bastards! These people eat sleep and breathe violence, and they'll only stop when either the entire continental U.S. is a smoking radioactive wasteland or they are all dead.

[DeV]

Siefer we need people like you in the White House, we really do.


They are products of their ENVIRONMENT. Thats all they know. They are sick people, and they are the extremists of their religion. I wouldn't go so far as to crucify an entire religion based on the actions of people that are blind to reason.

[TheEschaton]

These people eat sleep and breathe violence, and they'll only stop when either the entire continental U.S. is a smoking radioactive wasteland or they are all dead.

On both counts, of: A) eating, sleeping, and breathing violence, and B) willingness to stop only when either the entire continental U.S. is a smoking radioactive wasteland or they are all dead, the defense offers the following cross-examination:

Why is it they feel this way? While never truly peaceful (no region of the world has been always peaceful), the Middle East wasn't volatile, until we made it so.

-TheE-

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by pennywise
Islam is a very peaceful religion. In many respects, moreso than Christianity.Bullshit.

While Islamic people are probably more peaceful than your average Christian, it's impossible to get more peaceful than Christianity. Unless Islam considers the fig tree sacred or something.
Originally posted by Darkelfvoid
They are products of their ENVIRONMENT. Thats all they know. They are sick people, and they are the extremists of their religion. I've heard (too many) people say the same thing about me. :(
Originally posted by TheEschaton
the Middle East wasn't volatile, until we made it so. If by "we" you mean "Britain", then sure.

[DeV]

Originally posted by Latrinsorm

Originally posted by Darkelfvoid
They are products of their ENVIRONMENT. Thats all they know. They are sick people, and they are the extremists of their religion. I've heard (too many) people say the same thing about me. :([/quote]

I can get you help. U2U.

Back to the topic.

[Edited on 3-31-2004 by DarkelfVold]

[Galleazzo]

You are one sick fuck, Siefer. Maybe you and Testanazi should get together and share notes. If you got different IPs that is.

So you think there aren't sick mofos in America too? Remember how a couple redneck assholes tortured Matthew Shepard and hung him on a barbed wire fence to die? You think we should kill everyone in Texas because of that? There's even a website PRAISING what those rednecks have done. Think all Protestant preachers should die because of one maniac with his own server?

Yer a piece of work.

[TheEschaton]

it's impossible to get more peaceful than Christianity

Never heard of Jainism, eh?

And I hear that Islam considers human life so sacred, and a representation of the Divine so much so, that they don't allow it to depicted in their art, or any other form of life in their art, for that matter, because it would be a blasphemy against Allah.

-TheE-

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by TheEschaton
Never heard of Jainism, eh?I remember it was lumped together with two other religions/philosophies in a chapter freshman year. Heard of, yes, remember anything about, no.
And I hear that Islam considers human life so sacred, and a representation of the Divine so much so, that they don't allow it to depicted in their art, or any other form of life in their art, for that matter, because it would be a blasphemy against Allah.Skippy. Repressing expressions of humanity doesn't generally lead to peaceful folk, though. Look at the Victorians, for one. I don't see how considering something sacred makes the religion more peaceful. I already said the average Muslim is probably more peaceful than the average Christian, but I fail to see how any religion can be more peaceful than Jesus' Christianity (I know how you like chucking Paul at me ;))

what does that have to do with anything relating to the topic TheE?

I think the only way to teach them a lesson is send a few hundred artillery shells into their homes.

[DeV]

The government can't even find Bin Laden yet they got Saddam's ass already. Something is fishy.

Try finding somebody in America who pays for everything with cash and have little support form the population.
Come on be realistic

[pennywise]

Sorry Latrinsorm, I should have been a bit more specific in my post. Islam, in most respects and forms practiced today, is much more respective and peaceful in terms of other people being allowed their own religious practices. There are exceptions, of course, but on the whole, a Christian can be comfortable in a mainly Islamic country, whereas Muslims and other religions often cannot feel the same way in Christian countries.

[DeV]

Originally posted by The Edine
Try finding somebody in America who pays for everything with cash and have little support form the population.
Come on be realistic I'm being realistic.

[TheEschaton]

(I know how you like chucking Paul at me )

I hate chucking Paulie at anyone, he ruins the NT for me.


And Edine, think of the consequences of "chucking a few hundred missiles" at them. What'll happen? They'll only get more and more pissed. These are people who will never be "beaten into submission". First, there's the idea of the fair fight: Those in the Middle East (and the rest of the world) feel that America simply throws missiles and doesn't dare face the enemy in hand to hand combat. While it would be tactically stupid for us to do so when we don't have to, there is this sense of unfairness to those we "chuck missiles at". Secondly, the mindset of these people is that America is not looking out for their interests. And when they see America acting in a way that is NOT in their interest...well, then, they use it to reinforce their belief, whether or not we really are acting against them or not.

That's why Bush is such a danger: his cowboy persona, his "you're either for us, or against us" posturing, his blatant disregard for anything pro-Muslim (the U.S. was the only country to vote against the U.N. resolution to condemn the assassination of Yassin a couple of weeks ago, effectively vetoing the resolution, even though assassination has been a long standing no-no in U.N. policy), they all piss Muslims off.

-tHEe-

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by pennywise
Sorry Latrinsorm, I should have been a bit more specific in my post. Islam, in most respects and forms practiced today, is much more respective and peaceful in terms of other people being allowed their own religious practices. There are exceptions, of course, but on the whole, a Christian can be comfortable in a mainly Islamic country, whereas Muslims and other religions often cannot feel the same way in Christian countries. Well yeah, duh. :D
Originally posted by TheEschaton
"chucking a few hundred missiles" To be fair, he said shells. Shells aren't missiles. I'd much rather we got rid of missiles and bombs entirely, frankly, they're terribly expensive and inaccurate compared to artillery. From a military standpoint, I think it's a good idea. It's not like we're picking civilians at random, it's pretty obvious what these particular civilians did. I'd rather we send a warning shot or something, so those not involved could get themselves away.

[Ravenstorm]

My initial reaction to bomb their little city into rumble is tempered by the fact that it's their country and we're the invaders. It's been pretty thoroughly proven that Saddam had no ties to Al Quaeda, had no WMD, and posed no threat at all to the US. Despite this, we invaded and killed many Iraqi people. We would certainly be doing the same thing they are to anyone who invaded our country.

So it's a bad situation all around. My sympathies lie entirely with our soldiers dying over there who had no choice about whether to go or not, the Iraqi civilians who've been killed, and the families of everyone involved. As for Al Quaeda forces in Iraq, we're the ones who created that particular vacuum for them to move into.

Raven

[Nakiro]

Originally posted by Siefer
That's what you get when 600 of your fellow countrymen die for another country. Another safe haven for terrorists and an ungrateful population who couldn't even protest during the previous regime. My respect for all persons who worship Allah has dropped to a new low. People need to stop criticizing the U.S. and open their eyes to the violent reality that is Islam.

*Edited out~HarmNone*

For some reason I think they hold a similar view, only it concerns americans/christians.

[Edited on 4-1-2004 by HarmNone]

[Artha]

There's huge differences between Saddam and Osama. Osama has a giant, largely unmapped are of open terrain in between two countries who largely supported him (until recently, when Pakistan stepped it up). Saddam was in a country full of people he oppressed, and was only caught by accident (they were getting ready to destroy the spider hole when he surrendered). The terrain around Bin Laden is amazingly unfriendly to a large force, but perfectly suited to his travelling around with 50 body guards and taliban and al qaeda soldiers camped all over the place. The terrain around Saddam was a city with decently well kept streets.

[Hulkein]

<<tempered by the fact that it's their country and we're the invaders.>>


These were civilian contractors re-building their peace of shit land. There is nothing to temper this act, they killed civilians because they are sick fucks, simple as that.

[ThisOtherKingdom]

Originally posted by Hulkein
These were civilian contractors re-building their peace of shit land. There is nothing to temper this act, they killed civilians because they are sick fucks, simple as that.

We haven't killed civilians? Give me a break. They killed those people because they were invaders, it doesn't matter to them whether it's a solider or a civilian. We do not belong there. That's the only way I believe the killing will stop. Let's just ignore eachother!

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by pennywise
Sorry Latrinsorm, I should have been a bit more specific in my post. Islam, in most respects and forms practiced today, is much more respective and peaceful in terms of other people being allowed their own religious practices. There are exceptions, of course, but on the whole, a Christian can be comfortable in a mainly Islamic country, whereas Muslims and other religions often cannot feel the same way in Christian countries.

How many of you have actually lived Islamic countries as other than a Muslim?

My Pagan self has lived in Islamic countries, and in Christian ones. I speak from experience when I say that there are accepting and tolerant people in both venues. There are also doofuses in both venues. I see little difference. I see only people.

HarmNone

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Hulkein
These were civilian contractors re-building their peace of shit land. There is nothing to temper this act, they killed civilians because they are sick fucks, simple as that.

While you might see it as "their peace of shit land" (sic), it is THEIR land and they certainly do not see it as a piece of shit land.

The actions they committed were atrocious in the extreme. However, such extremists are not the whole of the population, nor do such extremists mean the entire land, and its people, is worthless.

HarmNone

Originally posted by TheEschaton
And Edine, think of the consequences of "chucking a few hundred missiles" at them.
-tHEe-

hmm I said nothing about missiles.

[ThisOtherKingdom]

How about getting over the fact that he said missiles when you said shells, and actually read the post.

Originally posted by HarmNone
While you might see it as "their peace of shit land" (sic), it is THEIR land and they certainly do not see it as a piece of shit land.


HarmNone


HarmNone It is only their land because we allow them to have it. It could have been ours some 7 days into the war, IF we claimed it.

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by The Edine

Originally posted by HarmNone
While you might see it as "their peace of shit land" (sic), it is THEIR land and they certainly do not see it as a piece of shit land.


HarmNone


HarmNone It is only their land because we allow them to have it. It could have been ours some 7 days into the war, IF we claimed it.

Ish, Edine. Are we going to get into ALLOWING a people to have the land on which their forebears have toiled for generations? Do we really want to go there? I do not. I shall not.

HarmNone will not speak to this kind of thinking, as it relates historically or currently

[i remember halloween]

what do you expect from animals

[Siefer]

Kill. Them. All. Only solution to the problem. Here's another one. How about we send all the idiots that disagree with me in this thread to go over there and try to talk some sense into those people, while I go and pick out your caskets? Annihilate these people before any more Americans die.

[Edaarin]

Go enlist and do it yourself. Gee, I wonder what would happen.

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by i remember halloween
what do you expect from animals

Better than can be expected from some humans, if the truth be known.

HarmNone

Originally posted by ThisOtherKingdom
How about getting over the fact that he said missiles when you said shells, and actually read the post.
I read the post and as usual I disagree most of the biased dribble that comes out of his mouth.

Completely wrong point #1: no hand to hand combat- unlike the first Iraq war which had some 30 odd days of bombing Operation Iraqi freedom had two days of bombing followed by the largest and fastest land invasion of a country ever...spearheaded by what I ask you? Infantry, Armored assault vehicles and artillery.

Wow way to state the obvious point # 2: America is only out for itself- um Duh. Lets see there was this little thing call 9\11
The aid for the Iraqi people and their freedom is one of many positive side jobs that we are doing in our fight to destroy terrorism.

And the best one point # 3: the U.S. was the only country to vote against the U.N. resolution to condemn the assassination of Yassin a couple of weeks ago- I thank god for a President who has the balls to stand up and fight for what he believes in and will not be pressured by Foreign governments and Politics. I thank him for a president who will not be a hypocrite in a fight against those that wish to kill civilians and condone the actions of the Palestinians. IF anything we should be helping them pick off the murderers one by one.


So as you can see TOK, I read it understood it and disregarded it, for the reasons stated above.

Originally posted by Edaarin
Go enlist and do it yourself. Gee, I wonder what would happen.

heh the Marines would take him

[Hulkein]

Originally posted by ThisOtherKingdom
We haven't killed civilians? Give me a break. They killed those people because they were invaders, it doesn't matter to them whether it's a solider or a civilian. We do not belong there. That's the only way I believe the killing will stop. Let's just ignore eachother!

Please cite the last time American adults AND kids sliced up, tortured, burned, then hung out of country contractors. Have fun trying to find it. They were men just trying to do a job, they weren't invading anything. Have fun looking chief.

Edited to add- And even if we have killed citizens in this greusome manner in recent history. Does this mean I am not entitled to get angry over this? I didn't say slaughter them all, I didn't say they're all violent. I said it was a disgusting act, and I know I'd say the same thing if it happened here to a bunch of hard working foreignors.

[Edited on 4-1-2004 by Hulkein]

[i]Originally posted by ThisOtherKingdom[/i}

We haven't killed civilians?
no not with intent.

Give me a break. They killed those people because they were invaders, it doesn't matter to them whether it's a solider or a civilian.
Let us disregard the fact that the invaders are building schools, rebuilding homes, hospitals, thier entire country, yes that makes them invaders.

We do not belong there. That's the only way I believe the killing will stop. Let's just ignore eachother!
This last comment is sad. appeasement has never worked, and that is what you are suggesting. I know you are a pacifist but really, look at what you are suggesting, sure we ignore them and then they blow up the Sears Tower like they were planning.

[ThisOtherKingdom]

Edine, how can you invade a country without the intent to kill? How can you drop the amount of bombs/missiles/shells, whatever, we have on their country without intent to kill? They weren't trying to kill civilians? No, that wasn't their goal, but any reasonably intelligent person knows beforehand that it is unavoidable. Intent in either case means nothing, the people are still dead.


Originally posted by The Edine
Let us disregard the fact that the invaders are building schools, rebuilding homes, hospitals, thier entire country, yes that makes them invaders.

That we destroyed. Excuse them if they're a little angry and ungrateful for the "help" we're providing.


Originally posted by The Edine
This last comment is sad. appeasement has never worked, and that is what you are suggesting. I know you are a pacifist but really, look at what you are suggesting, sure we ignore them and then they blow up the Sears Tower like they were planning.

Pardon me, I did not literally mean "ignore them." I'm all for intelligence gathering, heightened security, homeland defense. Get that? HOMELAND defense, not wandering all over the world attacking any country under this "anti-terrorism" flag. What I meant was, our involvement with their country and their way of life only angers them further and encourages future attacks. And also, I've never said I was a pacifist. I'm just against unnecessary death.

[ThisOtherKingdom]

Originally posted by Hulkein
Please cite the last time American adults AND kids sliced up, tortured, burned, then hung out of country contractors. Have fun trying to find it. They were men just trying to do a job, they weren't invading anything. Have fun looking chief.

Edited to add- And even if we have killed citizens in this greusome manner in recent history. Does this mean I am not entitled to get angry over this? I didn't say slaughter them all, I didn't say they're all violent. I said it was a disgusting act, and I know I'd say the same thing if it happened here to a bunch of hard working foreignors.

You are entitled to get angry over this, it is definately a horrible and viscious act. They mutilated innocent people. What I did was take your original comment...


These were civilian contractors re-building their peace of shit land. There is nothing to temper this act, they killed civilians because they are sick fucks, simple as that.

And say that at least 10,000 Iraqi people have died so far. Any civilians among those? I'd say that's a pretty safe bet. Does that mean we're sick fucks too because civilians died at America's hand? Who cares? Innocent people are dead either way. My point was our actions are not any better or more justified than theirs, because the end result is the same.

[Hulkein]

Well we share a totally different viewpoint then if you believe that since the end result is the same, it is less justified. We DID free them from a brutal dictator, ya know? I understand it's impossible for any of us to really imagine what it must've been like to live under scrutiny without any freedoms, but for a second try and see what it was like.

Also, I don't think anywhere near 10k Iraqi's have died..

<<That we destroyed. Excuse them if they're a little angry and ungrateful for the "help" we're providing>>

We didn't blow up schools or hospitals.

[i remember halloween]

you are correct that no where near 10k iraqis have died so far, but you are erring to the wrong side of 10k

[ThisOtherKingdom]

The Iraqi Body Count Project, which tracks press accounts, puts the number of Iraqi civilians killed up to now at between 8,790 and 10,639. Last month, a report released by the influential Project on Defense Alternatives (PDA) stated that between 7,800-10,700 Iraqi combatants and between 3,200-4,300 civilians died during the combat phase of the war. The numbers were arrived at using journalistic surveys of Iraqi hospitals and death certificates, interviews with Iraqi military commanders, and other news reports, as well as U.S. records of its military operations.

Uncounted Dead (http://www.motherjones.com/news/dailymojo/2004/03/03_661.html)

Originally posted by ThisOtherKingdom
Edine, how can you invade a country without the intent to kill? How can you drop the amount of bombs/missiles/shells, whatever, we have on their country without intent to kill? They weren't trying to kill civilians? No, that wasn't their goal, but any reasonably intelligent person knows beforehand that it is unavoidable. Intent in either case means nothing, the people are still dead.
So is the way of war
Thoes that attacked the people in Felugia<sp> did so with the intent to kill civilians. Which makes it far far diffrent. It changes it from Killing to Murder. Killing is not wrong Murder is.



That we destroyed. Excuse them if they're a little angry and ungrateful for the "help" we're providing.
Please tell me you are not that foolish. We destroyed no schools, and we destroyed no hospitals. They were in disarray when we arrived there, our strikes were all tactical and we have taken great care not to even fire a shot at said buildings, even if we are being shot at from them. Please play closer attention to what is going on over there before you make statements like that, I find it rather insulting.


Originally posted by The Edine
This last comment is sad. appeasement has never worked, and that is what you are suggesting. I know you are a pacifist but really, look at what you are suggesting, sure we ignore them and then they blow up the Sears Tower like they were planning.

Pardon me, I did not literally mean "ignore them." I'm all for intelligence gathering, heightened security, homeland defense. Get that? HOMELAND defense, not wandering all over the world attacking any country under this "anti-terrorism" flag. What I meant was, our involvement with their country and their way of life only angers them further and encourages future attacks. And also, I've never said I was a pacifist. I'm just against unnecessary death. [/quote]
I suggest you make a Friend, a Friend who is in the military, and ask them what the majority of the people over there think about the US. It is a select few who are ungrateful to us for being there. They are all bad people, and that is why they must be captured or killed.
The US military is now in the process of closing off that nice town completely and will be rounding up any and all who participated in the attacks and any and all who were in the "cheering" section.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by The Edine
Killing is not wrong Murder is.That's so not going to fly.

And I find it hugely unlikely that the U.S. Armed Forces would ignore any assault, let alone on the basis of them being in a certain building.

[ThisOtherKingdom]

Originally posted by The EdinePlease tell me you are not that foolish. We destroyed no schools, and we destroyed no hospitals. They were in disarray when we arrived there, our strikes were all tactical and we have taken great care not to even fire a shot at said buildings, even if we are being shot at from them. Please play closer attention to what is going on over there before you make statements like that, I find it rather insulting.


Speaking of foolish and insulting, why aren't the civilian death tolls reading a big fat ZERO? The strikes may be tactical, but mistakes are made. Buildings are misidentified. Not just recently, but in any bombing attack. Perhaps you should be paying more attention to what's going on over there. For example...


In the midst of war last year, the pitifully damaged body of 12-year-old Ali Ismail Abbas appeared on newspaper front pages and television screens across the globe.

A stray U.S. missile had killed 16 family members, including Ali's pregnant mother, father and brother. The boy's body was severely burned. His arms were amputated.

Is this one of the "tactical" strikes you were speaking of? Your claim of no hospitals or schools being destroyed is outlandish, because you don't know. Thousands upon thousands of bombs were dropped, and there is absolutely no way all of them hit their intended targets.

Link to the article that was quoted from. (http://www.rockymounttelegram.com/featr/content/shared/news/stories/0317_iraq.html?urac=n&urvf=10807896264210.23950200 435069602)

TOk show me a school or hospital that was destroyed

and why do you think that militants are hiding in schools hospitals and mosques?
the rules of engagment differ in relation to them

[Hulkein]

Originally posted by Latrinsorm
And I find it hugely unlikely that the U.S. Armed Forces would ignore any assault, let alone on the basis of them being in a certain building.

I heard on CNN etc that they did infact do that. They wouldn't attack certain buildings if some resistance was coming from them. By attack I mean reduce to rubble, which they could easilly.

And I thank you Kingdom for letting me know those amounts, I didn't know 10k or so Iraqi's had died. Most of them were fighting I know that, but still surprising.

[Skirmisher]

People:

We are reacting exactly as the FEW actual instigators wanted us to.

I share in the outrage as should be clear to everyone. But lets not lose sight of the larger picture in our anger.

Yes there was an attack by a small armed group, but at this point it appears that ended after the four victims were killed.

The part which is more responsible for the outrage we are feeling is the desecration of the bodies of these innocents by the mob whch then assembled.

This was a large group operating under a mob mentality. Clearly a huge percentage harbor many anti american feelings in this area, but I do not think that most of them would have done as they did without the frenzy effect that mobs create and sustain.

I am sure the crowd was egged on by those who made the attack in the first place as the world knows that the US hates nothing more than seeing its soldiers or citizens killed and mutilated on tv. They WANT us to leave or overreact and then alienate any of those Iraqis who are not yet hating us.

Step back, and walk around a bit and compose yourself and I would hope you would see that the US will respond, and hopefully with a measured response.

Let us not make hasty and anger inspired decisions that will in the end only make the sacrifice of so many US soldiers and civilians worthless. We are better than that.

Now is the time where the US can truly show itself to the world as the country we all know it is.

[Ravenstorm]

I'm quite calm, myself. This has changed my opinion in no way. They're just four more casualties out of too many. What happened to them after they were dead is just shock value. Unmentioned in this thread so far are the five soldiers killed a mere 12 miles north of that city a few hours later.

Nine Americans died today not just four civilians. My opinion hasn't changed at all just because four corpses were mutilated.

Raven

[TheEschaton]

unlike the first Iraq war which had some 30 odd days of bombing Operation Iraqi freedom had two days of bombing followed by the largest and fastest land invasion of a country ever...spearheaded by what I ask you? Infantry, Armored assault vehicles and artillery.

That's akin to Palestinian children throwing rocks at Israeli tanks. Do you think that's a fair fight? It's the same thing in Iraq, against armored Bradleys.

As to the rest of your drivel: You've never heard of the bomb shelter we hit in Gulf War I? There was one entrance into it for a missile, an air vent. We sent two - the first was a smaller one to blast open the way, for the second, larger missile, which went in. It vaporized everyone inside.....all the women and children. They say, if you go to Bagdhad, you can still see the shadows of the people ducking at the last second, blasted on the walls.

What was the justification? "We thought that there may have been enemy combatants in there." Despite it being known as a bomb shelter for women and children, it was still attacked.

Edine, your ignorance is at a point where I'm not surprised by it any more. That doesn't mean it doesn't depress me. You suck. I don't mean "Edine = teh suck", or "Edine sux0r", I mean this: You suck.

-TheE-

[Hulkein]

E, bad shit happens during war. We all know this. I don't think Edine is saying nothing bad happens during a war, but in the grand scheme of all past wars, we're pretty damn accurate and lenient as far as civilian killing goes.

[TheEschaton]

But then again, no one has ever invaded the United States.


The only people who even tried to merely ATTACK the United States, the Japanese, had two atomic bombs, dropped on civilian cities.


-TheE-

[Hulkein]

They got a warning though, and no one knew the full power of it.. But good point. I am still for the war, I just wish the families of those lost some comfort.

Edited to fix a typo.

[Edited on 4-1-2004 by Hulkein]

[ThisOtherKingdom]

Personally, I would have been more for the "war" if we had specifically gone after the people responsible for the attack on 9/11. Instead, we made it a world wide war on ALL terrorism. We cannot ever end all terrorism, and it is rediculous to think we can. It's like thinking the war on drugs will end drug use in our country. I feel if we captured Osama bin Laden immediately, and defeated most of al-Queda, it would have sent just as strong a message to terrorists. The best we can do is defend ourselves and go after the guilty. To fight terrorism abroad is only in effect going to cause more terrorism because of our ignorance.

[Galleazzo]

the U.S. was the only country to vote against the U.N. resolution to condemn the assassination of Yassin a couple of weeks ago, effectively vetoing the resolution, even though assassination has been a long standing no-no in U.N. policy)
Oh, hang on, I think Bush is a knob too but let's get a grip.

Let's say Bush knows exactly where Osama bin Laden is. All it'd take is an air strike, some cruise missiles, whatever. Blow the fucker to Allah once and for all.

And he wimps out and orders the military to stand down. And people find out about it.

Bush would be Kerry's bitch in the election; Kerry would get more votes than anyone not named Washington in a presidential election.

There is NO difference here.

And speaking of knobs ... Siefer, go and fucking enlist already. I'm tired of civvies screaming Kill Them All. You go and get something between your legs and wear the uniform, you get to screech about killing. Until then .....

STFU

:rolleyes:



[Edited on 4/1/2004 by Galleazzo]

[Blazing247]

Let me preface this by stating that I do NOT profess to be an authority on the religion of Islam. My statements are merely opinions that I have formed after reading numerous translated excerpts from the teachings of the Koran.

First, I don't believe that the Islamic religion is a religion based on tolerance, moderation, or peace. This is not to say that the entire Koran is comprised of violent propaganda, but after reading several dozen excerpts, it is hardly comprised of tolerance for non-believers or believers of another faith.

You might argue that one who follows the Koran to the word would be a "Muslim extremist". Are they taking the Koran too literally? Perhaps, but that is all semantics I guess. I suggest you find a translated version and read some for yourself.

Personally, I hate organized religion as a whole. I can, however, tolerate their ideals, save Islam. It is one thing to say that those who worship differently are going to Hell, it is another to say that those who worship differently must be converted or killed. In my mind, there is no separation of the terms Muslim extremist. From what I see, the Koran IS extremism in the purest sense. With that said, I leave you with this quote:

"Kill those who join other gods with God, wherever you may find them."

[Skirmisher]

Originally posted by TheEschaton
But then again, no one has ever invaded the United States.


The only people who even tried to merely ATTACK the United States, the Japanese, had two atomic bombs, dropped on civilian cities.


-TheE-

Washington DC in 1814 during the war of 1812 might disagree with that statement.

[Ravenstorm]

I always loved the song "Battle of New Orleans". It's got such a memorable, and amusing, chorus. Just to derail the topic a bit since she brought up the War of 1812. Now back to your regularly schedule debate.

Raven

[Siefer]

War has changed, we don't need to waste our time and blood by standing around with our fingers up our ass. Bomb the shit out of what needs to be bombed, send in the armor and comb through whats left, plant your flag, take some pictures, and get the fuck out before the masses turn against you. Or drop your most destructive bombs on them and be done with it. Very simple solution here. They can't be pissed at you if you vaporize every last one of them. If our enemies had that ability they would do it to us. End of story.

[Edited on 4-1-2004 by Kranar]

[ThisOtherKingdom]

Isn't it fun to listen to the rantings of our version of extremists? Siefer, don't you realize you share the same views as the people you want to exterminate? I don't think I can say it any better than this... WAKE UP!

[Galleazzo]

You got a good point, TOK. Siefer'd make a good Hamas militia member, wouldn't he?

[longshot]

Siefer with nukes...

Everything that wasn't the mirror image of Swampdick, Alabama would be glowing. The world would be reduced to about 1,200 people.

They all would have the same genes anyway...

[TheEschaton]

My statements are merely opinions that I have formed after reading numerous translated excerpts from the teachings of the Koran.


HA! I could give you exerpts of the Bible which would make you cringe. That being said, Christianity isn't supposed to be a violent religion. To base your assessment on Islam on a few exerpts from the Koran is like basing Christianity on the story of the flood, God asking Abraham to sacrifice his son (without the ending), the ten plagues, the angel of death, God's vengence on Sodom and Gomorrah....etc, etc, etc.


-TheE-

[Galleazzo]

Originally posted by longshot
Siefer with nukes...

Everything that wasn't the mirror image of Swampdick, Alabama would be glowing. The world would be reduced to about 1,200 people.

They all would have the same genes anyway...
Yep, and beat their sisters -- urr, I mean their wives, and drag their knuckles on the ground, and all have bumper stickers saying "My Wife Yes, My Beer Maybe, My Gun Never."

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Blazing247
I suggest you find a translated version and read some for yourself. If that's what you did, you don't understand the Koran at all. The Koran, like the Christian Bible, was written a long freaking time ago. The context is incredibly important, and often changes the meaning of passages entirely. What you should do, whenever you're reading a Koran/Bible/Torah kind of thing, is do so with the assistance of a scholar of the relevant religion.

[Atlanteax]

Originally posted by TheEschaton
But then again, no one has ever invaded the United States.


The only people who even tried to merely ATTACK the United States, the Japanese, had two atomic bombs, dropped on civilian cities.


-TheE-

Bingo. The US will destroy anyone who attacks the US.

It is an effective deterrent of itself.

While USSR/USA mutually backed off on the nuclear brinkmanship regarding Cuba...

Every foreign countrys' leadership are fully aware that the US is the only State to have ever used atomic weapons against another... which goes to indicate that the US is more likely to do so again in the future, as it already has done it.

The threat of US retaliation is also growing greater as the US starts building "mini-nukes" which will still outright destroy the target, not necessarily the city (is designed to be useful in that way, obliberate a small radius).

I'm certain one of the primary reactions by foreign leaders, especially those that are not regarded as "US Allies" was "OH SHIT".

I'm also reasonably certain that if we could with certainity pin down where Osama Bin Ladin is in Pakinstan, and it would be too difficult to capture him alive, is to fire a mini-nuke (missle) at his location... to obliberate anything within the proxmity.

Originally posted by TheEschaton

My statements are merely opinions that I have formed after reading numerous translated excerpts from the teachings of the Koran.


HA! I could give you exerpts of the Bible which would make you cringe. That being said, Christianity isn't supposed to be a violent religion. To base your assessment on Islam on a few exerpts from the Koran is like basing Christianity on the story of the flood, God asking Abraham to sacrifice his son (without the ending), the ten plagues, the angel of death, God's vengence on Sodom and Gomorrah....etc, etc, etc.


-TheE-

Hmm you do forget one thing the Koran, as I remember is Mohammad's writing and his word, considered the word of god. The bible, the New Testament is not the words of god or Jesus but that of his disciples, which makes a big difference.

Though not knowing a whole lot about Ilsam i could be wrong about the koran part

[TheEschaton]

The Bible, according to both Jews (for the OT) and Christians (OT + NT) is considered the Divine Word of God.


Try again.


-TheE-

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by The Edine
Though not knowing a whole lot about Ilsam i could be wrong about the koran part The Koran is the word of the angel Gabriel, written down by Mohammed. Gabriel was speaking for God at the time.

[i remember halloween]

i've met two of the four guys that died. they were good friends of my friend. it's ashame, they were really cool guys. they'd be glad to know that punishment will be exacted with a brutal retaliation.

[HarmNone]

My condolences to your friend for his loss, halloween. It is, indeed, a terrible shame. :(

HarmNone

[Blazing247]

<HA! I could give you exerpts of the Bible which would make you cringe. That being said, Christianity isn't supposed to be a violent religion. To base your assessment on Islam on a few exerpts from the Koran is like basing Christianity on the story of the flood, God asking Abraham to sacrifice his son (without the ending), the ten plagues, the angel of death, God's vengence on Sodom and Gomorrah....etc, etc, etc. >

I wouldn't disagree about Christianity. There are certainly many passages in the Bible which could be taken as aggressive and vindictive in nature. However, when was the last time a Christian extremist flew a plane into a building? And before you try and tell me McVeigh was Christian, check your facts. Certainly there is a difference in tolerance between the Bible and the Koran, and for you to even sit here and disagree with me on that fact is ignorant.


<If that's what you did, you don't understand the Koran at all. The Koran, like the Christian Bible, was written a long freaking time ago. The context is incredibly important, and often changes the meaning of passages entirely. What you should do, whenever you're reading a Koran/Bible/Torah kind of thing, is do so with the assistance of a scholar of the relevant religion.>

I'm sorry, you've done this? I don't mean this sarcastically, just asking for clarity sake. I don't mean to imply that I read a small sampling of chapters, I read a good 30+ pages. Are you arguing for the sake of arguing, or have you read it with an Islamic scholar and actually know of what you speak? If you haven't, please don't sidestep the conversation on such matters.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Blazing247
I'm sorry, you've done this? I don't mean this sarcastically, just asking for clarity sake. I don't mean to imply that I read a small sampling of chapters, I read a good 30+ pages. Are you arguing for the sake of arguing, or have you read it with an Islamic scholar and actually know of what you speak? If you haven't, please don't sidestep the conversation on such matters.With the Bible, I have. With the Koran, I have, to a lesser degree. I didn't try to imply that the quantity of your reading was insufficient, I was pointing out that without the proper context, you're going to be backwards no matter how many times you read it. I did the same thing with the Christian Bible, it's not an uncommon error.

[TheEschaton]

Certainly there is a difference in tolerance between the Bible and the Koran, and for you to even sit here and disagree with me on that fact is ignorant.

Not really. The problem is, like Latrin said, you're taking the message out of context. If you read a line on jihad, you can look at it by itself (as extremists do) and say, "Oh, well, this line says that Muslims must be intolerant of all those who aren't Muslim."

Meanwhile, you could read into the line from John, "I am the way, the truth, and the light. No man gets to God except through Me," and take it similarly, that all Christians should be intolerant of non-Christians. Jesus similarily sends out his apostles on a jihad (which is merely the name for "holy conflict"), saying "What you bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven. What you loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven. If, after a town shows you no hospitality, shake the dust of the town off from your sandals, and move on, and thus shall it be in my Father's eyes." Mainstream Christian thought interprets this as a preaching mission, as does mainstream Islamic thought interpret jihad as a preaching mission.

It is extremists, solely, who use this as a reason to condemn, and, ultimately, to kill.

And the question of "Which Christian has flown a plane into a building lately?" is not relevant. Christianity has been the dominant religion for the past 1700 years, and there haven't been wars to eliminate it and wipe it out completely (til now). Even now, the "war against Christianity" is a reactionary event to the longstanding war against non-Christianity (Christendom), which has threatened to wipe out these people's religious beliefs.

You don't think Jerry Falwell wouldn't fly a plane into a skyscraper in downtown Riyadh if the tables were turned, and Islam was trying to stamp out Christianity in the States? I rather think he's be on the plane himself, thumping the Bible to the very end.

-TheE-

[Hulkein]

Both of those quotes from the Bible seem to have a message of peace, as in let them go, God will judge them. Espicially the second one. I don't see how either of them would cause someone to become intolerent, the message I get is to just to get off their case, heh.

[Edited on 4-2-2004 by Hulkein]

[TheEschaton]

Both of them have the message that what you (the Christian) says, goes. If you condemn a town, they're condemned by God.


-TheE-

Well I am content knowing that the 1st ID is sitting outside Feluga<sp> just waiting to go in and show them that unlike clinton we will not run and hide from those that kill americans

[Hulkein]

Originally posted by TheEschaton
Both of them have the message that what you (the Christian) says, goes. If you condemn a town, they're condemned by God.


-TheE-

Yeah... but it doesn't openly say physically harm them as passages from the Qur'an do. Now I know it's because Muhammed grew up in a pretty rough place and said only as self defense, just pointing out that there is difference in ease of taking it out of context.

[TheEschaton]

Yeah, go and do that, see if they run and hide themselves, afterwards.

I mean, really, what part of "violence begets violence" do people not understand?

I'm guessing the "begets" part. It means "gives birth to". They need to realize it, we need to realize it, and someone needs to realize it only ends, when someone ends the fucking cycle.

I bet Osama is rubbing his hands gleefully somewhere - he's achieved his mission, of making anti-American sentiment rise to a fever pitch. And he did it rather shrewdly, knowing how the U.S. would react.

-TheE-

[TheEschaton]

Well, Hulkein, you could go back to the parts of the Old Testament where God Himself waged war against all of Israel's enemies, at the bequest of the Jewish high priests.


-TheE-

[Hulkein]

Well, nothing I can say to that except that it's outdated and Jesus pretty much said that type of stuff isn't the way of God. I get your point though. Just leave the New Testament out of this :)

[TheEschaton]

Funny, last I knew Christians consider both books relevant.

Can't pick and choose, Hulkein, so the Church would have you believe.

-TheE-

[Galleazzo]

Originally posted by i remember halloween
i've met two of the four guys that died. they were good friends of my friend. it's ashame, they were really cool guys. they'd be glad to know that punishment will be exacted with a brutal retaliation. Yeah, it'd really tickle me pink to know that after the towelheads burned me to death, mutilated my body and hung me from a bridge to be broadcast worldwide on the news services, some soldiers would shoot up the village some.

<<I wouldn't disagree about Christianity. There are certainly many passages in the Bible which could be taken as aggressive and vindictive in nature. However, when was the last time a Christian extremist flew a plane into a building? And before you try and tell me McVeigh was Christian, check your facts. Certainly there is a difference in tolerance between the Bible and the Koran, and for you to even sit here and disagree with me on that fact is ignorant. >>

You have GOT to be fucking kidding me. Muslims have a long way to go before they catch up to Christians killing for God. "Kill them all, for God knows his own!" That was a bishop saying that before the crusaders spitted every man, woman and baby in the city they were capturing on their swords. You got to be some real ignorant asswipe to say things like that.

[Galleazzo]

Originally posted by Hulkein
-Yeah... but it doesn't openly say physically harm them as passages from the Qur'an do. Now I know it's because Muhammed grew up in a pretty rough place and said only as self defense, just pointing out that there is difference in ease of taking it out of context.
Say to the people of Israel: Those who blaspheme God will suffer the consequences of their guilt and be punished. Anyone who blasphemes the LORD's name must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the LORD's name will surely die. (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT)

"The land which you are entering to possess is an unclean land with the uncleanness of the peoples of the lands, with their abominations which have filled it from end to end and with their impurity. So now do not give your daughters to their sons nor take their daughters to your sons, and never seek their peace or their prosperity, instead slay them, that you may be strong and eat the good things of the land and leave it as an inheritance to your sons forever." (Ezra 9:10-12 NAS)

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

(Moses) stood at the entrance to the camp and shouted, "All of you who are on the LORD's side, come over here and join me." And all the Levites came. He told them, "This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: Strap on your swords! Go back and forth from one end of the camp to the other, killing even your brothers, friends, and neighbors." (Exodus 32:26-29 NLT)

Every city and province, without exception, that does not observe the LORD's decree shall be ruthlessly destroyed with fire and sword, so that it will be left not merely untrodden by men, but even shunned by wild beasts and birds forever. (Esther 8:24 NAB)

And many of the peoples of the lands embraced the God of Israel, for they were seized with fear of the Jews. (Esther 8:17 NAB)

For since with this city, which is called by my name, I begin to inflict evil, how can you possibly be spared? You shall not be spared! I will call down the sword upon all who inhabit the earth, says the Lord of hosts. (Jeremiah 25:29 NAB)

That night the angel of the Lord went forth and struck down one hundred and eighty five thousand men in the Assyrian camp. Early the next morning, there they were, all the corpses of the dead. (2 Kings 19:35 NAB)

They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

The men of Israel withdrew through the territory of the Benjaminites, putting to the sword the inhabitants of the city, the livestock, and all they chanced upon. Moreover they destroyed by fire all the cities they came upon. (Judges 20:48 NAB)

Want me to come up with a few dozen more? How about a few HUNDRED more?

[Blazing247]

You're right Gall. What happened during the Crusades (a good 800 years ago) is VERY relevant in CIVILIZED, MODERN SOCIETY.

/sarcasm

No my friend, YOU have to got be an asswipe to say that. A lot of fucked up shit happened back then, because society wasn't very civilized. To compare that to heinous acts perpetrated in modern history is fucking ignorant.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Blazing247
You're right Gall. What happened during the Crusades (a good 800 years ago) is VERY relevant in CIVILIZED, MODERN SOCIETY. So God has a moral statute of limitations now, eh? Good to know. I guess that whole "burn for eternity" thing was just a big exaggeration.

I would love, personally, to go back in time and ask people of each epoch if: a) they were civilized b) kids didn't have any respect anymore and c) politicians were worthless. Because I'd bet they have the same answers we do.

[Hulkein]

Gal, I was speaking of the New Testament. I already conceded that the Old Testament says some fucked up stuff, but Christians are taught that the violence in the Old testament isn't the path of Jesus.

[Edited on 4-2-2004 by Hulkein]

[Galleazzo]

Sure, fine, be like that. Why not surf over to www.godhatesfags.com and tell me that there aren't Christians with plenty of hate out there. How about Timothy McVeigh vaporizing a couple hundred people for the Christian Identity crew he ran with? How about those assholes demonstrating right in Boston waving signs saying "Thou Shalt Not Suffer A Sodomite To Live?" How about the Christians killing each other in Ireland on a daily basis all because they worship the "wrong" Jesus?

[Ravenstorm]

The guy in Colorado sending death threats along with Bible quotes to people who've had editorials published in the paper supporting gay marriage. The abortion clinic bomber. When it comes to extremists, Christianity is just as guilty as Islam. And yes, that includes today.

If the 'Christian world' was being invaded by the most powerful country on the planet and it was Muslim, I suspect we'd see a fair number of equally misguided martyrs. And they'd be just as wrong.

Raven

[Blazing247]

I knew it was a matter of time before someone hinted at McVeigh's "ties" to Christianity. He was not a practicing Christian, and in many of his last recorded words he expresses very anti-Christian sentiments. Sorry, try again.

I don't mean to make this into a Christian "vs" Islam debate. If you ask me, almost any organized religion is fucked up in its own way. I don't think Christians are innocent of having some very fucked up extremists, but I don't see the Christians trying to annihilate the Jews.

<If the 'Christian world' was being invaded by the most powerful country on the planet and it was Muslim, I suspect we'd see a fair number of equally misguided martyrs. And they'd be just as wrong.>

Wasn't this part of the basis of the Crusades? It's been a long time since History 101, but I thought the Christians were just trying to reclaim the Holy Land from the Muslims? I could be wrong.

I'm not making excuses for any religion. The only reason I posted is because someone claimed that Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance. It's not. There's no reason to pretend that it is. Christianity is almost as bad in its own way- I'm not disagreeing there. Anyone wonder why Islam is one of the fastest spreading religions amongst our life term inmates?

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Blazing247
but I thought the Christians were just trying to reclaim the Holy Land from the Muslims?Doesn't sound so bad when you leave out the part about the Pope declaring that God wanted us to kill any Muslim we could find.
I'm not making excuses for any religion. The only reason I posted is because someone claimed that Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance. It's not. Here's the thing: yes it is. You seem to be arguing that because there are violent people involved with a religion, or because there are passages in a religion's holy book that when taken out of historical context promote violence, the religion itself is violent.

[Hulkein]

Originally posted by Galleazzo
Sure, fine, be like that. Why not surf over to www.godhatesfags.com and tell me that there aren't Christians with plenty of hate out there. How about Timothy McVeigh vaporizing a couple hundred people for the Christian Identity crew he ran with? How about those assholes demonstrating right in Boston waving signs saying "Thou Shalt Not Suffer A Sodomite To Live?" How about the Christians killing each other in Ireland on a daily basis all because they worship the "wrong" Jesus?

I didn't say in this thread Christians are perfect, I said that they aren't doing what the New Testament says, that's all.

[Galleazzo]

No, Hulk, no one said Christians are perfect. You've been saying that the Koran's about violence and the Bible isn't, is all, and that Islam's a violent religion and Christianity isn't. Sorry if the truth hurts.

And yeah, Blazing, I know the fundys have fought like bastards to tell everyone no, no, McVeigh wasn't Identity, no sirree. Why look, no good Christian would quote "Invictus" so he's not a Christian, that proves it!

Why, just think. You're using the same sort of arguments that the Muslim clerics are over in Iraq to say that what happened to those poor 4 bastards is against Islam. Do you believe them? I doubt it.

So why should we believe you?

[Blazing247]

<Here's the thing: yes it is. You seem to be arguing that because there are violent people involved with a religion, or because there are passages in a religion's holy book that when taken out of historical context promote violence, the religion itself is violent.>

Not at all. I'm not saying the religion is violent because of the extremists associated with it. I'm saying it's violent because it's extremely intolerant to anything Non Islamic. Show me one predominantly Islamic country that ISN'T fucked up? And I don't mean fucked up in an ethnocentric application, I mean fucked up using anyones standards. Exactly.

[Galleazzo]

A lot of them. There are like 50 Islamic countries out there.

[Hulkein]

<<No, Hulk, no one said Christians are perfect. You've been saying that the Koran's about violence and the Bible isn't, is all, and that Islam's a violent religion and Christianity isn't. Sorry if the truth hurts. >>

I said that the Qur'an has straight up violent parts which are easy to misconstrue. This is because of the situation Muhammed was in.

The New Testament, however, is very hard to twist into YOU MUST PHYSICALLY HARM THEM.

That's what I said.

[Galleazzo]

Christians don't get to say that the Old Testament doesn't count. Either it's the Word of God or it isn't.

[Hulkein]

Jesus specifically said that eye for an eye and other notions such as that are outdated, and the true way to salvation is turn the other cheek. The Old Testament has it's uses, but Jesus pretty much nullified all the violent commands in it.

[imported_Kranar]

<< Show me one predominantly Islamic country that ISN'T fucked up? >>

Turkey, Malaysia, Morocco, Tunisia, The United Arab Emirates, Qutar (highest GDP per capita in the world).

There are many others, but those are all that I can remember off the top of my head.

You really thought every muslim nation was like Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, or Iraq/Iran?

That's pretty sad, no offense.

[HarmNone]

Heh. Dubai and Bahrain do not do too badly, either. ;)

HarmNone

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Kranar
TunisiaCharlie Parker alert.

The un-fucked-up-ness of many Muslim countries notwithstanding (is it not or non? I think not sounds better) for a moment, even if every Muslim country that ever existed was composed of ravening lunatics who slaughtered babies and small animals, it wouldn't mean that the religion they followed was not a peaceful one. Europe during the Dark Ages, for instance, was not a nice place to live (because it was Dark) but that doesn't mean that Christianity is a repressive shadowy cloud of a religion.

[TheEschaton]

Hulkein, you have no sense of biblical scholarship.


Christians HAVE to accept the Old Testament. You know why? Because Jesus is the fulfillment of the prophecies. His Divine authority is based on it. His whole ministry is based on it. You cannot accept Isaiah saying "Unto Israel, in the town of Bethelhem, a savior shall be born," and not accept the parts Galleazo outlined.

If you DON'T accept the OT, as a whole, then Jesus was nothing but a cult leader.

Thus, you cannot accept only the prophetic parts of the Old Testament, and the New Testament.

Furthermore, you should know (and I think you do, and are merely being duplicitous) that almost every Biblical scholar: A) accepts the Old Testament not only as relevant, but divinely inspired and as true as the New Testament, if not literally, then in figurative language (Roman Catholicism, for example, has moved away from Creationism), and B) that even Jesus showed a violent side.


-TheE-