Make a Treaty with Al Qaeda?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Brad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Exporter said:
Norwitch,

To sign treaties with Al Qaeda would be illegal. The U.S.A. can only sign treaties with the Gov’t. of a duly recognised nation.
**Al Qaeda is a thug-gang. They are outlaws. No Gov’t. would sign a treaty with them. Come see New York’s twin towers and the 3000 dead who were innocent & maybe you will understand. **
**In my opinion, Norwitch, you are living in a dream land. One doesn’t negotiate with Religious Zelots. They have been hating us for several hundred years.:yup: **
Click to expand...

Exporter, you make an excellent point. We have all gone over that many times on the forums, but Norwitch is new and he came to teach us about what we are doing in the world. Our enthusiasm for our nation is upsetting.
We don’t know where you are from yet Norwitch? You got upset when I assumed you are from England. You lived in the Middle East, but now in England where you study to become a deacon.
 
40.png
Fitz:
Are you Muslim, then?
Click to expand...
No, but I have tried to understand where my so called enemies are coming from, that way I don’t fall into the trap of blind rhetoric. Try listening to some of your own (older) military leaders, “to defeat your enemy you must understand him”, (Patton I think) to completely defeat him make him your friend. (anon)

Seems to me the same lesson Jesus taught, can’t remember him teaching violence, retribution and all out war. Or is that only for Sundays?
 
40.png
gilliam:
I don’t know. I guess we have burned ourselves out compaining about the US mainstream press inaccuracies during the election.

Still, all in all, the US press claims not to be a mouth piece for one particular political party. The EU press actually brags about being mouth pieces. Completely different mind set.
Click to expand...
Well, I see what you are saying, but it doesn’t really work like that. The Murdoch press is the Murdoch press. Then you have the Tory supporting papers (like the Torygraph (sorry, I meant Telegraph) and the Spectator) and your labour supporting papers, like The Gaurdian. Then you have The Independant which perports to be independant, and in my estimation tends to offer all sides to any argument (and this is in fact, my paper of choice).
The BBC stands above this because of the way it is funded, it has a public mandate and no agenda to persue.
People in Britain tend to get their news today from the BBC.
 
40.png
Brad:
It is not manipulating the faith. It is living it. It is called just war theory in the tradition of Aquinas and Augustine.

A human tragedy and just war are not mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...
I do not agree that this war is in any way just. Any argument I have heard to support that claim simply denies the facts and is secondary to the initial reasons we invaded.

Put simply, it is justification after the event. You can convince yourself that this conflict has justification but I fail to see the logic in your argument.

The Church and its leaders are against war. Going to war is not living the faith Brad.
 
40.png
Norwich:
No, but I have tried to understand where my so called enemies are coming from, that way I don’t fall into the trap of blind rhetoric. Try listening to some of your own (older) military leaders, “to defeat your enemy you must understand him”, (Patton I think) to completely defeat him make him your friend. (anon)

Seems to me the same lesson Jesus taught, can’t remember him teaching violence, retribution and all out war. Or is that only for Sundays?
Click to expand...
Absolutely agree 100% I never fail to be shocked by members of this forum’s eagerness for conflict- it seems so contrary to everything I have grown up believing was the Catholic faith.

Peace may not be the easy answer, but as Catholics should it not be the first avenue we support?
 
40.png
Norwich:
No, but I have tried to understand where my so called enemies are coming from, that way I don’t fall into the trap of blind rhetoric. Try listening to some of your own (older) military leaders, “to defeat your enemy you must understand him”, (Patton I think) to completely defeat him make him your friend. (anon)

Seems to me the same lesson Jesus taught, can’t remember him teaching violence, retribution and all out war. Or is that only for Sundays?
Click to expand...
Your misquoting Patton. Patton said you needed to understand your enemy. But you don’t make him your friend, you overcome him.
 
I suppose you right, it must have been Jesus who turned his enemies into friends. (Paul!!!) But then, who listens to Jesus nowadays.
 
40.png
Norwich:
I suppose you right, it must have been Jesus who turned his enemies into friends. (Paul!!!) But then, who listens to Jesus nowadays.
Click to expand...
Jesus would protect the innocent.
 
40.png
Fitz:
Jesus would protect the innocent.
Click to expand...
Quite right, but it appears he treated his enemies the same.

LK 22:49 When Jesus’ followers saw what was going to happen, they said, “Lord, should we strike with our swords?” 50 And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear.

LK 22:51 But Jesus answered, “No more of this!” And he touched the man’s ear and healed him.
 
Hello All,

I’ve read many of the posts on this thread and everyone seems to have a good point. I have gone back and forth on this many times. Should we be at war or shouldn’t we? Is peace possible?

Of course we always need to seek out peace, I just don’t believe it is possible with Al-Qaeda. The leaders and members of this group do not think like us. They want one thing and that is for us to die. It’s really that simple and there is no possibility of peace with someone like that!

We have a right and a duty to defend ourselves and there should never, ever be a negotiation with terrorists. They chose their course and we have chosen ours.

God bless,
Trevor
 
40.png
trevor:
Of course we always need to seek out peace, I just don’t believe it is possible with Al-Qaeda. The leaders and members of this group do not think like us. They want one thing and that is for us to die.
Click to expand...
Because…
40.png
trevor:
It’s really that simple and there is no possibility of peace with someone like that!
Click to expand...
See if you think about it, that doesn’t make any sense. Al Qaeda are killing Americans because…They want to kill Americans? A little simplistic don’t you think?

The truth is, whether you like it or not, they are killing Americans because they feel that attacking the USA will achieve something. That means they are angry about something. No we have some grounds for negotiation, even if that means explaining how misguided they are.
 
Here is my treaty with al Qaeda and their allies:
  1. Attack us, we go after you and those who send you, funded you, and paid your families.
  2. Pay someone to attack us and we go after you (Saddam signed many checks).
  3. Fund terrorists and we go after you (Hey Saddam, wasn’t that you on TV with your sons on 9/11/2002 offering higher payouts for families of suicide attackers against the USA? Why yes, it was. How quickly some people forget).
So really, its up to the terrorists if they want to live or be hunted.
 
The whole point of the NR article is that the Geneva conventions don’t apply because we don’t have a treaty with the terrorists, so do we want to make a treaty? Of course not. It’s not really possible, they don’t want to make a treaty with us, and even if they did, the Islamic tradition if not scripture allows phony treaty-making to buy time and it wouldn’t mean a thing to them.

But it’s kind of a phony argument in a way. There this nothing stopping us from voluntarily extending the Geneva conventions to the prisoners, or as much as we can and still get information from them. It would have been better for us to have taken that tack than the totally legalistic one recommended by Gonzalez and NR.
 
*Ibn-Mahal sa’id Mohammed: You have been monitoring this thread, Abu?

Abu Fatah Karzim al-Ayyub: Indeed I have. Most interesting.

Ibn-Mahal sa’id Mohammed: You see how the infidels argue and squabble among themselves? How they canot agree on even the most basic points?

Abu Fatah Karzim al-Ayyub: Yes.

Ibn-Mahal sa’id Mohammed: It is very similar to their armies which came to Palestine in the Year of the Hijra 567, do you see? They could not agree with each other, and thus were not unified—and no threat to us. We easily defeated them then. Soon it will be no different.

Abu Fatah Karzim al-Ayyub: The one common factor they have is that they are against us…

Ibn-Mahal sa’id Mohammed: Yes, but they are too busy fighting with themselves to pay attention to the threat we represent. In Europe even now, more of us are born and more of them die every day—soon it will fall into our laps like a piece of rotten fruit. And these…

Abu Fatah Karzim al-Ayyub: Yes?

Ibn-Mahal sa’id Mohammed: These will be unable to stop us. They have great power, but underneath all is corrupt. The vast majortiy of their peoples live for their stomach or their genitals; the rest of them cannot agree on anything; they will not be able to unify long enough to prevent our ultimate victory.

Abu Fatah Karzim al-Ayyub: Praise be to Allah for that!

Ibn-Mahal sa’id Mohammed: Indeed, Abu! Wait and work for our next victory, and our inevitable triumph over these disorganized heretics. Allah akbar!

Abu Fatah Karzim al-Ayyub: Allah akbar!*
 
*“Multiculturalism is a Trojan horse.”*Do you mean what I hope and pray you don’t mean?
 
40.png
Norwich:
Somebody hasn’t read the Koran. It actually describes Christians and Jews as Brother religions who should be respected as believers in Allah (God). Unfortunately there are those in Islam, just like those in Christianity who will read into the text not what it says but what they want it to say.
Click to expand...
Catholic Answers has a tract titled, Endless Jihad. There are quotes from the book of Surah, chapter 9. Have a look. Is it possible the quotes are out of context? Maybe, but I trust the CA staff apologists not to take quotes out of context because they deal with out-of-context issues all the time when dealing with protestant bible scholars.

To the issue at hand, there are many differences of opinion regarding whether or not the Just War Doctrine applies in this case. Whatever the case may be, I don’t feel we should even bring in our faith on this. The country made a decision to go to war; this is political from our standpoint in the US, not religious. It may be both religious and political from the standpoint of our enemy.

Yours in Christ,

Todd
 
40.png
ToddC:
there are many differences of opinion regarding whether or not the Just War Doctrine applies in this case.
Click to expand...
No. Pope John Paul has stated very very clearly the war in Iraq is NOT a just war. He has stressed that a pre-emptive was is not and cannot be considered a just war. GB himself justified the Iraq was as a pre-emptive war because of WMD’s therefore it cannot be a just war. QED.

Or are you contending the Pope is wrong?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top