Troop pull-out unjust?

[vz71]

What, exactly, do you propose that US troops do?

Don’t know.
But then, I am not the military genius.

However, is the proposal to pull out when we think the situation looks bad? Pull out when you don’t know what else to do?

Of course, these are really beside the point. Read the thread title…is a pullout of the forces in Iraq just or unjust?

 

[vz71]

Why not give me Scripture or quote a clause in our Constitution to support your view? Why is that so hard?

At what point did the constitution become equal to God’s law?
Why this blind insistance that what is just must also be covered under the constitution?

 

[Verisimilitude]

At what point did the constitution become equal to God’s law?

At what point does Gods law support your position? What Commandment? What parable? What Church Doctrine?

Why this blind insistance that what is just must also be covered under the constitution?

Not all Americans recognize Gods law but all Americans are subject to the Constitution.

I am looking for justification to your position. I can’t find it in either Gods law or our civil law. It’s not unreasonable to ask is it?

 

[vz71]

At what point does Gods law support your position? What Commandment? What parable? What Church Doctrine?

If you can’t answer the question, just let us know.
Answering a question with a question is just rude.

Not all Americans recognize Gods law but all Americans are subject to the Constitution.

All Americans are subject to God’s law as well.
You our on a Catholic forum, in a Catholic discussion, on a social justice page concerning what is just and unjust.
I am sorry if you are having a hard time accepting God’s law as a given in the discussion.
Man’s law is not of issue here, God’s laws are.

I am looking for justification to your position. I can’t find it in either Gods law or our civil law. It’s not unreasonable to ask is it?

Answered many times over.
If you do not like the answer, that is your difficulty, not mine.

 

[SoCalRC]

Don’t know.
But then, I am not the military genius.
…
Of course, these are really beside the point. Read the thread title…is a pullout of the forces in Iraq just or unjust?

If there is not an acheivable strategic goal with a good probability of success, then an occaption is unjust, since it is a form of warfare.

So what, if anything, the troops can do is central to the question.

The Church teaches that warfare is alway accompanied by attrocities against the human person. As long as you have troops stationed in a civil war (multiple civil conflicts actually) and a domestic insurgency you will have civilian casualties. US soldiers are going to kill innocent people, including (as we have already seen) pregnant women and children.

The question then becomes, are we doing more harm than good? There is no doubt that some good is being done. And there is no doubt that some harm is being done. So how do we assess? I would say that the Iraqi people are in a better position to assess that just as the Church is a better authority on executing moral obligations. Since we are at odds with both, I think that any honest American should take a real pause.

However, is the proposal to pull out when we think the situation looks bad? Pull out when you don’t know what else to do?

What is the alternative? Wage war until we bankrupt the nation?

I’ve volunteered for a war I did not support. Spent two tours in combat, 23 months with a bat. that saw the highest KIA ratio in USMC history (about 94%). So please do not assume that I have no idea about a sense of duty to country, or no understanding of the meaning of honor or courage.

Although I was wounded multiple times, I never carried a gun or raised my hand in anger against another human being. I served as a combat medic. So please do not assume that I have no concept of duty to faith.

I’d say, ultimately, the answer is simple. Americans most likely to support continued occupation are also statistically least likely to serve themselves or have an immediate family member who is serving. They are also most likely to politically support placing the burden for the cost of the war on our descendants, and most likely to politically support the disgracefully underfunding of proper support and care for our troops when they come home.

If it is not worth putting one’s own skin on the line, then one has already ‘voted’ on the moral importance, regardless of whatever rhetoric is spewed. Likewise, if one’s committment won’t even extend to one’s own pocketbook, how can someone ask other Children of God to Sacrifice their lives?

War leaves horrible scars on far more than the wounded. Asking people to make such a sacrifice for lack of a meaningful plan or practical cause of action is, to me, the antithesis of ‘just’. It is an attrocity.

 

[Verisimilitude]

Answered many times over.
If you do not like the answer, that is your difficulty, not mine.

My difficulty is the substance of your answers. there is none.

For the simple reason that our presence is stopping escalated violence, the answer is a very firm “not right now.”

Were there to be a pullout, there would be a number of problems created. Not the least of which would be great loss of life as the insurgency in Iraq comes to greater power and takes revenge upon those that worked with the coalition.

If for no other reason then to stave off a genocide, we should be there.

I would think not taking a course of action that you know will lead to unjustified loss of life to fall well within the bounds of Catholicism. Has the church changed it’s stance on culpability?

Considering the violence before we were there (remember the various atrocities commited by their dictator), and the amount of violence that is occuring now, that is a tough sell.

So if you are in a position to prevent and evil from happening, but do not do so, you do not have culpability in the evil?

I have asked for a reference from Doctrine, Scripture or other. If you cannot support your position from them you should not continually say you are doing it in the name of the faith.

 

[BamaRider]

The Church, no. US forces, yes.

Ok, I’m with ya, don’t agree with it but it seems consistent with your other views.

You didn’t use the word American and I never said it was not good, I said they do not hold the same ideal of freedom as we do by nature of their religion and politics. Do Egyptians vote in elections? I say we have no right to export our ideology by force of arms, good or ill.

I don’t agree a man’s religion or the color of his skin makes him unable to accept true freedom, is there something unique about MidEast folks that renders them unable to grasp freedom?

I don’t think the Egyptians vote in elections as we know it. I think they have the kind where only 1 guy is on the ballot LOL Like Murbarak! Who has been in charge since 1980 or so? He ain’t giving up the seat till they carry him out.

Why not give me Scripture or quote a clause in our Constitution to support your view? Why is that so hard?

You honestly need a scripture quote to grasp spreading the Faith is easier in a free society as opposed to dictator’s? But to answer your question, no, I don’t have a scripture quote on it. Do you not agree with that premise?

Why not ask the Arabians, Egyptians, or Pakistanis if they want them.

I agree with this. But when you see folks rising up in defiance of an oppressive govt, then weigh your options, arms? embargos? Isolation? advisors? Going into Iraq should have been handled better, but once were there, we saw the oppurtunity presented to take them on and beat them in their sandbox, noway you walk away from that chance. Result NO terrorist attacks carried out in the US in 7 years, one of the longest streaks ever.

Leaving the Iraq before the job was finished was not in our interests. For sure some thought we should lose the war, thank goodness no one listened to them.

Isn’t by example a better way to bring freedom to people? They will see how free we are ourselves and want to emulate us if they like our freedoms. It wasn’t so long ago that was largely true. Iraq ended that notion for many. This thread is specific to the force of arms in Iraq and if the troops should be withdrawn. Sending billions to Pakistan is not serving our purpose in Iraq but it perpetuates the evil we are fighting in Iraq. Actions have consequences.

I agree with that, example can be a good thing. I suggest checking in with the folks in Iraq in 25 years and ask those living in freedom if it was worth it. Right now we are too close to the situation.

We are finishing up in Iraq, perhaps we surge in Afghanistan next I dunno. One thing is for sure, Pakistan can expect something if they keep allowing AL Q to go back and forth, but we’ll see.

Leaving Iraq is in no way a retreat. Major combat missions were ended over 3 years ago and every stated reason for going in (agree or not) have been achieved. We won.

Probably right on this. I’m for drawing down soon as the situation on the ground allows us, and not a day longer. In fact, I hear tours have been reduced.

 

[TDiGaetano]

When I first heard we were going into Iraq to through out their “evil” dictator I supported it because I thought the US sought to move in, move out, and move on.

At the time of 9/11 Sadam was one Target, but there are many more dictators in the world that are just as bad or worse. I really thought the US was war on terror was to remove these dictators and let the countries establish their own system of freedom, I was really disappointed when we just stayed in Iraq and didn’t move on to some of the other Countries ruled by bad people.

But now I feel we owe the Iraqi people to make sure they can have a safer nation.

 

[Verisimilitude]

Ok, I’m with ya, don’t agree with it but it seems consistent with your other views.

I simply do not believe in the American empire. We do not need to have bases in 130+ differnt countries and it is not the intetnt of civil law.

I don’t agree a man’s religion or the color of his skin makes him unable to accept true freedom, is there something unique about MidEast folks that renders them unable to grasp freedom?

The religion of Islam makes them unable to accept it. If you like I can quote their scripture (which translates to their civil law) that specifies oppression of women, oppression of non-Muslims, and a perpetual call for war with the non-Islamic world.

I don’t think the Egyptians vote in elections as we know it. I think they have the kind where only 1 guy is on the ballot LOL Like Murbarak! Who has been in charge since 1980 or so? He ain’t giving up the seat till they carry him out.

Can you name one country deemed Islamic that does?

You honestly need a scripture quote to grasp spreading the Faith is easier in a free society as opposed to dictator’s? But to answer your question, no, I don’t have a scripture quote on it. Do you not agree with that premise?

It’s not about being easy it is about being just, which is the topic of this thread. Jesus did not send out troops ahead of the Apostles.

I agree with this. But when you see folks rising up in defiance of an oppressive govt, then weigh your options, arms? embargos? Isolation? advisors? Going into Iraq should have been handled better, but once were there, we saw the oppurtunity presented to take them on and beat them in their sandbox, noway you walk away from that chance. Result NO terrorist attacks carried out in the US in 7 years, one of the longest streaks ever.

They tried to rise up in the 90’s but we betrayed them. If we didn’t pay Musharif (sp) of Pakistan billions to suppress Pakistanis they would rise up and overthrow him. Same most likely in Egypt with Mubarack. I say let them.

Leaving the Iraq before the job was finished was not in our interests. For sure some thought we should lose the war, thank goodness no one listened to them.

The job should never have been started.

I agree with that, example can be a good thing. I suggest checking in with the folks in Iraq in 25 years and ask those living in freedom if it was worth it. Right now we are too close to the situation.

What do you expect to see?

We are finishing up in Iraq, perhaps we surge in Afghanistan next I dunno. One thing is for sure, Pakistan can expect something if they keep allowing AL Q to go back and forth, but we’ll see.

Bush squandered our opportunity for letgitimate justice. The next President- whichever it is- will do the same.

Probably right on this. I’m for drawing down soon as the situation on the ground allows us, and not a day longer. In fact, I hear tours have been reduced.

Either way it seems you support troops there like we have in Korea, Japan, Europe…for the next few decades. Besides not having the moral right to do so we can;t afford it and will realize that soon and be forced to withdraw no matter the alleged intention.

 

[SoCalRC]

I agree with that, example can be a good thing. I suggest checking in with the folks in Iraq in 25 years and ask those living in freedom if it was worth it. Right now we are too close to the situation.

Hmm, a couple of decades. So, was it worth helping Osama Bin Laden when it was convenient for us? Or how about Saddam Hussein? Did that $70B we watched the Saudi’s feed to Wahabists really pay off for us on 9/11?

Funny thing, if you go back to all those decisions, we heard the same rhetoric, Freedom on the March…

But, considering that we have already been in Iraq for years, and have yet to secure a portion of Bagdahd or the road to the airport, and have yet to get water and electricity supplies back to pre invasion levels, don’t you think you might want to give yourself a little more elbow room?

We are finishing up in Iraq, perhaps we surge in Afghanistan next I dunno. One thing is for sure, Pakistan can expect something if they keep allowing AL Q to go back and forth, but we’ll see.

I guess you haven’t been paying attention. The sabre rattling set has declared that OBL would be chased to the “gates of hell”. But the caves of Pakistan, not so much. Even though we just had a bit of a bombshell revelation on their direct role in some nasty business don’t expect any courage in that quarter any time soon. If you expect actually expect response, then you really need to study the complexity of the relationship of mutual dependance. Once again, we’ve gotten in bed with nasty people to put “freedom on the march”. And, a couple of decades from now we’ll be almost certainly be regretting that aspect of the Iraq debacle poorly.

Probably right on this. I’m for drawing down soon as the situation on the ground allows us, and not a day longer. In fact, I hear tours have been reduced.

Out of necessity, not strategic response to the situation on the ground. That was quietly acknolwedged by Gates about 6 weeks ago, for those paying attention.

 

[BamaRider]

But, considering that we have already been in Iraq for years, and have yet to secure a portion of Bagdahd or the road to the airport, and have yet to get water and electricity supplies back to pre invasion levels, don’t you think you might want to give yourself a little more elbow room?

There were more Americans killed in LA last month then all of Iraq, the total for July was 13 service men., wanna bet that was much less then the Southern California city of Los Angeles? I suggest to you I’m as about as safe walking the streets of Bagdahd as I am in the city of LA. Heck y’all can’t even secure the streets in Southern California, so you wanna pull out?

Arguing with you is pretty much pointless, nothing but pessimssim, gloom and doom. I don’t know ya personally only from what I read here, but I dunno how ya do it, being on the internet so much moaning and groaning about how bad things are. I know you put a lot of thought in these loooong posts,and I appreciate the effort, but sheeesh, but a guy with your outlook on your country, must turn himself in knots when he hears we’re gonna be in Iraq for many years in some form or fashion.

As for me, I earnestly believe things are gonna be ok there, and the U.S. will succeed in securing the country, turning the oil back on, and giving freedom to land that never had it. Not a bad day’s work.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a post by you that had any optimism, hope, or a good thing to say about your country. We’re murdering people, running torture camps, denying sick people healthcare (none of which is true) a guy can read 10 or 15 your posts and come out looking for some prozac LOL.

I can see a thread title of which SoCal has posted on and instantly say, “shoot I wonder what it is this time,” I know it’s gonna be something negative about America and life in general, about how we’re all doomed to failure and the bubble is gonna burst anyday. Heck, I’ve been hearing that from libs for 40 years! Guess what? I’m still here, and doing pretty good! But Algore says we only have about 8 years left till we blow up.

I can web surf alot because I’m reitred and having nothing else to do if I so choose, but even I can only take so much before I go :hypno:

 

[bobzills]

I simply do not believe in the American empire. We do not need to have bases in 130+ differnt countries and it is not the intetnt of civil law…

I guess it is a way of protecting American multinational countries and ensuring that American products are bought.

 

[Cuddy_Duck]

There were more Americans killed in LA last month then all of Iraq, the total for July was 13 service men., wanna bet that was much less then the Southern California city of Los Angeles? I suggest to you I’m as about as safe walking the streets of Bagdahd as I am in the city of LA. Heck y’all can’t even secure the streets in Southern California, so you wanna pull out?

Arguing with you is pretty much pointless, nothing but pessimssim, gloom and doom. I don’t know ya personally only from what I read here, but I dunno how ya do it, being on the internet so much moaning and groaning about how bad things are. I know you put a lot of thought in these loooong posts,and I appreciate the effort, but sheeesh, but a guy with your outlook on your country, must turn himself in knots when he hears we’re gonna be in Iraq for many years in some form or fashion.

As for me, I earnestly believe things are gonna be ok there, and the U.S. will succeed in securing the country, turning the oil back on, and giving freedom to land that never had it. Not a bad day’s work.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a post by you that had any optimism, hope, or a good thing to say about your country. We’re murdering people, running torture camps, denying sick people healthcare (none of which is true) a guy can read 10 or 15 your posts and come out looking for some prozac LOL.

I can see a thread title of which SoCal has posted on and instantly say, “shoot I wonder what it is this time,” I know it’s gonna be something negative about America and life in general, about how we’re all doomed to failure and the bubble is gonna burst anyday. Heck, I’ve been hearing that from libs for 40 years! Guess what? I’m still here, and doing pretty good! But Algore says we only have about 8 years left till we blow up.

I can web surf alot because I’m reitred and having nothing else to do if I so choose, but even I can only take so much before I go :hypno:

According to the Rules we are suppoded to be more charitable and address the issue and not the poster. Is that not so?:tsktsk:

 

[bobzills]

We’re murdering people, running torture camps, denying sick people healthcare (none of which is true) a guy can read 10 or 15 your posts and come out looking for some prozac LOL. :

Actually, I beleive that it is true that hundreds of people have died in Iraq since the beginning of the US invasion and naked aggression against that country. And there have been reliable reports and photos showing that American soldiers have been torturing people.

 

[vz71]

My difficulty is the substance of your answers. there is none.

Every single response you listed indicated a minimizing of suffering and loss of life…of preventing a greater evil.

I guess that is not substantive enough…

I have asked for a reference from Doctrine, Scripture or other. If you cannot support your position from them you should not continually say you are doing it in the name of the faith.

‘In the name of faith’…
Where did you pick this up from? Certainly not my words.
And since you were good enough to quote everything I have said, It appears incredibly dishonest to attempt to place those words in my mouth. After all, you have read my responses, haven’t you?

I would suggest you argue with what is written, not what you wish was written.

 

[BamaRider]

Actually, I beleive that it is true that hundreds of people have died in Iraq since the beginning of the US invasion and naked aggression against that country. And there have been reliable reports and photos showing that American soldiers have been torturing people.

See what I mean.

 

[BamaRider]

According to the Rules we are suppoded to be more charitable and address the issue and not the poster. Is that not so?:tsktsk:

Nothing in the the above posts says anything about the individual, just the posts he puts out for all to see, so I’m gonna assume he doesn’t mind.

Now if someone wants to say my posts are full of optimism and hope, and that we live in a good place, mostly surrounded by good people, trying to do their best, then ok. It is what it is. I look forward to getting up expecting a good day because I’m American, as opposed to libs who are constantly angry about something.

 

[Verisimilitude]

Every single response you listed indicated a minimizing of suffering and loss of life…of preventing a greater evil.

I guess that is not substantive enough…

Let’s see if I can get you to understand a simple concept.

‘In the name of faith’…
Where did you pick this up from? Certainly not my words.

You say its Gods law but not civil law as your justification. If the above bolded statement is not intended to reflect your expression of your faith in support of Gods law with respect to the topic, what does it represent?

I base my decisions of just or unjust upon the teachings of God’s church, not the constitution.

And since you were good enough to quote everything I have said, It appears incredibly dishonest to attempt to place those words in my mouth.

Is my conclusion dishonest or just wrong? Are you not saying your view of Gods law is to minimize suffering, and loss of life…preventing a greater evil? Are you calling this Gods law?

At what point did the constitution become equal to God’s law?

After all, you have read my responses, haven’t you?

Your are comprehending my questions aren’t you?

I would suggest you argue with what is written, not what you wish was written.

So let us argue with what you have written based upon my conclusion and your comprehension as I understand it.

Minimize suffering: Do you only see the schools we build in Iraq and not the kicked in doors and destroyed homes of innocent families while US forces are looking for bad guys? Do you only see the pictures of comforted Iraqi children in the arms of American soldiers not the grave of the parent of the child we killed by accident looking for bad guys? Saddam built schools as well as kicked in doors. Why are our actions nobel and his are not? Gods law? Which one?

Minimize loss of life: How do you know the number of innocent people killed by US forces (accident or on purpose) in the last 5 years is less than those that Saddam was killing if he was still in power for the last 5 years? If Saddam killed 50 a month and we kill only 30 a month…is that your ‘minimize’? Gods law? Which one?

preventing a greater evil: I think I can reasonably conclude from your past statements you assume the greater evil is a potential mass killing of…are those you are protecting innocent…or guilty…if we leave and keeping US forces present is the prevention. Is it ok for us to kill 500 bad guys to save 5000 innocents? Gods law? Which one?

This is why I wanted a reference from Scripture. You reference Gods law as justification but you don’t say which one. You seem to suggest it is common sense and obvious but I see the contradiction and maybe hypocrisy to what I know of Gods law. If Gods law is not Scripture or other Chirch Doctrine what is it?

 

[Verisimilitude]

Now if someone wants to say my posts are full of optimism and hope, and that we live in a good place, mostly surrounded by good people, trying to do their best, then ok. It is what it is. I look forward to getting up expecting a good day because I’m American, as opposed to libs who are constantly angry about something.

I am not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination and I can empathize with your psotion as I used to share it.

As for me, I earnestly believe things are gonna be ok there, and the U.S. will succeed in securing the country, turning the oil back on, and giving freedom to land that never had it. Not a bad day’s work.

This is niave I think but good hearted.

Going into Iraq should have been handled better, but once were there, we saw the oppurtunity presented to take them on and beat them in their sandbox, noway you walk away from that chance. Result NO terrorist attacks carried out in the US in 7 years, one of the longest streaks ever.

Before the Iraq war started I felt almost similarly as I debated if I supported the war or not. I thought we had some justification in that Saddam was a bad guy for sure and was a thorn in our side with respect to any peace in the ME. I believedd what teh US administration was telling us. The Rumsfeld doctrine of smaller forces would have been a boon if the ‘cakewalk’ and liberation of Iraq proved true and swift as was maybe reasonably concluded at the time. It was not unreasonable to conclude a stable Iraq would help create a stable Iran and having forces next door in a stable Iraq would be a good military advantage with respect to the larger WOT.

I long considerd what is essentially the 1% doctrine of the administration in that if America had a chance to be attacked- even a small (1%) chance, we had the moral right to attack a potential enemy first. It almost seemed reasonable and just, but after mcuh contemplation and prayer I eventually concluded what we have done is in opposition to not only the principles of our faith but also our law and would have in the long run created a more dangerous world. Any action after that error could not be considered on its own as ‘good’ because it had to be in conjunction with the reasons we went to begin with.

The lack of more attacks in America since 9/11 have less to do with our taking the fight to the enemey as the enemy has real logistical problems to attacking us in our homeland. They can attack our interests overseas but America is harder to get to with a WMD.

I was studying Islam before the 9/11 attacks for reasons not relevant to this topic but the reason I mention it is by the time the attacks occured my view of Islam had already changed and I had begun a re-evaluation of US policy with respect to Islamic countries since US policy pre-9/11 was focused on Iraq and Israel/palestine.

I then began a study of US law and what the Founders intended to keep America safe with respect to how we shoudl deal and treat with other countries. My final conclusion was not reached untill after the Iraq war started and after the Presidential election of 2004. It is clear the Founders did not intend an American empire or a attitude that America should be the worlds policeman, but rather we should be a humble nation that protected the freedoms and liberty of Americans by not interfering in the affairs of other nations hat would drag us into conflicts. It was a just and moral code to have.

It think its pretty clear that Scripture does not support offensive violence for any reason that we can call just. You yourself said you could not provide Scripture as justification. If it is not supported by Scripture and not supported by our civil law I fail to see what you base it on other than a perception or feeling. Actions must be balanced with Scripture and civil law despite what we feel about something. The old saying of good intentions pave the way to heel apply here in a very substansive way I think.

Christ suffered for our sin. We are not commanded to sin to ease the suffering of others. We have parted from the path of wisdom to do what we are now doing. To continue it for misguided noble reasons does not reduce our own culpability. This is why I think we should withdraw from Iraq without further delay. It is not supported by our faith, our law or common sense despite the feelings we may have about it.

 

[vz71]

Let’s see if I can get you to understand a simple concept.

But you never actually said anything further…

You say its Gods law but not civil law as your justification. If the above bolded statement is not intended to reflect your expression of your faith in support of Gods law with respect to the topic, what does it represent?

You are asking for a reason a pullout at this point would be unjust.
I have supplied it.
I am uncertain what you wish to change the answer into, but it is not an expression of faith, it is the answer you asked for.

Is my conclusion dishonest or just wrong?

I don’t know.
I know it is wrong. I do not know if it is dishonest as yet.
It would appear so given the conclusion you are drawing from my statements is so far from what is actually being said.

Are you not saying your view of Gods law is to minimize suffering, and loss of life…preventing a greater evil? Are you calling this Gods law?

No, I am not.

Your are comprehending my questions aren’t you?

Is this a rhetorical question?
If not, it would seem to be an attempt swipe at my intelligence.
Ad Hominem does not strike me as one of your debate characteristics, so what exactly are you asking for here?

So let us argue with what you have written based upon my conclusion and your comprehension as I understand it.

No, let’s not.
We should argue the original question posed.

Minimize suffering:

Do you only see the schools we build in Iraq and not the kicked in doors and destroyed homes of innocent families while US forces are looking for bad guys? Do you only see the pictures of comforted Iraqi children in the arms of American soldiers not the grave of the parent of the child we killed by accident looking for bad guys? Saddam built schools as well as kicked in doors. Why are our actions nobel and his are not? Gods law? Which one?

No, I see both.
I also have the testimony of many soldiers that were deployed there as well as many that ended their tour and returned home.
I am not nearly so convinced as you that our military is involved in some brutal event.

Minimize loss of life:

How do you know the number of innocent people killed by US forces (accident or on purpose) in the last 5 years is less than those that Saddam was killing if he was still in power for the last 5 years? If Saddam killed 50 a month and we kill only 30 a month…is that your ‘minimize’? Gods law? Which one?

I am uncertain it appropriate to compare the actions of our military with the actions of Saddam.
Saddam used weapons of mass destruction against his own people. This does not compare at all with our current military force in Iraq.

preventing a greater evil:

I think I can reasonably conclude from your past statements you assume the greater evil is a potential mass killing of…are those you are protecting innocent…or guilty…if we leave and keeping US forces present is the prevention. Is it ok for us to kill 500 bad guys to save 5000 innocents? Gods law? Which one?

You mean that you see no difference between killing a suicide bomber on his way to blow up himself and others and killing innocent people going about their lives?
I think you have missed something here.

This is why I wanted a reference from Scripture. You reference Gods law as justification but you don’t say which one. You seem to suggest it is common sense and obvious but I see the contradiction and maybe hypocrisy to what I know of Gods law. If Gods law is not Scripture or other Chirch Doctrine what is it?

If you have that much difficulty with God’s laws, I humbly suggest you submit your difficulties into another thread where these laws can be explained to you.