Troop pull-out unjust?

[vz71]

It think its pretty clear that Scripture does not support offensive violence for any reason that we can call just.

I find myself in agreement here.
However, we have to deal with the reality that is.
We are there. Extricating ourselves without causing greater harm is a difficulty that those who want an immediate pullout fail to address.

 

[Verisimilitude]

But you never actually said anything further…

We all make mistakes. The concept is the use of violence. You might think our military is a ‘good’ violence compared to Saddams ‘bad’ violence, but destruction of life and property is the same result.

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.

I am not sure why or how you separate the two.

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.

You are making a distinction in something I am not and what it is yet is unclear. I am trying to determine what it is with no intention of deception.

No, I am not.

Then I do not know what you mean when you say Gods law if it is not Scripture or Doctrine.

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?

Just as you do not know if I am being dishonest I do not know if you are intelligent. Obviously I think my questions are clear, you do not. Something is amiss.

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

Our determination of what is just differs seemingly.

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.

I also see both and have spoken to those deployed. I know our military is not purposely doing evil with a few noted exceptions. I do not am and not paintng our efforts as intended evil, but I do not deny evil occurrs. Do you?

I am uncertain it appropriate to compare the actions of our military with the actions of Saddam.

To the average Iraqi being roused from sleep while we conduct our opperations I don’t know if they make a distinction.

Saddam used weapons of mass destruction against his own people. This does not compare at all with our current military force in Iraq.

We sold him the WMDs. We have culpability.

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 understand the difference but it isn’t so clear. It is one thing to see the bomber moving toward his target and stopping them with lethal force. It is another to go through a neighborhood looking for him to kill before he straps on the bomb vest. Is the risk and death of innocents in that regard just? This goes to the heart of going to Iraq to begin with. If we could limit our killing to teh guilty it might be just. We haven’t.

I think you have missed something here.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.

As a Catholic I think a term such as Gods law would be pretty clear but it isn’t. A simple explaination of what you define it as here would be sufficient.

 

[Verisimilitude]

However, we have to deal with the reality that is.

Reality is not limited to the last 5 years of war in Iraq. The previous 30 years of Americas involvement of Iraqi affairs cannot be dismissed and if you feel they were just please explain why we gave material support to Saddam with intelligence, money and weapons.

 

[bobzills]

An unintended consequence of keeping the troops in Iraq is the intensification of the extremist Islamist power in the Muslim world. According to the extremist Muslim education program, the USA is intending to invade and destroy strong Muslim governments and replace them with “US agent regimes”. These USA agent regimes would replace Islamic law and instead put secular, western style man made laws in their place, and control Muslim oil resources and holy sites. When the USA invaded Iraq, what followed was the looting of Baghdad, and the regime was replaced by the rule of Mr. Bremer, which was known to involve corruption at every level. This provided a credible argument supporting the Koran’s conditions for launching a defensive jihad against the USA.
The sooner these US troops are removed, the easier it will be for the USA to live in peace with Muslims around the world. The longer that these troops stay in Iraq, the greater will be the power of the extremist Muslim groups calling for a defensive jihad against American interests.

 

[vz71]

Reality is not limited to the last 5 years of war in Iraq. The previous 30 years of Americas involvement of Iraqi affairs cannot be dismissed and if you feel they were just please explain why we gave material support to Saddam with intelligence, money and weapons.

A red herring?
Sorry, but I’ll not bite.

The OP is the question of a pullout being just.
This is not past tense, nor does it involve 30 years of recent history. It has solely to do with the now.

Will a pullout cause more harm then good.
It will at this point.

 

[Verisimilitude]

A red herring?
Sorry, but I’ll not bite.

The OP is the question of a pullout being just.
This is not past tense, nor does it involve 30 years of recent history. It has solely to do with the now.

Will a pullout cause more harm then good.
It will at this point.

How is a continuation of almost 40 years of harm a red herring? The only way to stop the harm is to stop. It has to do with tomorrow not today or yesterday but neither can be excluded. To do so is irresponsible. Leave tomorrow up to God. Leave Iraq to Iraqis. Leave. It is just that simple.

 

[Verisimilitude]

If the U.S. packs up and flees from Iraq, causing the place to turn into a hideous blood-bath, much moreso than it already is, America will be committing a mortal sin. McCain is right: we might to have to stay in Iraq for the next century, if it means preventing a holocaust. We’ve invested so much in rebuilding Iraq, that a sudden pull-out, which would expose tens of thousands of former collaborators to revenge-killings, could never be justified, morally.

If others are not as free as you, you have the moral right to make them free even if it kills them?

As an American, I am free. Nobody but God runs my life. Nobody.

What if they have a different god…some think it is the same God…but belive differnt but feel the same as you; are you morally superior to them to take that away from them for their own good? What is they were stronger than us and were doing it to you?

 

[vz71]

How is a continuation of almost 40 years of harm a red herring?

Because it is irrelevent to the OP.

The only way to stop the harm is to stop. It has to do with tomorrow not today or yesterday but neither can be excluded. To do so is irresponsible. Leave tomorrow up to God. Leave Iraq to Iraqis. Leave. It is just that simple.

You still do not get it.
Leaving will cause much more suffering and death then staying at this point.
Your claim that the only way to stop the harm is to stop is a point well made, but you have not measured the harm of our presence against the harm of a pullout.
You should.

 

[vz71]

If the U.S. packs up and flees from Iraq, causing the place to turn into a hideous blood-bath, much moreso than it already is, America will be committing a mortal sin. McCain is right: we might to have to stay in Iraq for the next century, if it means preventing a holocaust. We’ve invested so much in rebuilding Iraq, that a sudden pull-out, which would expose tens of thousands of former collaborators to revenge-killings, could never be justified, morally.

If others are not as free as you, you have the moral right to make them free even if it kills them?

You failed to address at all what KingAlfred said.
Your question is yet another red herring.

 

[Verisimilitude]

Because it is irrelevent to the OP.

That is not rational.

You still do not get it.

Believe me, I get it. You can’t articulate how you ‘know’ what you know.

Leaving will cause much more suffering and death then staying at this point.

You ignore 40 years of history and rely on speculation and supposition in the future. How do you read the future since you do not care about the past?

Your claim that the only way to stop the harm is to stop is a point well made, but you have not measured the harm of our presence against the harm of a pullout.

How close is the weights? What is the delta of death in your calculations? What are your start and stop points of before pullout death/mame/homeless/orphan count and after pullout d/m/h/o count? Do you go to the start of the war and actual eventual pullout or some special derivative that gives your argument a chance or seeming rational?

You should.

You have never explained Gods law and now some mysterious measure of potential harm with nary a reference. I suppose the obvious is you can’t. You don’t use Scripture, Doctrine, Civil law, non-fiction book, fiction book, philsophy or historical reference in anything you have said.

Save the wounded response. Forget my questions. I am done. I have my answer.

 

[bobzills]

Will a pullout cause more harm then good.
It will at this point.

What is the proof of that false statement? The fact is that an unintended consequence of keeping the troops in Iraq is the dangerous and unwise strengthening of the Muslim extremist alliance against the USA, as I have already shown above in post number 104.

 

[Cuddy_Duck]

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.

and yet

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.

Speaking out against injustice is not pessimism.

 

[vz71]

What is the proof of that false statement? The fact is that an unintended consequence of keeping the troops in Iraq is the dangerous and unwise strengthening of the Muslim extremist alliance against the USA, as I have already shown above in post number 104.

Not at all. The post you refer to does not show anything more then your opinion on the matter. You call for evidence, but have offered none up yourself.

 

[BamaRider]

First I said-

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.

Refering to statements such as this made by various libs-
Bobzills post #94

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.

Do you believe these acts have been carried by a few acting individually or systemic attempt by America to intimidate, murder, and torture innocent people?

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.
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.

So you believe the Crusades to rescure the Holy Land were incorrect?

And I don’t believe for a minute the bible or Church doctrine denies the right to defend yourself against your enemies. In cae YOU forgot they declared war on US, and war is what they got.

Now I dunno about your 1% chance of attack or all that baloney, but I can tell ya for the 3,000 folks who died in the Twin Towers it was a 100% chance, and without a relentless pursuit of Jihadists they’ll do it again. I’m for following them to every cave and sandbox they call home and if they wanna die for Muhammed and collect the 73 virgins I’d accomdate them, and if they surrender I’d give them a one way ticket to Gitmo. I’m not for rehabilitating them or trying to understand them.

 

[vz71]

Forget my questions. I am done. I have my answer.

Thank you. Goodbye.

I too grow very weary of this debate. It is difficult arguing when the opposition is all over the map the way they have been in this thread.
There have been ad hominem attacks:

Just as you do not know if I am being dishonest I do not know if you are intelligent.

I can assure you I am intelligent.

There have been red herrings brought up at every turn:

I challange the veracity of your statment about the good our overall presence has had for the average Iraqi in the last 5 years and Fox News as most news sources in America are little more than propaganda machines for the administration.

FOX news??
Where is this from?

And there is constant inconsistency:

if we did pull out and a mass killing took place it is not the fault of America they are killed. It is the fault of those who kill them.

We sold him the WMDs. We have culpability.

Meanwhile, my answer remains unchanged.
A pullout at this time will cause more harm then good.
This alone would make a pullout at this time unjust.

So in the OP, is a pullout just or unjust? It really does depend on the time scale we are speaking of. At this time, it would be unjust because of the harm it would cause.
In the future? Possibly just. After all, the coalition that is in place is working to put the infrastructure of Iraq back together. At some point Iraq should be able to defend itself.
Our presence would no longer be needed.

 

[Walt_Oliver]

Thread closed. Lack of charity and discussing each other rather than the topic posed in the original post.