Opinion

[Paul Victorey]

Originally posted by Hot Rod It actually is religion in a sense because they all believe that they are due the land that they are trying to get......each religion's "promised land." They think God (or Allah in their case) has promised them the land and the other people are intruding upon it. Every different religion believes they are the chosen people and they need to conquer all other people because that is what God has told them to do and because all other people are infidels. Saddam himself thinks he is a messiah. So some people follow him to the death because they really think he is a messiah and other people are trying to kill him. Another case is that some areas hate Christians coming into the area and will shoot on sight because there is proof of certain things that are described in the Bible. If people showed this proof it may mean that Christianity is right and Islam is dead. You can see how strongly people argue religion on a small basis every day in America. Now put three different religions who believe VERY strongly in their religion so much so that they'll die for it and then put them in a space the size of California and then arm them. See what you get.

I still say religion is merely a scapegoat. Yes, the Koran, Bible, and Torah all say to kill anyone who is not of your religion, but none of the groups truly follows these things. They fight over oil, over land, and over human rights, not over religion. There's plenty of religious diversity in America without the religious violence.

And many of these Arab infighting occured before the Arabs were even Muslim, so although religion is used to try to dtum up support, it's not the root cause.

People like Bin Laden of course will claim to be very religious. Religion is a wonderful tool to control the population, and it works very well in that area. If you convince people God is on your side, they're much more likely to agree with you.

[TimPoet]

We had a pro-troops rally here in Las Vegas just a couple blocks from my home and work last Wednesday. 2000 people there with flags a waving, what a beautiful thing!
Drove by it and saw all these wonderful people pushing their babies in strollers, wearing T-shirts with a big bold US flag on it, gathering to over capacity size. Go America!

[Eaglefeather]

Sorry Tim, the US, Britain and other freeworld countries do not act in a barbaric fashion after a war. This is not about spoils of war, this is about freedom. Freedom from the fears of the WMD that Saddam and his thugs have amassed. And, Freedom for the Iraqi people.

Perhaps you should all listen a little closer to what President Bush and PM Blare have been saying about this very subject.

They have both stated, in fact they stressed this very strongly as being a main concern, "when hostilities cease, we want the UN to restart the Food for Oil program right away." The program was stopped just before the war began.

Now I may simple minded, but that sounds to me like they want to turn the oil over to the UN to administer. Apparently they are already in negotiations with the UN on this matter.

Also yesterday, after their meeting, President Bush said America will pay the (US's) full cost of the confict. The question was directed to the President, but the PM didn't disagree or add anything so I think we would be safe to presume that Britain will pick up it's own costs as well. I seem to recall, although I can not remeber it all exactly, but a few days ago the President said exactly the same thing.

Now from that I think it would be more than safe to say that the only ones going to benifit from that oil is the Iraqi people. For now they will get it in the form of food, medicine and other essential necessities of life.

Once they have a democratic system in place and working it would be up to the UN to decide when to give the Iraqi's full control of the oil. At least that is my interpretation of what the leaders have been saying.

[ktkendall]

It certainly is a weird thing when we have France calling US arrogant and Germany doesn't want to fight!!
But seriously folks, I was just listening to a well known speaker who alluded to the fact that never before in History has any country had the Military might, and financial resources that the USA has but uses them for only honorable purposes. (ie. freeing Kuwait then rebuilding them last time, and after this current one is all over, we're already allocating resources to rebuild and help them become an independant democratic country) I do have to agree that there is a sense of honor to what we are doing, right or wrong. The troops over there seem to think so, and seem willing to take the risk to do so. As I read all these responses before me I see that when we shift the discussion over to right or wrong that is certainly where there will always be much disagreement, because for there to even be a right and a wrong it has to be based upon some kind of foundation and that is where there are so many differences in where exactly do we gain our foundation of what is righ and what is wrong. Even poeple with the same foundation have different interpretations so I'm sure we'll never reach agreement on the right and wrong issue, but now that we are this deeply involved we surely can not back out now, that would be devastating, and we need to give the troops our full support and prayers. It was ashamed we couldn't welcome them home from the viet-nam conflict as the heroes that they really are. Those that were so forcefully opposed to that one should have vented their anger where it needed to be, at the administration not the boys who were just doing their job and trying to come back alive and in one peice from that one..

[m.m]

the war is agenst ISLAM if USA relly want bece why not stop Israel from killing thousnds of inocent people of Palestenines

[Hot Rod]

I heard on the radio today over lunch that the UN security council voted unanimously to restart the oil for food program. Bush thanked them.

[drisley]

Good. It seems these countries realized the errors of their ways when they came out threatening to veto it a few days ago.

[Hot Rod]

Here is a link.....

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,82475,00.html

This gives a lot more info than they gave on the radio station that I was listening to.

[Eaglefeather]

QUOTE, "Yes, the Koran, Bible, and Torah all say to kill anyone who is not of your religion"UNQUOTE.

I think you better read your Bible, Koran and Torah just a little closer Paul. I think you will be very hard pressed to find anywhere in these religious writings where the believer is exhorted to go out and kill none believers.

I believe the Koran calls none believers, "infidels" and the Torah something similar, Jewish members may be able to tell us what exactly the Torah wording is.

The Christian Bible exhorts believers to go out and convert none believers. It does not exhort believers to kill none believers. Only God himself has the authority to Judge man.

You seem to forget one of the ten commandments given to Moses was, "Thou shalt not kill". Now that commandment applies to Christians and Jews alike.

I recall a moslum leader was answering some questions about violence that had occured in or around their Mosque after 9/11. He mentioned at that time that the Koran did not sanction violence of any kind. That these acts of violence attributed to Moslems was not in accordance with their religious teachings.

A lot of killing and other hienious acts have been committed in the name of God, but in actual fact they are just men trying to justify their base animal instincts. The Crusades and the Inquisition are good examples.

I don't dispute what you say about religion being used as an excuse for barbaric acts, but that doesn't mean it was sanctioned in the holy books. A fanatic/bully/dictator can take things out of context and convince himself and/or others that murder, rape and many other foul deeds are sanctioned by God. A bully and dictator will use any means at his disposal to get otherwise peaceful people to do his bidding.

As for the Food for Oil vote, I think the two countries that have been the biggest pain in the ass for the Coalition, namely Russia and France, realized that they would look a right fool in the eyes of the rest of the world if they hadn't agreed. They would have found themselves trying to answer some very tough questions not only from other countries but particularly their own people.

There is a lot of sympathy in the world right now for the Iraqi people. They are seen as pawns in a deadly game of wills. Any government that contributes to more hardship for the Iraqi people will find themselves in a heap of trouble with their citizens. Excepting China, they couldn't care less and would put down any revolt just as ruthlessly as Saddam. But France and Russia do not have that luxury.

I think also that the US/British proposal to resume the program placed before the UN should stop some of the critisism about this war being fought over oil. Afterall, the US and/or Britain can hardly steal the oil reserves if those very reserves are being administered by the UN.

EF