It's True: Iraq is a Quagmire
We're floundering in a quagmire in Iraq. Our strategy is flawed, and it's too late to change it. Our resources have been squandered, our best people killed, we're hated by the natives and our reputation around the world is circling the drain. We must withdraw.
No, I'm not channeling Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. I'm channeling Osama bin Laden, for whom the war in Iraq has been a catastrophe. Al-Qaida had little presence in Iraq during the regime of Saddam Hussein. But once he was toppled, al-Qaida's chieftains decided to make Iraq the central front in the global jihad against the Great Satan.
"The most important and serious issue today for the whole world is this third world war, which the Crusader-Zionist coalition began against the Islamic nation," Osama bin Laden said in an audiotape posted on Islamic Web sites in December 2004. "It is raging in the land of the Two Rivers. The world's millstone and pillar is Baghdad, the capital of the caliphate."
Jihadis, money and weapons were poured into Iraq. All for naught. Al-Qaida has been driven from every neighborhood in Baghdad, Maj. Gen. Joseph Fil, the U.S. commander there, said Nov. 7. This follows the expulsion of al-Qaida from two previous "capitals" of its Islamic Republic of Iraq, Ramadi and Baquba.
Al-Qaida is evacuating populated areas and is trying to establish hideouts in the Hamrin mountains in northern Iraq, with U.S. and Iraqi security forces, and former insurgent allies who have turned on them, in hot pursuit. Forty-five al-Qaida leaders were killed or captured in October alone.
Al-Qaida's support in the Muslim world has plummeted, partly because of the terror group's lack of success in Iraq, more because al-Qaida's attacks have mostly killed Muslim civilians.
"Iraq has proved to be the graveyard, not just of many al-Qaida operatives, but of the organization's reputation as a defender of Islam," said StrategyPage.
Canadian columnist David Warren speculated some years ago that enticing al-Qaida to fight there was one of the reasons why President Bush decided to invade Iraq. The administration has made so many egregious mistakes that I doubt the "flypaper" strategy was deliberate. But it has worked out that way. It may have been a mistake for the United States to go to war in Iraq. But it's pretty clear now it was a blunder for al-Qaida to have done so.
You may not be aware of the calamities that have befallen al-Qaida, because our news media have paid scant attention to them.
"The situation has changed so unmistakably and so swiftly that we should be reading proud headlines daily," said Ralph Peters, a retired Army lieutenant colonel. "Where are they?"
Richard Benedetto was for many years the White House correspondent for USA Today. Now retired, he teaches journalism at American University in Washington, D.C.
When U.S. troop deaths hit a monthly high in April, that was front-page news in most major newspapers, Mr. Benedetto noted. But when U.S. troop deaths fell in October to their lowest levels in 17 months, that news was buried on page A-14 of The Washington Post and mentioned on Page A-12 in The New York Times. (The Post-Gazette put the story on the front page.)
"I asked the class if burying or ignoring the story indicated an anti-war bias on the part of the editors or their papers," Mr. Benedetto said. "While some students said yes ... most attributed the decision to poor news judgment. They were being generous."
Mr. Peters suspects the paucity of news coverage from Iraq these days is because "things are going annoyingly well."
Rich Lowry agrees. "The United States may be the only country in world history that reverse-propagandizes itself, magnifying its setbacks and ignoring its successes so that nothing can disturb what Sen. Joe Lieberman calls the 'narrative of defeat,' " he wrote in National Review.
If what Mr. Peters, Mr. Benedetto and Mr. Lowry suspect is true, it must have pained The Associated Press to see a correspondent write Wednesday: "The trend toward better security is indisputable." It'll be interesting to see which newspapers run the AP story, and where in the paper they place it.
"We've won the war in the real Iraq, but few people in America are familiar with anything other than its make-believe version," said the Mudville Gazette's "Greyhawk," a soldier currently serving his second tour in Iraq.
Comment(s) »
» Leave a comment
- Your E-mail address is never displayed. If you enter it, it will only be visible to the blog author
- Since there already are over 25 comments to this post, your eventual comment will no longer trigger a notification e-mail to the persons that commented before you.
- The line and paragraph breaks automatically
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/21 @ 09:14 AM — (Reply)
Al-Qaida's support in the Muslim world has plummeted, partly because of the terror group's lack of success in Iraq, more because al-Qaida's attacks have mostly killed Muslim civilians. Heres the really good news MISSIOM ACCOMPLISHED ! BRING 'EM HOME.
Comment by jim— 2007/11/21 @ 09:38 AM — (Reply)
BUSH IN HELL! BURN CRUSADERS!The conflict in Afghanistan has reached "crisis proportions," with the resurgent Taliban present in more than half the country and closing in on Kabul, a report said on Wednesday.
If NATO, the lead force operating in Afghanistan, is to have any impact against the insurgency, troop numbers will have to be doubled to at least 80,000, the report said.
"The Taliban has shown itself to be a truly resurgent force," the Senlis Council, an independent think-tank with a permanent presence in Afghanistan, wrote in a study entitled "Stumbling into Chaos: Afghanistan on the brink."
"Its ability to establish a presence throughout the country is now proven beyond doubt," it said. "The insurgency now controls vast swaths of unchallenged territory including rural areas, some district centers, and important road arteries."
Senlis said its research had established that the Taliban, driven out of Afghanistan by the U.S. invasion in late 2001, had rebuilt a permanent presence in 54 percent of the country and was finding it easy to recruit new followers.
It was also increasingly using Iraq-style tactics, such as roadside and suicide bombs, to powerful effect, and had built a stable network of financial support, funding its operations with the proceeds from Afghanistan's booming opium trade.
"It is a sad indictment of the current state of Afghanistan that the question now appears to be not if the Taliban will return to Kabul, but when," the report said.
"Their oft-stated aim of reaching the city in 2008 appears more viable than ever."
Reuters, November 21, 2007
Comment by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi— 2007/11/21 @ 12:26 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/21 @ 01:01 PM — (Reply)
you're just a sore loser man. We all know Reuters is used to faking pics etc. Look what they did in Beirut last year...naughty naughty
Osama's still going to hell.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/21 @ 12:35 PM — (Reply)
Referring Link http://bloghi.com/
Host Name cpe-24-93-179-111.neo.res.rr.com
IP Address 24.93.179.111 [Label IP Address]
Country United States
Region Ohio
City Ravenna
ISP Road Runner Holdco Llc
Returning Visits 8
Visit Length 3 mins 16 secs
VISITOR SYSTEM SPECS
Browser MSIE 7.0
Operating System Windows XP
Resolution 1024x768
Javascript Enabled
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/21 @ 12:37 PM — (Reply)
ABU ZARQAWI LIVES! AND LOVER OF ANGELS! BEEN KING OF THE ISLAMIST UNDERGROUND FOR A WHILE, BUT NOW I'M BACK ON TOP OF JIHAD MOUNTAIN, LION OF THE HILL, A#1. SPREAD THE NEWS!
Comment by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi— 2007/11/21 @ 01:20 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/21 @ 01:33 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Ed— 2007/11/21 @ 02:24 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/21 @ 01:25 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/21 @ 01:28 PM — (Reply)
He doesn't look alive to me Herr Doktor.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/21 @ 01:35 PM — (Reply)
DIGS: GLOBAL ISLAMIC MEDIA FRONT. WORKING FOR SHEIK OBL IS BETTER THAN COVERING SHEIK OBL, AS LOA USED TO DO.
Comment by Lover of Angels— 2007/11/21 @ 01:41 PM — (Reply)
what's the address? surely you need a good pr man? I helped you out last time.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/21 @ 01:53 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/21 @ 02:02 PM — (Reply)
Well, well, well. Look who's showed up here--Bad Penny Pino.
Thanksgiving break, no doubt. No classes to teach, no campus meetings to attend.
Let's see, al-Zarkawi has been deal for how long? His corpse must stink to high heaven by now, or else is so dessicated as to resemble dried fish (as in the mummy of Ramses).
Comment by Always On Watch— 2007/11/21 @ 02:14 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/21 @ 02:17 PM — (Reply)
Comment by riffran— 2007/11/21 @ 11:01 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Barry G.— 2007/11/22 @ 03:35 AM — (Reply)
Happy Thanksgiving! Give Him thanks for all the freedoms we have. After all, He is the Author of them.
Comment by Always On Watch— 2007/11/22 @ 04:34 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/22 @ 04:49 AM — (Reply)
Hope all y'all have a Happy and Blessed Day, we did!
tmw
swanky
Comment by the merry widow— 2007/11/22 @ 01:19 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Barry G.— 2007/11/22 @ 03:14 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Dugg— 2007/11/23 @ 04:33 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/23 @ 05:16 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Dugg— 2007/11/23 @ 07:27 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Barry G.— 2007/11/23 @ 08:16 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Dugg— 2007/11/23 @ 11:11 AM — (Reply)
Nowhere in either of these last two posts does it mention Fox News or even winning the war...they speak about the violence being down, less people dying and Christians being able to worship where they once were unable to....does that sound like a warmonger to you?
Next I suggest you read about gossip in the Bible..your wacky conspiracy theories et. al smack of gossip and lies
I also suggest you quit attributing pacifism to Christ...God often used/uses righteous anger to deal with evil in the world...God used/uses war as a tool to deal with evil...He also ordains governments to wield the sword when necessary (Romans 13)
so get off your high horse and read more...tune in that tin foil hat of yours because the mother ship aint a comin'.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/24 @ 02:14 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Brooke— 2007/11/23 @ 07:39 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Barry G.— 2007/11/23 @ 08:18 AM — (Reply)
MUJAHID BOMBS KILL PUPPET POLICE: Two bombs exploded hours apart Friday in a central Baghdad pet market and a police checkpoint in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, killing 26 people and wounding dozens, officials said. The attacks were among the deadliest in recent weeks.
Friday's blast was particularly significant because it dealt a blow to an increased feeling of confidence among Iraqis about the recent calm in the capital and surrounding areas.
Comment by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi— 2007/11/23 @ 08:33 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Julio— 2007/11/23 @ 09:47 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/24 @ 02:57 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/24 @ 02:58 AM — (Reply)
U.S. military spokesman Rear Admiral Gregory Smith said it appeared the Shi'ite militants wanted Friday's bombing, the deadliest attack in Baghdad in two months after a lull in violence, to look like the work of al Qaeda.
Most big bombings that cause mass casualties are blamed on Sunni Islamist al Qaeda. . . .
Smith said those behind the market attack intended to make it look like the work of al Qaeda in order to convince Iraqis in the area they needed the protection of Shi'ite militias.
If Shiite militias are seeking Shiite popular support, wantonly murdering Shiite civilians seems a certain recipe for failure, and thus it was naive of the Times to see this attack as a portent of worse to come.
The Times did follow up the next day with a report quoting Adm. Smith:
"The group's purpose was to make it appear Al Qaeda in Iraq was responsible for the attack," Admiral Smith said, using the military's name for Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. "The special groups' aim was to demonstrate to Baghdadis the need for militia groups to continue providing for their security."
"Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia," of course, is the Times's name for what everyone else calls al Qaeda in Iraq--everyone, that is, except Reuters (!), which simply calls it al Qaeda.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/26 @ 12:51 PM — (Reply)
MY CONTRIBUTION TO JIHAD: MUST WATCH!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWGOt4My_R4
Comment by Abu Terror— 2007/11/23 @ 01:19 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Julio— 2007/11/23 @ 02:10 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/24 @ 02:16 AM — (Reply)
The nutty professor sticks his head out. When ARE they going to fire that scumbag?
Comment by Farmer John— 2007/11/24 @ 04:11 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Barry G.— 2007/11/24 @ 08:37 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/24 @ 07:15 AM — (Reply)
Australia's voted liberal, folks. They'll be leaving Iraq. And, John Howard, about the only guy in the "West" with the guts to have killed Zarqawi again if he could, will be gone soon.
It was nice knowing Australia 'got it'.......Now it's REALLY going to "get it", God forbid.
Comment by Z— 2007/11/24 @ 07:47 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/24 @ 07:49 AM — (Reply)
Good article. Too bad they voted wrong.
"Sorry he interrupted a muslim prayer meeting in CITY HALL?" oy.
Comment by Z— 2007/11/24 @ 04:28 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/25 @ 04:05 AM — (Reply)
2 LIONS FROM MARTYRS BRIGADE BOMB PAKI-PUPPET MUSHARAFF: One of Saturday’s bombings in Rawalpindi occurred when a small car rammed a bus full of intelligence personnel just as it was entering the gate of Hamza Camp, a walled compound where the Inter-Services Intelligence agency and Military Intelligence maintain offices and residential buildings. The bus was packed with security personnel.
Fifteen people on the bus died, said Maj. Gen. Waheed Arshad, the chief military spokesman.
Minutes earlier, another suicide car bomber was turned away from a checkpoint near a side entrance to the army General Headquarters several miles away. As he turned the car, he detonated the bomb, killing himself and wounding three soldiers at the checkpoint.
The bombings follow a pattern of recent suicide attacks that military officials say is a sign militants are hitting back at the forces that are pursuing them the hardest in what is a growing struggle. A bomber blew himself up in September in the mess hall of Pakistan’s United States-trained special forces unit, the Special Services Group, killing at least 15.
Comment by FuranAK47— 2007/11/24 @ 08:35 AM — (Reply)
-- Iraqi soldiers and concerned local citizens in Hawr Rajab, repelled an attack by about 15 members of al Qaeda in Iraq, killing two terrorists and wounding an unreported number. Al Qaeda began the attack with small-arms fire and mortars early in the morning, targeting an Iraqi army checkpoint. Small-arms fire continued throughout the morning. Coalition forces supporting the Iraqi army called in helicopter support from 3rd Squadron, 17th Cavalry Regiment, 3rd Combat Aviation Brigade. The attack helicopter crews killed two al Qaeda members and wounded two others. Then deployed a U.S. Air Force F-16 dropped a 500-pound bomb on a van that was transporting weapons, destroying it and all of its contents. Though they suffered casualties during the defense of their checkpoints, the Iraqi army and the concerned citizens group stood their ground, officials said. The attackers broke off after being unable to overrun the checkpoints.
-- Coalition forces targeted al Qaeda propaganda cells during operations in Samarra. As the ground force approached the targeted building, they called for the building's occupants to come out, but no one complied. One individual took a defensive position by the door and engaged coalition forces. Responding in self-defense, the ground force returned fire, killing the terrorist. While securing the area, the ground force detained two suspects and found a weapons cache, which was safely destroyed by a coalition air strike.
-- In Hawija, coalition forces captured a wanted individual believed to be the foreign terrorist leader in Arab Jabour, and who allegedly is associated with senior terrorist leaders in Baghdad’s southern belt. The wanted individual identified himself to the ground force and was detained, along with one other suspect.
-- In Mosul, coalition forces targeted a northern al Qaeda in Iraq security leader believed to be involved in kidnappings and assassinations. They detained two suspects. Coalition forces also detained four suspects during operations targeting associates of a former al Qaeda media leader near Khan Bani Sad.
-- An Iraqi emergency response unit, advised by U.S. Special Forces, detained five suspected extremists during an early morning operation in Daghgharah. The operation, conducted north of Diwaniyah, targeted an extremist cell reportedly involved in improvised-explosive-device attacks against Iraqi and coalition forces in Diwaniyah and Hillah. This cell also is believed to gather intelligence for attacks against Iraqi and coalition forces and to transport and store weapons and IEDs, officials said. The capture supported the 8th Iraqi Army Division's Operation Lion Pounce, an ongoing operation to disrupt extremist groups operating in Diwaniyah and the surrounding region. No Iraqi or U.S. forces were injured during the operation.
In operations Nov. 21:
-- Soldiers of the 3rd Iraqi Army Division uncovered a large weapons cache during a routine patrol northwest of Tal Afar. The cache included 4,200 pounds of homemade explosives, four sets of Iraqi military uniforms, 12 82 mm mortar rounds and 10 hand grenades.
-- Soldiers of the 5th Iraqi Army Division and U.S. forces came under sniper fire while attempting to clear terrorists from villages near Abu Khamis. Iraqi and U.S. forces responded to the attack, killing two terrorists. In the course of the operation, three Iraqi soldiers were injured.
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/24 @ 08:39 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/24 @ 08:36 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Barry G.— 2007/11/24 @ 08:41 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Barry G.— 2007/11/24 @ 04:37 PM — (Reply)
I find people who attribute pacifism to Christ as being ignorant of their own professed faith. And if they know so little of their own faith, how can they be trusted when talking about anything other? Let's settle this, shall we? Do you recall when Christ was talking to the Roman soldiers, and what he said to them? He did not tell them to leave the army because they should be pacifists. No. He told them to be content with their wages. Thus, we are not instructed to be pacifists.
Comment by InRussetShadows— 2007/11/24 @ 05:00 PM — (Reply)
Very good points, Russet. But, Jesus is also held up as a kind of 'father of socialism' by the left, as you know.....when, really, he said (i paraphrase) "you don't work, you don't eat"
Comment by z— 2007/11/24 @ 06:47 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/25 @ 03:46 AM — (Reply)
In John 2:14, Jesus comes to the Temple and finds people selling “oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables.” Jesus sees that the religious leaders have turned this, His father’s house of prayer, into a marketplace. Instead of prayers and supplications, there is the noise of commerce. Jesus is burning with anger and indignation. The zeal for His father’s house consumes Him.
“And He made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables” (John 2:14-15).
This was a physically violent response on the part of Jesus. This makes it abundantly clear that Jesus was not a strict pacifist. The Bible is also clear that Jesus was sinless. Even in this situation, he did nothing wrong.
In Luke 22:36-38, Jesus is preparing His disciples for His departure. He knows that the Jewish leaders are decidedly against Him. In the past, when He sent His disciples out, He took care of all their needs. But now things are going to change.
“And He said to them, ‘But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one. For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, ‘And he was numbered with transgressors;’ for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment.’ They said, ‘Lord, look, here are two swords.’ And He said to them, ‘It is enough.’”
What is the context here? When traveling from city to city, people of that day often had to carry a sword in order to fend off robbers. Jesus told His followers that He was going to send them out there, and warned them to be prepared to defend themselves when appropriate. Clearly, Jesus was not a pacifist.
In the book of Revelation, there is a stronger example. Here is a portrait of Jesus, the warrior king. Here the elements of love and justice come together. Love and war can go together, if it is done on behalf of good.
And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war. …From His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations, and He will rule them with a rod of iron; and He treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty (Revelation 19:11, 15).
This is no meek and mild Jesus. This is not a pacifist. This is the mighty warrior, the God of love, who comes to wage war against his evil enemies. The imagery is graphic. It describes Him as treading the wine press, destroying His enemies as their blood spills over on His robes. Love and the pursuit of justice are not contradictory. They can go hand in hand.
Standing by and refusing to act while harm befalls a neighbor is not a virtue; it is a vice.
John Calvin emphasized that a Christian soldier should never use force to gain self-advantage, but “use force out of love for thy neighbor.” Standing by and refusing to act while harm befalls a neighbor is not a virtue; it is a vice.
As someone else has said, “War can be a means to a just peace, and to break an unjust peace.”
Jesus was not a pacifist, nor was He a hawk. It is interesting that Jesus makes everyone uncomfortable, because He can never be put in anybody’s box. He said blessed are the peacemakers. Jesus wasn’t a hawk. He wasn’t a pacifist. He wasn’t a Republican. He wasn’t a Democrat. He wasn’t an American. He wasn’t an Iraqi. He transcends all categories.
PRIVATE VS. PUBLIC ROLES - Pacifists fail to make a clear distinction between a Christian’s private and public views. In Romans 12-13 we find Paul’s explanation of the role of the Christian and the State. Here he lays out some fine distinctions between how we are to conduct ourselves privately and publicly—how we are to manage our person, and how we are to manage our office.
In Romans 12:17-21, Paul lays out the responsibility of the Christian INDIVIDUAL. “Never pay back evil for evil to anyone. If possible…” Notice the qualifier, “if possible.”
“If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men.”
What is Paul saying? There will be times when you cannot be at peace with all men. But when it is possible, when it depends on you, as an individual, strive for peace.
“Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord. But if your enemy is hungry, feed him, and if he is thirsty, give him a drink; for in so doing you will heap burning coals on his head. Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.”
These are words very similar to those of Jesus. Verse 17 and 21 are saying the same thing: Never pay back evil for evil, and overcome evil. These two verses act like bookends in the text—one at the beginning and the other at the end. Everything between these two bookends supplies the definition and context for what Paul means when he says “evil.”
What is evil? Don’t take your own revenge; that is evil.
Why is it evil? Because you are usurping the prerogative of God who alone has the wisdom to know when retribution ought to be enacted. God is to be the judge, and God’s ministering authority, the State. Individuals should not take matters into their own hands. That is God’s job. To do otherwise is to usurp God’s right and to usurp the right of the State.
So, the evil that Paul, and I believe Jesus, had in mind to resist here is the evil of personal vengeance. The Scriptures are forbidding us from taking personal revenge. That is a lot different than forbidding us to pursue justice.
Revenge no; justice yes.
It is no coincidence that Paul follows this passage dealing with the Christian’s private response to evil with a Christian’s public response to evil. In chapter 13:1-4, we see the role of the State.
“Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil.
Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; for it [government; the State] is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.”
What is Paul saying? He is building an argument. First of all, government is established by God. As a minister of God, it acts as an avenger to promote good and to punish evil (some translations say “evildoers”). Essentially, the role of government is to promote justice.
As individuals, we are not to seek personal vengeance. We need to be willing to suffer injustice as Christians, and make an appeal to our God and to our State. We are to entrust ourselves to God.
But, as members of the State, we are to work for justice against evil, for the sake of others and of society.
That creates a tension for many Christians, trying to understand when is the right time to turn the other cheek. John Stott put it this way,
“If my house is burglarized one night and I catch the thief, it may well be my duty to sit him down and give him something to eat and drink, while at the same time telephoning the police.”
We have a private responsibility and duty, and we have a public one.
Conclusion about pacifism
Ever since Adam, the world has been in a war between good and evil. For this reason, the pacifist position is unrealistic. When taken to its logical conclusion, it would virtually do away with courts and police departments. It would ultimately lead to anarchy due to the nature of human hearts.
Pacifism is also unbiblical, because it does not take the whole counsel of Scripture. It does not separate a Christian’s private duties from his public duties, and the role of the State versus the role of the individual.
The Just War Theory
Just War Theory is the other dominant position held by many Christians. This position was first formulated by Augustine of Hippo and later refined by Thomas Aquinas. It is based on the following assumptions:
War is never good. But it is sometimes necessary. Why? Because sin is an ever present reality that has to be dealt with.
“What is the source of quarrels and conflicts among you? Is not the source your pleasures that wage war in your members? You lust and do not have; so you commit murder” (James 4:1-2).
At the forefront of much war and conflict is an idolatry that says, “I want more. I want what you have.” And so there are wars and rumors of wars. Much of it is rooted in human sin. Political parties and institutions are not evil in themselves. Evil is ultimately rooted in every human heart.
Necessary wars are to be conducted within the limits of justice.
The purpose of Just War Theory is to give us a common terminology, so that nations that wage war will operate within certain parameters that are just.
As Christians, we need to be realistic, not naive. We need to get past the common white hat versus black hat assumptions about war. When it comes to war, there is rarely pure good versus pure bad. There are usually gray hats versus gray hats, with different shades of gray. We are all guilty sinners. The hope of Just War Theory is that by applying just principles we can be as righteous as one can be when it comes to waging war.
Only governments, and not individuals, have the right under God to carry out retribution.
This rules out terrorists. They have no authority to do what they do.
Within Just War Theory there is a seven-fold criteria.
There must be a just cause. All aggression is condemned in Just War Theory. Participation in war must be prompted by a just cause or a defensive cause. No war of unprovoked aggression can ever be justified.
Preemptive war can be legitimate in some circumstances, according to Just War Theory, if it is known that a grave act of aggression is imminent. If a government knows that their nation or another is about to become a victim, it can act to prevent the injustice before it takes place.
Just intention. The war must have a right intention to secure a fair peace for all parties involved. One must have just motives for going into war.
It is a last resort. Other means of resolution such as diplomacy and economic pressure must have been reasonably exhausted before war.
Formal declaration. The war must be initiated with formal declaration by a properly constituted authority. Only governments can declare war, not individuals or militias or terrorist organizations -- only governments.
Limited objectives. Securing peace is the purpose and objective in going to war. War must be engaged in such a way that when peace is attained, hostilities cease.
Proportionate means. Combatant forces of the opposition may not be subjected to greater harm than is necessary to secure victory and peace.
Noncombatant immunity. Military forces must respect individuals and groups not participating in the conflict and must abstain from attacking them.
Conclusion
Based on my studies, a strict pacifist position is not only unreasonable, it is unbiblical. The presence of sin in the world means that is is sometimes regrettably necessary to use force in order to secure justice for the innocent and the helpless. However, when war is considered, its legitimacy must be carefully evaluated.
In doing so, Christians should remember that their ultimate allegiance is not to the State; it is to the commands of God. Unfortunately, history shows that individual Christians and churches have rarely stood up effectively against the State when the war is unjust. It is too easy for people to get caught up in patriotism. It is all too easy to buy into nationalistic interests. People are often so close to the situation that they cannot objectively judge the legitimacy of taking action against another nation. That failure was evident in Nazi Germany, where the Church became a lapdog to the State. Yes, there were those who stood against it in defiance, but most did not. The Church also failed in Constantine’s Rome.
Yes, there are times when war is just. We must be careful to step outside of nationalistic thinking and critique our nations so that we can be faithful to God, before our State, and then act according to our conscience.
Remember, God is sovereign. The nations rage, but God has established His King on Mount Zion. He has given Him an inheritance which is the whole world. And there will come a day when we will take our swords and craft them into plowshares. We will learn war no more. Come quickly Lord Jesus!
Author: John Salvatore, Faith Church of the Valley. The Just War Theory section of this article was adapted from an article by Commander Timothy J. Demy, Th.D. and Th.M. (Dallas Theological Seminary), Chaplain Corps, U.S. Navy.
Copyright © 2003, Faith Church of the Valley, Chandler, Arizona. All Rights Reserved - except as noted on attached “Usage and Copyright” page that grants ChristianAnswers.Net users generous rights for putting this page to work in their homes, personal witnessing, churches and schools.
www.ChristianAnswers.Net
Christian Answers Network
PO Box 200
Gilbert AZ 85299
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/25 @ 04:03 AM — (Reply)
That was excellent, well worth the read EB.
PS- thanks for ink!
Comment by Joe Gringo— 2007/11/27 @ 04:50 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2007/11/29 @ 03:47 PM — (Reply)