[hks_kansei]

an unconditional surrender.

Wasn't this term used in August 1945?.......... right about when an entire city of mostly innocent women and children was destroyed in one go....


Yes, you are correct, killing everybody will prevent war, in fact, exploding the planet will further prevent wars. If everybody is dead they can't fight, and if there's no planet there's nothing to fight over.
Is that necessarily better though?

[arnold]

And now america is being resold on the new idea of "needing to go to war" with Iran.

Yeh, why don't they learn about "Peace in our time" and negotiate like that Neville chap did? ( America deserves a Capital A even if you think it no better than it's enemies.)

[Blue]

As an atheist but well-versed in the intricacies of the 3 major Abrahamic religions, your first statement might only be right for those who believe in Christ to begin with, a type of circular reference ususally found in faulty Excel spreadsheets. Christianity as a whole accepts every single word that is in the OT as the word of the one and only god herself.

The second statement seems to wrongly suggest christianity has its own god, different from judaism and islam. There is no such thing as "Christianity and its God". This shows more than just self-righteousness, it shows you do not accept a theological fact of life.

Christianity, judaisme and islam share one god (if she would exist in the first place of course). Christianity expanded the OT quite a bit with a new bundle of writings by various persons of which some ended up bundled into the New testament. Islam did much of the same with both OT and NT. There is no escaping the fact that if one is right about "its" god, they all are and if one is wrong...well, you figure it out.

Can you cite the Book and verse in the OT where Christ is mentioned?

[MRRiley]

Mike, Christianity is centred on Christ. He *never* condemned anyone (the adulteress, the unbeliever, the inside betrayer, etc.) and fulfilled Old Testament prophecy. It is incorrect to quite the Old Testament and say this is what Christianity and its God stands for.

Ash,

D0n claimed that RML faced no harm or was not in danger from Christians. The reason I cited the OT was that there are no NT calls for the death of homosexuals, while the OT (which many many Christions cherry-pick) contains the passages I cited. I'll give you that Jesus never condemned anyone (except the money changers) and was probably actually a pretty liberal guy. However it is spoken against by his early followers in Romans, 1st Corinthians and 1st Timothy.

Please realize that my point was to directly counter D0n's argument that Christians would not hurt her, by citing concrete examples both in our current time and in history when people justified killing homsexuals on Judeo-Christian religious grounds. That the current threat, in this country at least (and probably in yours as well) is from ultra-fundamental Christians is clear and indisputable. Were she in the middle east or some Muslim dominated country, the threat would be from Muslims, but she is in the U.S. and Christian zealots are the proximate threat.

Another reason I quoted the OT... Most mainstream Christian sects place a high degree of reliance on the Old Testament, so in a sense it does indicate what Christianity and the Christian "God" stand for. Preachers sermonize on stuff in the OT as much as they preach about stuff in the NT. Trouble is, they cherry-pick it to pieces, concentrating on stuff like homsexuality being a mortal sin, while ignoring the laws not to eat pork or shellfish. So when Christians claim that the second does not apply to them as gentiles of the new covenant, then logically neither should the first, but they inevitably argue that homosexuality is somehow more evil than pork (though it is found in the same list of prohibitions) and the transcends the transition to the new covenant.

Mike

---

Last edited by MRRiley; 12-05-2012 at 05:13 PM.

[arnold]

The point is not that Christianity has not been used to justify dreadful things. The point is that it has been "tamed" by our secular values, something Islam still needs to go through. 'Moderate' (non fanatical) religionists are those who are not 100% committed, and it's the only way one can live with them, since those who take their religion seriously take little heed of values outside their dogma.

[Ash]

The second statement seems to wrongly suggest christianity has its own god, different from judaism and islam. There is no such thing as "Christianity and its God". This shows more than just self-righteousness, it shows you do not accept a theological fact of life.

I was not inferring Christianity has any separate God. It was not to be taken in this way. There is one God only according to all Abrahamic religions. If you and I know this, then we can stop bicking over it and move on.

What was this thread about anyway?

[Ash]

The point is not that Christianity has not been used to justify dreadful things.

Unfortunately arnold, it has. A lot. It is a common argument put forward about which religion is the most violent. You can just look through this own forum's history as to the discussions around this very topic. Check here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/political-religious-discussion/78644-isla...-minarets.html

Then: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/political-religious-discussion/93220-what-christian.html, https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/political-religious-discussion/169295-why...istianity.html and https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/political-religious-discussion/169129-chr...y-defined.html

[Ash]

Please realize that my point was to directly counter D0n's argument that Christians would not hurt her, by citing concrete examples both in our current time and in history when people justified killing homsexuals on Judeo-Christian religious grounds

Got it Mike.
It's so easy to justify anything based on anything, and it's just history repeating itself and our own self-destructive nature manifesting.

Most mainstream Christian sects place a high degree of reliance on the Old Testament, so in a sense it does indicate what Christianity and the Christian "God" stand for

The OT is still relevant historically but not as an example to emulate since Jesus came to put the 'laws' given to Moses in their place.

[Blue]

Wasn't this term used in August 1945?.......... right about when an entire city of mostly innocent women and children was destroyed in one go....


Yes, you are correct, killing everybody will prevent war, in fact, exploding the planet will further prevent wars. If everybody is dead they can't fight, and if there's no planet there's nothing to fight over.
Is that necessarily better though?

No, the term was used in Dec 1941. It has something to do with tomorrow.

[Tom S.]

No, the term was used in Dec 1941. It has something to do with tomorrow.

Or in other terms: Reap what you sow. Without Pearl Harbor there wouldn't have been a Hiroshima or Nagasaki bombing.

[jeffkrol]

No, the term was used in Dec 1941. It has something to do with tomorrow.

One result of the conference was a 26 July joint proclamation by the U.S., Great Britain and China, the three main powers then fighting Japan. This "Potsdam Declaration" described Japan's present perilous condition, gave the terms for her surrender and stated the Allies' intentions concerning her postwar status. It ended with an ultimatum: Japan must immediately agree to unconditionally surrender, or face "prompt and utter destruction".

Potsdam Conference

The first ten days of August 1945 had been disastrous for Japan. Having seemingly ignored the 26 July Potsdam Declaration of Allied terms, the beaten and increasingly devastated nation's military clung to hope that the coming invasion of the home islands would be beaten back at great cost to the invaders, making possible a more favorable negotiated peace.

However, on 6 August, the Hiroshima atomic bombing demonstrated that the "prompt and utter distruction" promised by the Potsdam Declaration was now at hand. That message was reinforced by the Nagasaki bomb three days later. A fast-moving Soviet invasion of Manchuria on the same day shattered any expectation that Japan's large army could hold back her enemies' conventional forces. This triple shock prompted, after several difficult meetings of his chief officials, the Japanese Emperor's decision to end the War by accepting the Allies' terms, a decision announced on 14 August.

Eighteen days of celebrations, preparations, prisoner of war recovery and initial occupation activities by the Allies followed, initially with considerable wariness of possible Japanese treachery. Things went relatively smoothly, though, bu

ilding to a dramatic climax on 2 September 1945 in Tokyo Bay, when representatives of Japan's government and her military signed the Instrument of Surrender on board USS Missouri (BB-63).
JAPAN CAPITULATES

JOINT RESOLUTION Declaring that a state of war exists between the Imperial Government of Japan and the Government and the people of the United States and making provisions to prosecute the same.

Whereas the Imperial Government of Japan has committed unprovoked acts of war against the Government and the people of the United States of America:

Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the state of war between the United States and the Imperial Government of Japan which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby formally declared; and the President is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war against the Imperial Government of Japan; and, to bring the conflict to a successful termination, all the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States.[7]

Of course you know all that..

The "good old days" when a country actually had to attack you (physically and not just "on paper") before you invaded...........

By the grace of Heaven, Emperor of Japan [Emperor Shōwa], seated on the throne occupied by the same dynasty from time immemorial, enjoin upon ye, Our loyal and brave subjects:

We hereby declare War on the United States of America and the British Empire. The men and officers of Our Army and Navy shall do their utmost in prosecuting the war. Our public servants of various departments shall perform faithfully and diligently their respective duties; the entire nation with a united will shall mobilize their total strength so that nothing will miscarry in the attainment of Our war aims.

To ensure the stability of East Asia and to contribute to world peace is the far-sighted policy which was formulated by Our Great Illustrious Imperial Grandsire [Emperor Meiji] and Our Great Imperial Sire succeeding Him [Emperor Taishō], and which We lay constantly to heart. To cultivate friendship among nations and to enjoy prosperity in common with all nations, has always been the guiding principle of Our Empire's foreign policy. It has been truly unavoidable and far from Our wishes that Our Empire has been brought to cross swords with America and Britain. More than four years have passed since China, failing to comprehend the true intentions of Our Empire, and recklessly courting trouble, disturbed the peace of East Asia and compelled Our Empire to take up arms.....................Our confident expectation that the task bequeathed by Our forefathers will be carried forward and that the sources of evil will be speedily eradicated and an enduring peace immutably established in East Asia, preserving thereby the glory of Our Empire.

Change a few words (Iraq, Bush, God, US, Mideast) and you get true irony..........

[seacapt]

Getting back to the thread title of missed opportunities and bad ideas.
There is a FOB in NE Afghanistan where a close friend's son is currently stationed. He is career military coming up on his 20 and has seen all kinds of sh!t but nothing like the sh!t he's in now. This base was set up and is maintained by the US Army and hosts NATO, Afghan and other branches of the US millitary forces.This past weekend was the 3rd time this year that the Taliban have caused damage and deaths at this base.
Last night I was shown pics of the base and was flabberghasted by what I saw. For the sake of those stationed there I will not mention most of the blatant security weaknesses but three of the big ones are obvious to anyone . They built this base at the bottom of a hill rather than on the adajcent high ground. There is a single tower which doesn't even afford 360 visabillity and is manned exclusively by Afghan troops (no joint patrol here) with light arms.There is a single fence with no outer perimeter.
Aside from security issues at this base there are supply and logistics problems . Our troops frequently don;t even have toilet paper.
The campaign is over Barry won isn't it time that our Comander in Chief pull his head out and appoint joint chiefs of staff who know whats going on and will advise rather than being yes men.
How many more will be hurt at this one base due to stupidity and disregard?
How many more FOBs were set up by lazy ass clowns?
Barry is quick to say that he follows the advice of his millitary advisors , if that's the case he needs better advisors
Regardless if you believe we should have millitary personel abroad or not the fact is those at these bases deserve better than they are getting.