Christian "high horse"

[Andy9o8 0]

RonD1120

However, radical Islamic terrorists are real and evil. We need leadership to annihilate them from the face of the earth, not lecture Christians as being on a "high horse."

Then you misunderstand the lecture, the FoxNews-esque spin of it notwithstanding. It's a lecture to not use the existence of radical Islamic terrorists as a convenient rationalization for broad-brush anti-Islamic bigotry. If you think about it... stay with me, now.... the point of the lecture is really quite Christ-like.

[RonD1120 58]

I'm with you. I just wanted to get back on track.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Boomerdog 0]

You done yet? Ooops...don't stop you're on a roll, write a dissertaion and impress us.

[SkyDekker 1,121]

RonD1120

However, radical Islamic terrorists are real and evil. We need leadership to annihilate them from the face of the earth, not lecture Christians as being on a "high horse."

No we need Muslims to deal with them. Otherwise we will just create the next group of radicals.

Though I have this feeling that murdering all non-christians would be quite fine with you.

[RonD1120 58]

What we could do is divide the world between Christians and non-Christians. Then find some really big battlefield, probably somewhere in the Mideast, and pit one side against the other in a fight to the death. The winner would get the whole earth. I'll bet the blood would flow as deep as horses' bridles but it would be done. Bring it on!

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[rushmc 18]

SkyDekker

***However, radical Islamic terrorists are real and evil. We need leadership to annihilate them from the face of the earth, not lecture Christians as being on a "high horse."

No we need Muslims to deal with them. Otherwise we will just create the next group of radicals.

Though I have this feeling that murdering all non-christians would be quite fine with you.

Sorry
you are wrong has these groups as you llike to call them, have been around for a long long time

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[normiss 622]

So much for that "loving" god then.

Why does it seem all religion want to do is spread hatred and kill people???

[Bolas 5]

RonD1120

What we could do is divide the world between Christians and non-Christians. Then find some really big battlefield, probably somewhere in the Mideast, and pit one side against the other in a fight to the death. The winner would get the whole earth. I'll bet the blood would flow as deep as horses' bridles but it would be done. Bring it on!

How about this:

Anyone who believes in a deity can live in the Middle East and North Africa. They can choose to get along or fight.

Those that don't get the rest of the planet. They can choose to get along or fight.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[SkyDekker 1,121]

Bolas

***What we could do is divide the world between Christians and non-Christians. Then find some really big battlefield, probably somewhere in the Mideast, and pit one side against the other in a fight to the death. The winner would get the whole earth. I'll bet the blood would flow as deep as horses' bridles but it would be done. Bring it on!

How about this:

Anyone who believes in a deity can live in the Middle East and North Africa. They can choose to get along or fight.

Those that don't get the rest of the planet. They can choose to get along or fight.
Most belief systems are structured around a better place once you die. Why not just help all believers get to their better place and the non-believers inherit the world?

[billvon 2,396]

>you are wrong has these groups as you llike to call them, have been around for a long long time

Agreed. Heck, they were around back in the 1100's when Christians did their level best to eradicate Islam in the Middle East. (Although they were called Saracens back then.)

[rushmc 18]

billvon

>you are wrong has these groups as you llike to call them, have been around for a long long time

Agreed. Heck, they were around back in the 1100's when Christians did their level best to eradicate Islam in the Middle East. (Although they were called Saracens back then.)

All I am saying is they do not need a reason to form
The, we are creating them by our actions, is a talking point with no fact behind it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[normiss 622]

Religion shows hate every day, today, it's in Kansas
Desperation at this point really.
Or simple insanity, you pick.

[rushmc 18]

normiss

Religion shows hate every day, today, it's in Kansas
Desperation at this point really.
Or simple insanity, you pick.

Well, I look to a bit of history
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/history.htm

one of many sights that look at the history of this religion

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[normiss 622]

[rushmc 18]

normiss

sure
one can do that if you wish to off handedly dissmiss what is happening TODAY!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[normiss 622]

Why is it bad?
It was fine when the christians were doing the same damn thing.

I'm not dismissing it, I'm also not panicking over it.
Nor am I calling the world to all out end of times warfare.
History...it's kinda weird the ways it repeats itself.

Why not just people the fuck alone?
Why does anybody care what another person does in their life???

[SkyDekker 1,121]

rushmc

***

sure
one can do that if you wish to off handedly dissmiss what is happening TODAY!

What is happening today is your previous president convinced your government to go to war in Iraq. This little error has destabalized that country and quite possibly the region, which has led to the creation and rise of ISIS.

So, before you start talking about offhandedly dismissing things, why don't you first accept you created this problem.

This of course you will now offhandedly dismiss.

[rushmc 18]

normiss

Why is it bad?
It was fine when the christians were doing the same damn thing.

I'm not dismissing it, I'm also not panicking over it.
Nor am I calling the world to all out end of times warfare.
History...it's kinda weird the ways it repeats itself.

Why not just people the fuck alone?
Why does anybody care what another person does in their life???

nobody said it was
it would be wrong today
And leaving them alone will not stop them
HISTORY has shown this to be a fact

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

SkyDekker

******

sure
one can do that if you wish to off handedly dissmiss what is happening TODAY!

What is happening today is your previous president convinced your government to go to war in Iraq. This little error has destabalized that country and quite possibly the region, which has led to the creation and rise of ISIS.

So, before you start talking about offhandedly dismissing things, why don't you first accept you created this problem.

This of course you will now offhandedly dismiss.

What they are doing has nothing to do with Iraq
Sure, they use it but, history shows they would be attacking with or without that as an excuse
You use it as a talking point excuse to defend what they do
You dismiss what they are doing today

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[normiss 622]

While those actions clearly created the power vacuum that these religious idiots used to their advantage, those actions did not create religious zealot idiotic "convert or die" behavior.
Religion continues to prove it does that all on it's own.

[funjumper101 15]

RonD1120

For those of you who believe the Crusades were as evil as the current move of the Daesh read the following.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/398126/jihadis-14-crusaders-2-ralph-peters

Perhaps you might read a bit about religious rituals that occurred in your part of the world within the past 130 years.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/02/jim_crow_south_s_lynching_of_blacks_and_christianity_the_terror_inflicted.html


It seems likely that if such rituals were happening now, you and the other "christians" in the community in which you now reside would gleefully and wholeheartedly participate in such rituals without a shred of shame or guilt. It is all part of God's plan, eh?

This is one example that proves President Obama's point about religion and the heinous activities that have been performed in the name of God, or Allah, depending on which theology you follow. There are plenty more. They are quite easy to find.

Real historical facts can be very unpleasant to contemplate.

[kallend 1,623]

rushmc

*********

sure
one can do that if you wish to off handedly dissmiss what is happening TODAY!

What is happening today is your previous president convinced your government to go to war in Iraq. This little error has destabalized that country and quite possibly the region, which has led to the creation and rise of ISIS.

So, before you start talking about offhandedly dismissing things, why don't you first accept you created this problem.

This of course you will now offhandedly dismiss.

What they are doing has nothing to do with Iraq


BERLIN, Germany – Former UN chief Kofi Annan blamed the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq for the rise of the Islamic State (ISIS), warning that the Middle East must evolve and adapt for lasting peace.

Annan, who was speaking Sunday at the Munich Security Conference where many world leaders and ministers have been discussing global issues that include the wars in Iraq and Syria, said he had always opposed the US invasion of Iraq.

“The folly of that fateful decision was compounded by post-invasion decisions,” he said in a speech. “The wholesale disbandment of the security forces, among other measures poured hundreds of thousands of trained and disgruntled soldiers and policemen onto the streets,” he noted.

“The ensuing chaos has proved an ideal breeding ground for the Sunni radical groups that have now coalesced around the Islamic State label,” he said.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[RonD1120 58]

Your assumption is unfounded.

ETA: What do you think we should do regarding the Daesh?

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[jakee 1,254]

kallend

Quote

What they are doing has nothing to do with Iraq

BERLIN, Germany – Former UN chief Kofi Annan blamed the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq for the rise of the Islamic State (ISIS), warning that the Middle East must evolve and adapt for lasting peace.

Annan, who was speaking Sunday at the Munich Security Conference where many world leaders and ministers have been discussing global issues that include the wars in Iraq and Syria, said he had always opposed the US invasion of Iraq.

“The folly of that fateful decision was compounded by post-invasion decisions,” he said in a speech. “The wholesale disbandment of the security forces, among other measures poured hundreds of thousands of trained and disgruntled soldiers and policemen onto the streets,” he noted.

“The ensuing chaos has proved an ideal breeding ground for the Sunni radical groups that have now coalesced around the Islamic State label,” he said.

Not sure what you can say to someone who thinks ISIS (what does that stand for again?) has nothing to do with Iraq. Of course it does. Not just from the invasion, but from the ludicrous optimism and complete lack of contingency planning surrounding what would happen post-invasion.

MR. RUSSERT: If your analysis is not correct, and we’re not treated as liberators, but as conquerors, and the Iraqis begin to resist, particularly in Baghdad, do you think the American people are prepared for a long, costly, and bloody battle with significant American casualties?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, I don’t think it’s likely to unfold that way, Tim, because I really do believe that we will be greeted as liberators. I’ve talked with a lot of Iraqis in the last several months myself, had them to the White House. The president and I have met with them, various groups and individuals, people who have devoted their lives from the outside to trying to change things inside Iraq. And like Kanan Makiya who’s a professor at Brandeis, but an Iraqi, he’s written great books about the subject, knows the country intimately, and is a part of the democratic opposition and resistance. The read we get on the people of Iraq is there is no question but what they want to the get rid of Saddam Hussein and they will welcome as liberators the United States when we come to do that....

MR. RUSSERT: The army’s top general said that we would have to have several hundred thousand troops there for several years in order to maintain stability.

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I disagree. We need, obviously, a large force and we’ve deployed a large force. To prevail, from a military standpoint, to achieve our objectives, we will need a significant presence there until such time as we can turn things over to the Iraqis themselves. But to suggest that we need several hundred thousand troops there after military operations cease, after the conflict ends, I don’t think is accurate. I think that’s an overstatement.

MR. RUSSERT: We have had 50,000 troops in Kosovo for several years, a country of just five million people. This is a country of 23 million people. It will take a lot in order to secure it.

VICE PRES. CHENEY:... But the—again, I come back to this proposition—Is it cost-free? Absolutely not. But the cost is far less than it will be if we get hit, for example, with a weapon that Saddam Hussein might provide to al-Qaeda, the cost to the United States of what happened on 9/11 with billions and billions of dollars and 3,000 lives.

And you can't say they weren't warned - they just looked for the intelligence they wanted to hear.

Admiral Lord Boyce said he tried in vain to persuade defence officials in Washington that the coalition forces would not be greeted as liberators.

He told the inquiry: "I could not get across to them the fact that the coalition would not be seen as a liberation force and that flowers would be stuck on the end of rifles and we would be welcomed and it would all be lovely...

"This was absolutely not accepted. I think, as far as the Pentagon was concerned, both the civilians in the Pentagon and the uniforms, they just thought that Iraq would be fine on the day."

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[funjumper101 15]

RonD1120

Your assumption is unfounded.

ETA: What do you think we should do regarding the Daesh?

The USA should not bother with whacked out conspiracy theories.

Did you read the Slate story? Do you deny the conclusions that are expressed in the story?

In other words, were the lynchings were an expression of "Christian" supremacy over black people, or not?

Odds are the folks in your community would gladly lynch a Muslim, if they could get away with it. Your own writings make that very clear.