[QUOTE=ArrMatey]
So, uhm… Yes. Christianity has expanded via war. Not saying it always has, just saying your demand for an appology over such an idea might not be justified.
[/QUOTE]
I never said that Christianity did not expand by war, but the claim was that was the “primary vehicle for the spread of Christianity since it’s inception throughout most of Western Civilization.” That is a lie.
[QUOTE=Two and a Half Inches of Fun]
I never said that Christianity did not expand by war, but the claim was that was the “primary vehicle for the spread of Christianity since it’s inception throughout most of Western Civilization.” That is a lie.
[/QUOTE]
In the early Roman Empire, Christianity spread by underground missionary work.
After it took control of the Empire, it spread by the force of the state.
After the Empire fell, it spread by missionary work among the barbarians.
After Columbus, it spread mainly by force and war.
I omit the Crusades, which did not “spread Christianity” except geographically and temporarily – in the Mideast, that is; there were several other “Crusades” in Europe, against pagan holdouts and heretics such as the Cathars, that had much more deep and lasting success.
In sum, however, a religion that would hardly be worth noticing, today, if it had never had armed force behind it.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
No, the aftermath would be like the present occupation of Iraq, but on a transcontinental scale. Definitely not a win.
Making the occupied Germans give up being Nazis is a whole lot easier than making occupied Muslims give up being Islamists; any forceful effort along those lines is far more likely to push them even more towards Islamic radicalism. As we should have learned by now.
[/QUOTE]
Most all of the people that would resist an occupation would be dead. A general war between the Western world and the Islamic world would be an ugly thing. Most of the Islamic world would be carpet bombed to dust. Thankfully, this war is not going to happen.
And you have not explained how the terrorist win in a general war scenario.
[QUOTE=Two and a Half Inches of Fun]
Most all of the people that would resist an occupation would be dead. A general war between the Western world and the Islamic world would be an ugly thing. Most of the Islamic world would be carpet bombed to dust.
[/quote]
Oh, we couldn’t do that! It would make it impossible to access the oil afterwards!
[QUOTE=Two and a Half Inches of Fun]
And you have not explained how the terrorist win in a general war scenario.
[/QUOTE]
By their lights, they win just by making it happen. (The rest of the job is not for terrorists, but for real armies.)
[QUOTE=yojimbo]
If this story is true and there are US fuckwits taking it upon themselves to proseltize to the Iraqis then they need to be found and stopped.
This kind of arrogant self servering shit is just putting their fellow soldiers at risk.
[/QUOTE]
Not exactly an unbiased source from reading that article. What I can tell you is that if there are individuals attempting to preach to Iraqis it is a courtmartial offense. Prohibition against such acts are in Centcom General Order #1. Everyone serving in Iraq knows it.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
Oh, we couldn’t do that! It would make it impossible to access the oil afterwards!
[/quote]
The oil is underground and will not be damaged. But the oil is one of the reasons it will be so ugly. The war will have to be over relatively fast.
No. Their goals are not just to start the war, but to see it won (by an entity that does not even exist).
[QUOTE=Two and a Half Inches of Fun]
You already said you do.
So you admit that it has not happened, and then you say that that is the perception. So you should believe that perception is wrong.
[/QUOTE]
What I believe is that the perception exists. I believe that America is currently in a position where the powers-that-be are doing things that cause said perception. I would really like them to stop.
I also believe you already know this is what I meant, and I wonder why you question it.
[QUOTE=Two and a Half Inches of Fun]
Do you want someone to call the whambulance?
[/QUOTE]
Christ! What an original, funny, thought-provoking post! But then again, that could be said about everything you post!
I weep for the ferns that died during the Carboniferous Era, were transformed into coal, and then wasted when they were burned to generate the electricity used every time you post.
You’re an oozing, bleeding neoplasm on this board. I look forward to the day you are excised.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
In the early Roman Empire, Christianity spread by underground missionary work.
After it took control of the Empire, it spread by the force of the state.
After the Empire fell, it spread by missionary work among the barbarians.
After Columbus, it spread mainly by force and war.
I omit the Crusades, which did not “spread Christianity” except geographically and temporarily – in the Mideast, that is; there were several other “Crusades” in Europe, against pagan holdouts and heretics such as the Cathars, that had much more deep and lasting success.
In sum, however, a religion that would hardly be worth noticing, today, if it had never had armed force behind it.
[/QUOTE]
But the spread of it had more to do with the underground and missionary work and taking land (if you are an American see our country) and Christians filling it with their own descendants than forcing conversions with a "boot on [the] neck. Not that forced conversion during war did not (does not) happen, but it is not the primary way Christianity was spread.
[QUOTE=Two and a Half Inches of Fun]
The oil is underground and will not be damaged.
[/QUOTE]
It has to be pumped from the surface, and not a radioactive surface.
[QUOTE=ArrMatey!]
What I believe is that the perception exists. I believe that America is currently in a position where the powers-that-be are doing things that cause said perception. I would really like them to stop.
I also believe you already know this is what I meant, and I wonder why you question it.
[/QUOTE]
What have the powers-that-be done that causes the perception that American children are being herded into stadiums and that there are soldiers on the streets of America?
Please be specific.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
It has to be pumped from the surface, and not a radioactive surface.
[/QUOTE]
Not all bombs are radioactive.
[QUOTE=Weirddave]
Terrorists with their own agendas will continue to fly planes into our buildings, or attack us in other ways, no matter what we do.
[/quote]
Don’t be silly. Plenty of people attack us who wouldn’t bother, if we didn’t do things like invade and bomb their countries and massacre their friends and relatives. The world is not composed of automatons who are hostile or non-hostile to America regardless of our behavior. People have reasons for what they do.
[QUOTE=Weirddave]
All nations act from their own perceived best interest, “the respect of the world” has nothing whatsoever to do with it, and attempting to base our actions and decisions on something so nebulous, meaningless and non-existent is the quickest road to disaster that I can think of.
[/QUOTE]
You know, that’s exactly the sort of thinking that puts countries on the wrong side of losing wars and economic embargoes. Like it or not, nations are run by and composed of people, most of whom aren’t particularly motivated by the cold robotic calculation of self interest. People who have feelings, moral codes, and ideologies. People who despise us can and will choose not to help us, or actively work to harm us regardless of whether or not it’s in their self interest. For that matter, making us despised makes it in the self interest of political leaders to NOT cooperate.
I generally don’t respond to Der Trihs, but in this case, I can’t resist.
Good God you’re an idiot.
Well, coming from someone who believes the war in Iraq is justified, I’m not sure I’d consider that much of an insult.
[QUOTE=Weirddave]
I generally don’t respond to Der Trihs, but in this case, I can’t resist.
Good God you’re an idiot.
[/QUOTE]
Really. I’m not the one who’s claiming that the world is composed of inhuman, emotionless drones whose actions are unaffected by our behavior.
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
Really. I’m not the one who’s claiming that the world is composed of inhuman, emotionless drones whose actions are unaffected by our behavior.
[/QUOTE]
And neither am I. Nations, however, ARE inhuman, emotionless, soulless constructs WRT international relations. They have to be. Christ, it’s even one of your “America is evil” mantras.
And woodstockbirdybird, the war was justified. Of all of the reasons laid out in the authorization for the use of force, only one-WMD-turned out to be false. Everything else was right on the money. You can argue that the war wasn’t wise, wasn’t needed, hasn’t been carried out properly or many other things, but you’re off base if you say it wasn’t justified. Sorry, you’re wrong.
[QUOTE=Spiff]
If we had the respect of the world, some of them would become our allies and join us in the good fight to combat terrorists.<snip>
[/QUOTE]
As yojimbo said, many countries’ soldiers are fighting (and dying) alongside the US in Afghanistan, Canada being one of them. We helped the US as much as we could when the World Trade Centre and Pentagon attacks occurred (look it up if you’re interested in learning about how some small Canadian communities doubled in population from stranded fliers and things like that), we went to Afghanistan with the US for the legitimate reason of bringing Osama bin Laden to international justice, but we did not go into Iraq with the US, because it is and was wrong. I think it’s important for US Americans to know that they do have allies in the world, but those allies are not necessarily going to do wrong things with you.
[QUOTE=Weirddave]
And neither am I. Nations, however, ARE inhuman, emotionless, soulless constructs WRT international relations.
[/QUOTE]
But nations aren’t flying 'planes into buildings. Individuals are. And those individuals do so for reasons based on their emotions.
[QUOTE=villa]
But nations aren’t flying 'planes into buildings. Individuals are. And those individuals do so for reasons based on their emotions.
[/QUOTE]
As well, nations are headed by people. In fact, nations are little else than populations. If you truly believe that the actions of a nation are independant of the thoughts and emotions of her leaders, then you are sadly mistaken. The US in the past eight years is very much a reflection of the values of Bush/Cheney/Rove. They are the primary policy makers, and they are quite human(oid).