I've said before that the "Christian" side of the Crusades ought to be more abhorrent to the Christ-follower than the Muslim side, because Rome was claiming to represent Christ, while the Muslims were not.
Well, here's a contemporary example of this principle. Donald Rumsfeld's once classified "Worldwide Intelligence Update" associates the Word of God with the imperial ambitions of the Pentagram...er, Pentagon. Viewing this should turn the stomach of the disciple of Jesus.
How horribly evil it is that the invasion and occupation of Iraq that led to the death of 1 million Iraqis and which left 4.5 million displaced and 5 million orphaned (No wonder Iraqis prefer life under the hated Saddam!) is considered act of Christianity. In reality, a "Crusade," as Rumsfeld branded it, is not of Christ, but quite the opposite. Christ taught us to love our enemies, not to kill innocent people who happen to live in a country ruled by a regime that the governments of this world declare to be an enemy regime.
Here's the slide show put together by GQ showing how Rumsfeld's Pentagon mixed Bible verses in with their military exploits in a disgusting attempt to bring divine sanction to the military-industrial-complex. Unfortunately, far too many Christians were echoing these misrepresentations of Christ, but perhaps there is truly an awakening and a movement of repentance within the Christian church today.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Not too surprising. How could anyone engage in the killing of others without believing that they were doing God's will? I think that most people who do violent acts believe that what they are doing is morally right and not evil. Otherwise, how could you live with yourself and that guilty conscience?
ReplyDeleteGood point. I've wondered if even Lucifer thought he was doing something good when he challenged God's government in heaven and led 1/3 of the angels against the Lord. Did he think that God was really bad and that he was really good? Evil usually thinks its good, I think, but is blinded by pride, the Great Sin.
ReplyDeleteNot that I'm defending, nor criticizing the war in Iraq. But modern warfare has made it increasingly difficult to spare the lives of innocent civilians. I do not think that Rumsfeld and the rest of the politicians involved in the war planned all of these civilian deaths (though even to a very small extent they are responsible for them). However I believe they assuaged their conscience by justifying in their mind that the cost of Iraqi lives was a consequence of saving the lives of tens of thousands of American Soldiers (And perhaps rightly so). So rather then being blinded by pride, I think it is more likely that they were governed by their own belief that an American life is worth far more than an Iraqi life.
ReplyDeleteI agree: They believe an American life is worth more than an Iraqi life. I'd call that pride, arrogance, self-centeredness, whatever. Definitely evil.
ReplyDeleteI think it goes without saying also, and I think you'd agree, that American Soldiers' lives were not SAVED by this war, as the twisted logic of empire might suggest, but rather, they were sacrificed on the alter of the Neo-con agenda.
One place where we might disagree a little is that I don't have a problem saying that they "planned" for civilian deaths. It may not have been their primary objective, but when you know something is going to result from your actions, and you deliberately take those actions, you have planned for the results to occur.
I would agree that they aren't bound to any morals. But to say that they are personally evil... I cannot be so sure. On one hand their actions caused the deaths of countless of civilian lives. And on the other, Government is not a moral force, nor should it be (although it should be bound to moral standards). As I said before, modern warfare has made it increasingly difficult to spare the lives of innocents. So do we judge them by the amount of lives they wasted, or by the amount of American Lives saved? It is a very difficult issue for me.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with you that, due to the War itself, that American Lives were not saved, but wasted carelessly. However, because we are already in the war I would also agree with "doing what we can to save American Lives".
Also as far as the "planning civilian deaths" goes, the real issue there is not that civilians died. As I have said before, " modern warfare has made it increasingly difficult to spare the lives of innocent civilians." The issue is: "were those deaths necessary?"
I think not. In hindsight, I see no need nor justification to invade Iraq. If there were actually WMD, I might be able to Justify the war. However because nothing was found, the masterminds behind the war should be held accountable.