OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 23, 2014, 10:46:02 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Iran...Deal with it now or later  (Read 7436 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Mo the Ethio
Proud Capitalist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
Posts: 453



« on: January 29, 2006, 08:58:12 PM »

Tom S`post on this got sidetracked a bit so I am going to post anew on this topic.
 I`ve been thinking about the situation in Iran for a long time and it seems to me the only option Israel has is to eliminate Irans` nuclear aspirations. There is no doubt in my mind that Iran would use a nuclear weapon against Israel given the chance. Does anyone have illusions about the United States` responce would be if that unthinkable event were to transpire? And the Chinese responce to our responce..etc...?
ÂÂ  The only option is an air strike with bunker piercing bombs. Give them twelve hours notice to vacate then go to town.
Now,before all of my liberal friends jump my a#$, I want to say that I am in full agreement that this sucks. It would be wonderful if we could suddenly eliminate all nuclear weapons from the face of the earth. But , you know what? Surprise! IT AIN`T GONNA HAPPEN!! Life is full of hard choices and this is one of them. Trying to hold the hand of the President of Iran and get him to change his mind will only give them more time to finish their bomb.
 
The options are :ÂÂ  a smaller amount of pain now or a LOT of pain later.

 
  ÃƒÆ’‚ As someone on this forum once pointed out, Christianity is a religion of peace not passivity. Where does one draw the line between
turning the other cheek/ praying for our enemies and defending our families?
  ÃƒÆ’‚ For myself, this is a no-brainier. If my family is threatened then it is my obligation to defend them to the death. Indeed, it would be a grave sin for me to do otherwise, right? (Seminarians chime in here with cannon law, please).
  ÃƒÆ’‚ Defending my family, in my book includes, ALL threatening actions whether from a person breaking into my house or some maniac drawing us in to World War Three. The world cannot afford to stand by and hope that "diplomatic" solutions will succeed.
 Now is the time to act.
  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚ Moses
« Last Edit: January 29, 2006, 09:58:09 PM by Mo the Ethio » Logged

"Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names."
- John F. Kennedy (1917-1963)
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,914


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #1 on: January 29, 2006, 10:17:02 PM »

My political views out of the picture, the scripture says "turn the other cheek," not "turn your wife's cheek."  Defending others is seen as noble.  As far as "if Iran attacks Israel," I think the point was brought up that the US has a treaty that requires us to go to war - with anyone who attacks Israel with Nuclear Weapons - by using our nuclear arsenal.  I don't want to get into all the possible iterations of who would attack whom, and who wouldn't (because of economics, fear, or alliances).  And since I don't have the full picture of who has what and what is ready and targeted, I couldn't comment if a pre-emptive strike would be appropriate.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 29, 2006, 10:49:25 PM »

This is a political thread. Is there any reason we shouldn't close this?
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #3 on: January 29, 2006, 11:06:35 PM »

This is a political thread. Is there any reason we shouldn't close this?

Perhaps the thread could be construed to be about international politics rather than American politics? Mind you it can be difficult to discuss international politics without including American politics, but I'm sure you know the details and nuances of your American politics ban, and what it does and does not entail, better than I.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Mo the Ethio
Proud Capitalist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
Posts: 453



« Reply #4 on: January 29, 2006, 11:10:23 PM »

I thought I might get called on that. However, the rules of the forum state " No American Political Discussion" .

 ÃƒÆ’‚ Although I briefly touched on some implications involving the U.S. , this topic of this thread is middle-eastern politics.
I don`t believe I am breaking the rules of the forum by posting this as politics outside of the U.S. are not prohibited.
 If I am in error please let me know.
 ÃƒÆ’‚  I would like to point out however, the rule against American political discussion has been bent if not out right broken under the guise of "non" political topics.


 ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚ Moses
Logged

"Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names."
- John F. Kennedy (1917-1963)
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,914


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #5 on: January 29, 2006, 11:12:37 PM »

Really, the only two ways I would see not to close the thread for politics would be A: GiC/Mo's suggestion of how to construe it (since it really isn't Am-Pol, technically, yet), or B: create an Am-Pol/World-Pol private no-holds-barred section.  Otherwise it treads the thin line.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #6 on: January 29, 2006, 11:16:45 PM »

I would like to point out however, the rule against American political discussion has been bent if not out right broken under the guise of "non" political topics.

And the rules against Ad Hominems have been bent if not out right broken under the guise of 'addressing the issues'...which is one of the great uses of rhetoric, the ability to insult someone to their face and make it come off as a complement or addressing something that is expressly forbidden without ever violating the rules...it's a real shame that they dont teach this most valuable of skills in our schools today. Wink
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Mo the Ethio
Proud Capitalist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
Posts: 453



« Reply #7 on: January 29, 2006, 11:22:14 PM »

And the rules against Ad Hominems have been bent if not out right broken under the guise of 'addressing the issues'...which is one of the great uses of rhetoric, the ability to insult someone to their face and make it come off as a complement or addressing something that is expressly forbidden without ever violating the rules...it's a real shame that they dont teach this most valuable of skills in our schools today. Wink

 And you my brother are the KING of this fine art! ÂÂ ( Said with complete respect).
Logged

"Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names."
- John F. Kennedy (1917-1963)
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,440


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #8 on: January 29, 2006, 11:27:18 PM »

OK, have fun guys, we'll see how this goes and I'll check back in tomorrow on this thread and see if it stayed away from American political discussion.
Logged

Met. Demetrius's Enthronement

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching.

I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #9 on: January 29, 2006, 11:43:03 PM »

And you my brother are the KING of this fine art!  ( Said with complete respect).

I'll take it as a complement, however it was intended Grin
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #10 on: January 29, 2006, 11:58:07 PM »

My standard opin on Nuclear Weapons --

The US should have NEVER EVER allowed any other country to develop Nuclear Weapons. We should have obliterated all the Soviet Union's military sites as soon as they performed their first test.

Let's not beat around the bush (no pun intended) about it - the US form of government is far superior to any other. We should have done mankind a favor (favour for you left wing speakers) and used our nuclear arsenal to impose it. We imposed it on the Germans and the Japanese after we destryed them in WWII and it is the best thing we ever did.

Peace will only reign when all people are free - both economically and politically.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2006, 12:19:32 AM by TomS » Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #11 on: January 30, 2006, 01:41:47 AM »

My standard opin on Nuclear Weapons --

Well, this is a continuation of a topic that is likely to get the thread closed, but as it relates to America's role in the International scene, it should technically be allowed to continue, so on my somewhat legalistic assumption (I am a strict constructionist and student of Roman law Wink ) I shall comment.

Quote
The US should have NEVER EVER allowed any other country to develop Nuclear Weapons.

Agreed, America in particular and the world in general would be much better off today if we had forbidden the development of nuclear weapons under threat of war.

Quote
We should have obliterated all the Soviet Union's military sites as soon as they performed their first test.

Here I disagree, I personally believe that the Third Army should have crossed into East Germany on their way to Moscow as soon as we had stockpiled a few Atomic Bombs to support the invasion after the surrender of Japan...Spring of '46 would have probably been good...constantly producing more bombs, of course, and in doing so bring about the destruction of Communism world wide...no need to wait for such clearly hostile countries to actually develop the bomb.

Quote
Let's not beat around the bush (no pun intended) about it - the US form of government is far superior to any other. We should have done mankind a favor (favour for you left wing speakers) and used our nuclear arsenal to impose it. We imposed it on the Germans and the Japanese after we destryed them in WWII and it is the best thing we ever did.

Well, I dont know that I would speak to the superiority of our government, but I would agree with the sentiment Better Dead than Red.

Quote
Peace will only reign when all people are free - both economically and politically.

'qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum' -- Vegetius
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
nikolaos
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56

Macedonia birthplace of Greek civilization


« Reply #12 on: January 30, 2006, 02:39:29 AM »

Well who is responsible who should have nuclear weapons and who should not.Personally i dont feel comfortable with Iran to posses nuclear weapons but i don't also feel comfortable either with Pakistan( they  are also  fanatic Muslims and with an oppressive government) or with other countries which also are posesing nuclear weapons.I also  don't believe that us had to strike or to invent USSR at 1946 no one should forget the contribution of Russian people during the world war ii any use of nuclear weapon would be not only against the soviet government but also against the Russian people itself.so i think that the US government act wisely at that time and did not strike soviet targets.After all lets not Forget that with out any kind of war the oppressive soviet regime collapsed by it self.  Wink Lets also not forget that none government is in any case the protector of the church of freedom or of justice.Any government have its own goals which in most cases is far away from ethics or from bible
Logged
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #13 on: January 30, 2006, 02:47:43 AM »

My standard opin on Nuclear Weapons --

The US should have NEVER EVER allowed any other country to develop Nuclear Weapons. We should have obliterated all the Soviet Union's military sites as soon as they performed their first test.

Let's not beat around the bush (no pun intended) about it - the US form of government is far superior to any other. We should have done mankind a favor (favour for you left wing speakers) and used our nuclear arsenal to impose it. We imposed it on the Germans and the Japanese after we destryed them in WWII and it is the best thing we ever did.

Peace will only reign when all people are free - both economically and politically.

I agree with GiC- Better Dead Than Red. As for the bombings of Dresden, Hiroshima and Nakasaki, that's a different story and one we've covered here before. Bombing innocents in Dresden only provided propaganda fuel for Hitler while killing tens of thousands of undeserving Germans. Japan...well, they had already lost but the emporer refused to step down. Some posit that those bombings were used for display purposes- to show Russia(with whom we knew trouble would develop after the war) that we meant business if the time ever came to do business. Is that justified?

To sidetrack back to Israel...what other claim do they have to the land other than an outdated scriptural reference and the support of Western powers? While we're giving land back to "rightful owners" why not give most of Europe back to the Celts. Istanbul is formerly Christian land...why isn't the world working to secure a settlement in Turkey?
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #14 on: January 30, 2006, 09:52:05 AM »

After all lets not Forget that with out any kind of war the oppressive soviet regime collapsed by it self.ÂÂ  Wink Lets also not forget that none government is in any case the protector of the church of freedom or of justice.Any government have its own goals which in most cases is far away from ethics or from bible

We got lucky and communism fell, but both countries had to spend trillions of dollars in preparation for WWIII and the world was almost destroyed on more than one occasion, in the end we got lucky and did the best we could for not invading, but the initial decision to not invade Russia was foolish at best.

To sidetrack back to Israel...what other claim do they have to the land other than an outdated scriptural reference and the support of Western powers? While we're giving land back to "rightful owners" why not give most of Europe back to the Celts. Istanbul is formerly Christian land...why isn't the world working to secure a settlement in Turkey?

I'm not a big fan of Israel, but we do have a mutual protection pact with them, so what I think about their country or how it was formed really isn't relevant, what is relevant is that we have a responsibility to our allies to, if nothing else, retaliate if they are subject to a nuclear attack. Furthermore, as we are the primary ally that has prevented Israel's development of nuclear weapons, promising to offer protection on such matters, we have a moral responsibility to retaliate with the fullness of our nuclear capabilities instantly and without hesitation if Israel is attacked with nuclear weapons...if we are unwilling to do that then MAD is pointless and this world will become a much more dangerous place.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #15 on: January 31, 2006, 01:51:23 PM »

TEHRAN:ÂÂ  Iran struck back Tuesday at the decision of major powers earlier in the day to refer the country's nuclear program to the UN Security Council, saying the move has no legal justification and would be "the end of diplomacy," as a senior official here put it.
 
Cool! Load up the Stealth's with a couple nukes. Let's get it on.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/01/31/news/iran.php
« Last Edit: January 31, 2006, 01:51:37 PM by TomS » Logged
observer
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 546

Vivre die Raznitsa!


« Reply #16 on: January 31, 2006, 02:25:11 PM »

First it was poor Russian and now it's Iran.  China who executes political dissidents goes unchallenged. I think we are looking in the wrong direction.  BTW Russia was and is protected by its saints - I don't know about Iran - may be there is someone praying behind the scenes (in a Church, not a mosque).
Logged

Thou shalt not prefer one thing to another (Law of Liberalism)
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #17 on: January 31, 2006, 02:48:19 PM »

First it was poor Russian and now it's Iran.ÂÂ  China who executes political dissidents goes unchallenged. I think we are looking in the wrong direction.ÂÂ  BTW Russia was and is protected by its saints - I don't know about Iran - may be there is someone praying behind the scenes (in a Church, not a mosque).

China was a mistake, we failed to support Chiang Kai-Shek when we had the opportunity and now not only are we, but the citizens of China and the rest of the world as well are paying for our past mistakes today...it is, unfortunately, no longer practical to put an end to the Chinese regime. But the fact that we failed in China, just as we failed in Russia after WWII, is no excuse for us to fail in Iran today, leaving future generations with a major problem that we could have solved with one minor military operation.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2006, 02:49:42 PM by greekischristian » Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Mo the Ethio
Proud Capitalist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
Posts: 453



« Reply #18 on: January 31, 2006, 10:21:46 PM »

Quote from: TomS link=topic=8074.msg105559#msg105559 date=1138729883
 
Cool! Load up the Stealth's with a couple nukes. Let's get it on.

[url

  A bit over the top, Tom.The use of nuclear weapons in this case should be avoided. The objective could be achieved with a few M.O.A.B.s. ....Bada boom , bada bing. A surgical strike with minimal after effects.
Logged

"Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names."
- John F. Kennedy (1917-1963)
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #19 on: January 31, 2006, 11:28:43 PM »

ÂÂ  A bit over the top, Tom.

Girl !  Cheesy
Logged
Mo the Ethio
Proud Capitalist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
Posts: 453



« Reply #20 on: February 02, 2006, 03:48:41 AM »

Girl !ÂÂ  Cheesy
 Umm....ok, whatever  Roll Eyes  So...does anyone else have an opinion on the issue at hand?
Logged

"Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names."
- John F. Kennedy (1917-1963)
jmbejdl
Count-Palatine James the Spurious of Giggleswick on the Naze
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Church of Romania
Posts: 1,480


Great Martyr St. John the New of Suceava


« Reply #21 on: February 02, 2006, 05:19:23 AM »

First it was poor Russian and now it's Iran.ÂÂ  China who executes political dissidents goes unchallenged. I think we are looking in the wrong direction.ÂÂ  BTW Russia was and is protected by its saints - I don't know about Iran - may be there is someone praying behind the scenes (in a Church, not a mosque).

I'm sure that there are saints praying for Iran also. My patron, St. James the Persian, as his name suggests was a native of Persia, now known as Iran. I don't know how many other saints and martyrs the region has produced but that's at least one.

James
Logged

We owe greater gratitude to those who humble us, wrong us, and douse us with venom, than to those who nurse us with honour and sweet words, or feed us with tasty food and confections, for bile is the best medicine for our soul. - Elder Paisios of Mount Athos
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #22 on: February 02, 2006, 06:09:44 AM »

does anyone else have an opinion on the issue at hand?
We just never learn, do we? We seem to have the memory spans of fruitflies.
Does anyone even remember the "reason" we invaded Iraq? Remember how everyone was convinced that there were weapons of mass destruction? Remember those sattelite images of them we were shown on TV? We had "concrete evidence" of Iraq's WMD's, including "documented" uranium purchases.......Well guess what?......
So excuse me if I don't start shaking in my boots when the same news media starts telling me that yet another ("coincidentally" oil-rich) nation is planning to use nuclear weapons against the West.
I have no doubt another futile and unnecessary war will eventuate: those who don't learn from history are bound to repeat it, and people are reluctant to change horsemen in the middle of a perceived apocalypse.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2006, 06:46:36 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,914


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #23 on: February 02, 2006, 06:50:15 AM »

George,
While you're making a completely valid point, what would you say to those who bring up the point that, unlike Iraq in recent years, Iran has made threats to Israel, has definitely threatened to break off any and all negotiations if they don't "get their way," and has actively and not-so-privately been circumventing the IAEA rules?
Even while the point about being doomed to repeat history is one we can't overlook, what about the charge that this situation bears more resemblance to 1930's Germany than 2000's Iraq?
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #24 on: February 02, 2006, 07:08:10 AM »

Cleveland,
While it is true that Iran is circumventing IAEA rules, the belief that this is to develop nuclear weapons is not based on any evidence. Only the West believes this is Iran's goal. Neither Russia nor China believe this- interestingly, the two countries who also did not believe there were WMD's in Iraq and refused to support the invasion....and they were right, and we were wrong. And as for the comparison with Hitler, remember the constant linking of Iraq with 9/11 which the media bombarded us with prior to the invasion? Egypt has threatened (and been at war with) Israel, Lebanon has threatened (and regularly attacked) Israel...why aren't they compared to Hitler in the 1930's by our media
What is happening is straight out of Machiavelli's "The Prince". The best way to keep a population under control is through fear- when people are scared, they will do whatever their leaders tell them to do. Tell me, how often has the "Terror Alert Color" issued by the Homeland Security ever been green or blue? I'll tell you: never. Because scared people are easier to control. And scared people can more easily be made to do crazy things or agree to them and scared people can be made to act contrary to love, even the natural love common to all human beings, so they can inflict torture, kill, and terrorize. And it doesn't matter who is in government, the same tactic of fear is always used, because it is so effective: The Cold War, the Macarthy years of "Reds under the bed", where people wouild betray their neighbours out of fear.....it works, no wonder governments use it. The only wonder is that the people never cotton on to it.

EDIT:
And everyone else,
please spare me the rhetoric about "sticking my head in the sand"....when tens of thousands have needlessly died in Iraq because we struck pre-emptively, based on similar (and even more "evidence based") beliefs about Iraq.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2006, 07:54:26 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
SouthSerb99
Archbishop of Shlivo, Patriarch of All Vodkas & Defender Against All Overstepping!
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 2,800


Now Internet Forum Friendly


WWW
« Reply #25 on: February 02, 2006, 10:36:20 AM »

George,

     You and I often fall on the same side of every issue.  I also appreciate that you tend to be the voice of compassion in all debates.  I think there is a great deal of sincerity in that which you write.  However, in this case I disagree with your assessment on one basis and one basis alone;  radical Islam.

     I have stated here before, I hated the labels we put on each other when talking politics (liberal vs. conservative), because if I state that I am either or, does that mean I have to follow blindly in the path of either?  Like you, I agree the Iraq war was error, on many grounds.  I am not one of those people who changed their opinion as the war progressed, I was always firmly against it, although my reasons were/are different than yours.  Let me explain...

     While I never bought the WMD argument, I also totally rejected the "terrorist links" argument.  However, for me, the single biggest reason why I thought Saddam was better than any alternative, is because he is a "secular dictator".  That is, Saddam never used the cry of jihad to rally his cause.  Was he brutal?  Yes.  Did he committ crimes against his own people?  Yes, but he didn't do anything even close to the scale of crimes going on in *several* African nations.

      So why was it better to have him in power?  Well, here is where we differ.  The middle east has proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that democracy is incompatible with the will of the people.  Iraq and now the Palestinians are case in point.  When given the opportunity to have free elections, they voted for "Islamic parties" that generally support oppressive Islamic regimes which preach the destruction of Israel and support dhimmitude, as well as general jihad against infidels.

     Lets say, we are able to stop "the insurgency" in Iraq 100%.  How long after things have "settled down" do you think it will take before they democratically elect and Islamic regime?  Obviously, nobody can say for certain, but it is my belief that if left "truly free", Iraq will be a radical Islamic state in 15 years.  Under Saddam, that would have never happened.  Maybe a simple case of the lesser of two evils.

     So, how does this tie into Iran.  Well, its radical Islam.  The current crop of leaders in Iran are radical Shea clerics.  Even Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is of the radical clerical ilk (although he's not a cleric).  He was "democratically elected", as Iranians chose him over a more "moderate" alternative.  So what's the big deal?

     Unlike Iraq, Ahmadinejad truly believes, his, is a mission from God.  Thus, if he gets a bomb, why not use it on the Israeli's, if it be God's will?  If it means that he martyrs his entire nation by sending a few nuclear bombs to Israel, so be it, because "God will be well pleased".  Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's goal is not Territorial expansion.  It's not about a better life for his people.  He has a mission, which was commanded by Mohamed.  Defeat the infidel at any cost, so that you will be with God.  For this reason and this reason alone, Iran is very different than Iraq.

     While I agree that Iraq was a grave error, I do not believe it is the yardstick, by which Iran must be measured.
Logged

"Wherever you go, there you are."
 Guy from my office

Orthodox Archbishopric of Ohrid
Hungry? Click Here
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #26 on: February 02, 2006, 11:39:53 AM »

SouthSerb,
Dear friend, I never expected my opinion on this to be popular. But you know,40 years ago, I could have taken everything you've just written and substituted "Communists" for "Islamic Fundamentalists" and "Soviet" and "Glorious Five Year Plan" for "Islamic Regime", and "Kruschev" for "Mahmoud Ahmadinejad"......the same ka-ka, different day.
"The Soviets want the bomb"->"the Soviet's have the bomb"->, the "Soviets want to use it against us"-> Cuban missile crisis...... Remember the hatred of the Cold War? Yet we never had to invade the Soviet Union to manage the situation. Why do we feel we have to invade Iran to manage that situation?....There can only be one answer-> Oil.
Like I said, I know another invasion is coming, so tell you what, let's see what happens in 10 years time-> We'll look back and see how history judges this one, OK? Wink If you go to http://www.futureme.org/ you can send an email to yourself which you can program to be sent any time in the future. Send an email to yourself in 2016 saying "Who was right about Iran, me or George?" ....I've already programmed one to be sent to you in 2016 saying "told ya so!" Cheesy
« Last Edit: February 02, 2006, 11:53:04 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
SouthSerb99
Archbishop of Shlivo, Patriarch of All Vodkas & Defender Against All Overstepping!
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 2,800


Now Internet Forum Friendly


WWW
« Reply #27 on: February 02, 2006, 11:53:10 AM »

SouthSerb,
Dear friend, I never expected my opinion on this to be popular. But you know,40 years ago, I could have taken everything you've just written and substituted "Communists" for "Islamic Fundamentalists" and "Soviet" and "Glorious Five Year Plan" for "Islamic Regime", and "Kruschev" for "Mahmoud Ahmadinejad"......the same ka-ka, different day.
"The Soviets want the bomb"->"the Soviet's have the bomb"->, the "Soviets want to use it against us"-> Cuban missile crisis...... Remember the hatred of the Cold War? Yet we never had to invade the Soviet Union to manage the situation. Why do we feel we have to invade Iran to manage that situation?....There can only be one answer-> Oil.
Like I said, I know another invasion is coming, so tell you what, let's see what happens in 10 years time-> We'll we look back and see how history judges this one, OK? Wink If you go to http://www.futureme.org/ you can send an email to yourself which you can program to be sent any time in the future. Send an email to yourself in 2016 saying "Who was right about Iran, me or George?" ....I've already programmed one to be sent to you in 2016 saying "told ya so!" Cheesy

I love the site! It woudn't be the first time I was proven wrong (as my wife would tell you in a hurry). LOL

I've actually had this debate with some of my "comrades" at the office.  Here is the difference, the way I see it.  I think most people, long for the days of the big bad commies.  Other than the Cuban missile crisis, the commies never acted specifically against "us", so to speak.  Sure they had certain expansionist ambitions, but they never flew planes into buildings, took grade school children hostage or bombed subways and trains.

Do you remember the song by Sting, "Russians"?  How did the line go... "Do the Russians love their Children to".  The premise was, if the Russians loved their children, as we do, than they could never attack us, because it would be the end of the world.

I think the answer was "Yes" the Russians do love their children.  The question now is, do radical Islamic Clerics, love their children?  I think the answer is no, at least not in my understanding of love.

As former Israeli Prime Minister once said, "We will have peace with the Arabs. when they will love their children. more than they hate us."
Logged

"Wherever you go, there you are."
 Guy from my office

Orthodox Archbishopric of Ohrid
Hungry? Click Here
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #28 on: February 02, 2006, 12:16:18 PM »

Sure they had certain expansionist ambitions, but they never flew planes into buildings, took grade school children hostage or bombed subways and trains.
And have the Iranians done these things? 15 of the 18 hijackers involved in 9/11 were Saudi's. Strange how we never once thought of invading Saudi Arabia in all this....perhaps the fact that the Saudi's own 6% of the US economy has something to do with it.

I think the answer was "Yes" the Russians do love their children.  The question now is, do radical Islamic Clerics, love their children?  I think the answer is no, at least not in my understanding of love.
True, but what has that to do with Iran? You see, the same mental link between terrorism and Iran is being made as was made between Iraq and 9/11 to justify the invasion. A nation is demonized and dehumanised in Western minds to the point where any action is justified, and we then send our kids to "fight for freedom" there, only to end up with yet more tragic death, destruction, torture.....and for what? To prevent something that we consider "might possibly maybe" happen in the future if we don't.......We have no evidence, but we extrapolate future predictions of how things may go, and send young men and women to war on the basis of this. I used to work in psychiatric hospitals with people who behaved out of the same motives as this. We called them "Violently Paranoid Delusional".

« Last Edit: February 02, 2006, 12:23:41 PM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
SouthSerb99
Archbishop of Shlivo, Patriarch of All Vodkas & Defender Against All Overstepping!
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 2,800


Now Internet Forum Friendly


WWW
« Reply #29 on: February 02, 2006, 12:26:10 PM »

And have the Iranians have done these things? 15 of the 18 hijackers involved in 9/11 were Saudi's. Strange how we never once thought of invading Saudi Arabia in all this....perhaps the fact that the Saudi's own 6% of the US economy has something to do with it.

Very true and I might be unfair, but the link is "radical Islam".  There was very little of it in Iraq, and if it existed, it was sufficiently subdued, so that it did not present a problem.

I don't see it as a link between "nations", as much as link between radical Islam.  Furthermore, I think Saudi Arabia represent a HUGE problem for the West and is a country that should be dealt with.  They have been given a free pass (on account of a cozy oil relationship). That being said, it doesn't excuse what is going on in Iran and our need to act.

Quote
True, but what has that to do with Iran? You see, the same mental link between terrorism and Iran is being made as was made between Iraq and 9/11 to justify the invasion. A nation is demonized and dehumanised in Western minds to the point where any action is justified, and we then send our kids to "fight for freedom" there, only to end up with yet more tragic death, destruction, torture.....and for what? To prevent something that we consider "might possibly maybe" happen in the future if we don't.......We have no evidence, but we extrapolate future predictions of how things may go, and send young men and women to war on the basis of this. I used to work in psychiatric hospitals with people who behaved out of the same motives as this. We called them "Violently Paranoid Delusional".
  Again a valid point and given the backdrop of what occurred in Iraq, it carries even more weight, however, with a radical Islamic regime in power in Tehran, can we afford not to be presumptive?


[/quote]
Logged

"Wherever you go, there you are."
 Guy from my office

Orthodox Archbishopric of Ohrid
Hungry? Click Here
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #30 on: February 02, 2006, 12:43:25 PM »

with a radical Islamic regime in power in Tehran, can we afford not to be presumptive?
Yes, we can.
If we exert violence on others because we "think" they "may" harm us in the future, then what have we become? And what sort of a society and way of life would we be defending if that is  the case?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,914


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #31 on: February 02, 2006, 02:02:15 PM »

I think SS has made an excellent point, that the fact of Iran's religious government makes the situation with them more dangerous, and certainly very different, than that of Iraq and its largely secular government.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #32 on: February 02, 2006, 02:08:18 PM »

Yes, we can.
If we exert violence on others because we "think" they "may" harm us in the future, then what have we become? And what sort of a society and way of life would we be defending if that isÂÂ  the case?

Perhaps the question we should ask ourselves is, 'If they had the capability of invading us or undermining our state or causing us substantial harm, would they?' And I from the rhetoric we hear comming out of Tehran I believe it is reasonable to answer that question in the affirmative. They are not saying that they simply wish to live and let live, if that was all they desired then I may agree with you. But instead I hear from their top officials that they believe Israel should be destroyed, that western civilization should be undermined, and that widespread destruction should be brought to the shores of these United States. They have taken an agressive stance and we are more than justified in responding accordingly.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #33 on: February 02, 2006, 02:10:18 PM »

I think SS has made an excellent point, that the fact of Iran's religious government makes the situation with them more dangerous, and certainly very different, than that of Iraq and its largely secular government.

Good point, Saddam may have been a ruthless dictator, but in the long run we may see that he is the best leader Iraq has had since the Brits left. Middle Eastern countries arn't like normal countries, they have a tendency towards radical islam, which will make a far worse government than even the cruelest of secular dictators.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #34 on: February 02, 2006, 05:07:33 PM »

I've scheduled 2 more "told ya so" emails for 2016 Grin
« Last Edit: February 02, 2006, 05:07:59 PM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
kansas city
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian
Posts: 192



« Reply #35 on: February 03, 2006, 12:19:08 AM »

I think with the spooky communist/jihadist parallels, we could all stand to dust off our copies of Red Dawn.

George, let me know if there's a site to receive emails now from myself in the future.
Logged
JoeS
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,122


Global Warming Enthusiast.


« Reply #36 on: February 03, 2006, 12:28:27 AM »

Good point, Saddam may have been a ruthless dictator, but in the long run we may see that he is the best leader Iraq has had since the Brits left. Middle Eastern countries aren't like normal countries, they have a tendency towards radical islam, which will make a far worse government than even the cruelest of secular dictators.

I invite you to ask the Kurds of northern Iraq of whom Saddam murdered some 400,000 by gassing them. Oh and lets not forget the second class status of the Shi'ite population.  If by best you mean is he any better than Hitler or Stalin, maybe. I hope this democratic experiment in Iraq succeeds for it will provide a buffer in the middle east and an example that democracy albeit imperfect can be accepted and held onto by the majority.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2006, 12:30:11 AM by JoeS » Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #37 on: February 03, 2006, 12:58:33 AM »

I invite you to ask the Kurds of northern Iraq of whom Saddam murdered some 400,000 by gassing them. Oh and lets not forget the second class status of the Shi'ite population.¦nbsp; If by best you mean is he any better than Hitler or Stalin, maybe. I hope this democratic experiment in Iraq succeeds for it will provide a buffer in the middle east and an example that democracy albeit imperfect can be accepted and held onto by the majority.

The real threat in this day and age is Islam. Saddam was unable to project his terror beyond his borders, so while it might not have been too much fun living under him his actual Threat to the world outside the middle east was nominal. After the first gulf war his threat to his neighbours was even nominal. Furthermore, when compared with some of their neighbours, Iraqis, espeically women, had far more rights and freedoms. Thus, it makes sense since the only real threat of Saddam is within Iraq's borders (and perhaps still less of a threat than the alternative, an Islamic government), the issue should have been regarded as an internal one. Islam is not an internal issue, on multiple occasions they have taken their violence to the western world, Islam is clearly a threat to all humanity and all civilization, a threat that the rest of the world should unite to eradicate at all costs. And I'm sorry, but establishing democracies in Islamic countries is not the most efficient means to accomplish this task.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Thomas
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,753



« Reply #38 on: February 03, 2006, 02:27:19 AM »

Sadly Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and Syria  were probably the most successful secular societies in the middle east for many years.  The key to their success was suppresion of the opposition, the development of the secular to the undermining of Religious  values and morals. Under the Shah, Iran ran a secular society in which the minority Farsi, Bahai, and Christian Communities were well represented in government and governmental jobs. In the two Baathist countries of Syria and Iraq, the Christian minority was/is generally well protected, was/is represented in the government and governmental jobs. Turkey focused on the value of being Turkish over all other areas, eventually resulting in the ethnic minorities Kurds, Hellenes, Armenians, etc being encouraged to immigrate out of Turkey as they would not play the secular role and just be absorbed into the Turkish population. They thrived because all four governments suppressed any religion who sought to place religion into society but especially in the majority religion of Islam, they feared the radical Islamic parties to the point many of their leaders were sent into exile (the Imam Khomeini for example to France). Our Western governments offered them shelter where they began schools of radical Islam in the West  couple that with the Radical branch of Islam in Saudi Arabia that has funded most of the mosques in the West to create the militant brand of Islam we are suffering from at present.

Once the flood gate was opened with the fall of the Shah and the rise of militant Islam in Iran, the militant Muslim was able to see that the use of Islamic  foundations could effectively use :democratic voting" to secure their base, just as secularism had done in the twentieth century. It should be no surprise that when the US wants a democratic middle east that we are faced with the surfacing of Radical Islam and anti-Christian behavior rising. Secularism failed, and the Christians of the Middle east who joined with it for greater freedoms are now paying the price.  By the encouragement of Free voting, we have  paved the road for militant Islam to come to the forefront.

Thomas
Logged

Your brother in Christ ,
Thomas
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #39 on: February 03, 2006, 02:59:31 AM »

Quote
I invite you to ask the Kurds of northern Iraq of whom Saddam murdered some 400,000 by gassing them. Oh and lets not forget the second class status of the Shi'ite population.�  If by best you mean is he any better than Hitler or Stalin, maybe. I hope this democratic experiment in Iraq succeeds for it will provide a buffer in the middle east and an example that democracy albeit imperfect can be accepted and held onto by the majority.

Lest we get too caught up in our own propaganda, America supported and sold arms to Hussien.  And while talking of his war crimes it is interesting how little the current American government mentions gassing Iranians - unless of course you forget that is precisely what America wanted Saddam to do at the time.  America really likes to set up brutal  dictators and then remove them a few years later.  It's kind of strange. 
Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #40 on: February 03, 2006, 03:18:09 AM »

Quote
By the encouragement of Free voting, we have  paved the road for militant Islam to come to the forefront.

Possibly, but also maybe not.  Democritization was no quick and easy process even in America - if you consider the formation of the nation from the first sparks of the French-Indian war, to the buildup towards revolution, the revolution, the diastrous articles of confederation, some minor rebellions and finally the stability that came after the war of 1812.  With all that out of the way, the big questions didn't really get settled until 1865.  So that is about 150 years, four major wars, several smaller military standoffs to form modern American Democracy. 

It is also hard to predict what Hamas winning the elections entails.  It is very possible there could be a radical dash away from Jihadist policy.  Of course the opposite may happen as well.  Only time will tell. 
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #41 on: February 03, 2006, 05:13:39 AM »

In a (more than likely futile) attempt to put a human face on this before the innevitable invasion of Iran, here are some recent blog entries by Iranians in Iran. I'm not sure why I'm doing this. Possibly for posterity's sake for when the madness is all over.


From "The Adventures of Mr. Behi" Blog
http://mrbehi.blogs.com/i/2006/02/iran_in_dead_en.html

Iran in dead end

I do not like to write about this nuclear stuff that much because news and media are doing so a lot. It is very sad as an Iranian to see all those irrational stuff being said by everyone; Iranian government, Europe, US, Russia. The sad thing is that some people are out there threatening your country and your leaders are so ignorant about it so I do not know from which side I should complain. I had a comment here in this blog who was kind of inspired that US will attack Iran and will destroy all the infrastructure so that the country gets back to stone age! I am wondering as a human, how can a person become excited about making others to suffer for something that is not their fault!

Some people are saying that we are in a dead end and there is no escape. If it is cool for some people to watch bomb explosions in the streets of Tehran and if they love to see fighter jets taking off from USS whatever, it is not cool for me at all. I never loved war because I saw a missile exploded 500m from my apartment killing one of my best friends, I was 7. Try to feel standing in a long line to buy some milk for your little brother to feed. Stay out of your comfort and try to feel what sanctions mean.

Posted on February 01, 2006




From "Iranian Truth" Group Blog:


The mistake inherent to an Israeli attack
http://www.iraniantruth.com/?p=94

An attack by the Israeli's, or by US forces, will likely result in the death of hundreds of thousands if not millions of Iranians. And while I recognize the significance of Iran's nuclear progress coupled with its president's horrific statements, one cannot view Iranian politics or foreign policy from a superficial perspective. The president, Ahmadinejad, has no military authority nor any real political power. One needs only to view former president Khatami's failure to actualize reform policies as the barometer of Iranian presidential weakness. Ironically, the Iranian president is more a weapon of mass destruction to his own people, than to foreign nations. The question is, whether the powers underlying the negotiations and nuclear planning are guided by "ideological imperative and nationalistic determination" such that the program can never be negotiated away. To begin with, it is clear that Iran is treated and negotiated with differently than other states, authoritarian or not. The significantly different treatment between the "haves" and "have-nots" is essential in characterizing Iran's fear. Generally, a number of variables have been looked at to explain why a country would go nuclear. Two of the most prominent which have emerged in the Iran "nuclear discussion" are prestige and territory (or geo-political stability).

Prestige: every country which possessed nuclear weapons at the time the UN Charter was drafted is now a permanent member on the Security Council. Many scholars have postulated that "hegemony" requires nuclear weapons. Thus, for a country to reach the status of a regional hegemon, it must possess nukes. I don't think this argument is that persuasive. A number of countries, including Germany and Japan, have successfully become regional hegemons by becoming economic powerhouses. However, what every "strong" country possesses is a nuclear infrastructure. It goes without saying that every major global and regional power is capable of creating and running its own nuclear cycle. It is enough to say, therefore, that if Iran wishes to be viewed as a global, or regional, player it must be capable of exploring nuclear technology. However, to postulate that prestige motivates Iran's design to acquire nuclear weapons is both insincere and dangerous. While the Iranian people are highly prideful, particularly to their technological and scientific progress, the vast majority of Iranians have clearly indicated that they desire nuclear technology and not its military uses. There is pride in possessing nuclear technology because it reflects the advanced character of science in Iran. There is a clear distinction, however, amongst Iranians between the character of science as reflected by knowledge and possession of nuclear technology, and militirization of nuclear devices. Subsequently, at least on the grassroots level, it is inappropriate to think that "prestige" is motivating the Iranians to "go nuclear" in the military sense.

Territory: The second and more important reason why countries go nuclear, is because of territorial threats. The more a country views its territory to be threatened, the more likely it is to develop nukes. The US, Russia, France, Britain, and China in reaction to WWII and the Cold War. India in reaction to China. Pakistan in reaction to India. Israel in reaction to the Arab states. South Africa in reaction to Angola and international pressures against apartheid. North Korea in reaction to South Korea and growing international pressures. Even alleged programs are reactionary. Iraq, under Saddam, in reaction to Iran. Argentina and Brazil in reaction to each other. Egypt in reaction to Israel. And so on.

With the removal of both the governments in Afghanistan and Iraq, Iran faces no territorial threat. In fact, it faces two governments which are highly favorable, if not inspired, by its existence. The question is whether the looming American presence is enough to constitute a territorial threat. I don't think it is and I don't think the Iranians think it is either. Generally, territorial threats are tangible. For one, the Iranians know that the Israelis do not possess the capacity or the desire to overthrow the Iranian regime. Secondly, the US administration is so entrenched in its own war in Iraq and Afghanistan, that it simply lacks the manpower or popular sentiments to engage in a full war with Iran.

The Calculus: There is one fundamental issue to keep in mind. The pursuit of nuclear weapons is highly costly venture, both in monetary and political terms. Post-NPT nuclear states spend billions of dollars, are politically isolated, and are closed off from global markets for decades. In the vast majority of cases where states have sought to acquire nuclear weapons, or possessed nukes by virtue of dissolution, the pressure imposed by the international community has generally succeeded in stopping completion of their objectives or continued possession of weapons. Subsequently, every state that pursues nuclear weapons must generally determine through some political calculus that the deterrent capability far outweighs its political, economic, and structural consequence. That being said, an Iran which is attacked is far more likely to weaponize its nuclear program then an Iran which is negotiated with. Now put other variables in perspective. Iran currently faces an economic crisis wherein its unemployment rates probably near 25%. Its leaders understand the political consequences of economic problems. In fact, every presidential candidate made the economy the focal point of their campaign. In all real terms, the vast majority of the population was sympathetic to a candidate which promised to make Iran an "Islamic Japan," clearly drawing reference to Japan's economic power. An attack against Iran does nothing more than draw attention away from its economic problems and burgeoning democratic movement. In other words, an attack on Iran does more to further Iran's nuclear ambitions, then lessen it.


 
From "Iranian Diaries" Blog.
http://iraniandiaries.blogspot.com/2005/01/no-war-please.html

No War, Please

I sit in front of my computer and connect to internet; the Persian blogsphere is announcing of the probable attack of the USA against Iran. There are some petitions to stop this thinking of military invasion, this one to UN General Assembly and this one to George W. Bush.

I sit in front of my computer, in a cold winter night, in my warm room; but I’m afraid and I feel cold. The news of war frightens me. I remember the years that I was a school child, when my country was included in a bloody war with Iraq, we were frightened: are we the next target of Iraqi bombs or missiles? Nothing is more frightening than living in fear.

I click on a link and read an essay in Frontpage Magazine in which it’s written of Iranians welcome to possible USA military action against Iran. I read all the lies—the truth is that there is no staying at home to see that speeches of George W. Bush, and there are no discussions of welcome to USA troops in taxis and buses. Also no so-called Civil Disobedience Movement, which sounds more foolish than making any sense. No one here—at least among the people I know—welcomes a war.

I am writing to a world who reads these lines: I, as an Iranian—a 27-year-old boy who is not satisfied with the current government of Iran and seeks a way to have a better living, perhaps in a foreign country—with all of conflictions in today Iran, can’t tolerate another invasion to my mother land. I don’t want to see my Iran destroyed under bombs and missiles, and people died or injured or lost their families or homes, in a war between Iranian government and USA government in which only innocent people would hurt.

My country has lots of potentials to get better which any war would vanish all that potentials. OK, I’m not with this government; I want respect, good salary, social and political freedom, etc., but I’m sure that a bloody war can't give me these sort of things in a beautiful package, like a gift.

Thus, in the name of all the lives in Iran who deserve to be alive, I ask Mr Bush and all of his alleys to stop thinking in a war way, and ask the world to show a reaction before the USA get serious in doing any harsh action.

posted by Ali
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #42 on: February 03, 2006, 05:27:07 AM »

The question now is, do radical Islamic Clerics, love their children? 
Reading through the Iranian Blog entries, I've only just realised SouthSerb, this is the wrong question to ask. In all honesty, the only question we can ask before taking any action against Iran is the question, "Do the Iranians love their children too?" If you read what they themselves say, I think you'll find they do.
Read "Mr. Behi's" story of being a terrified, traumatized seven year old  child who witnessed his friend blown up in a mortar attack and tell me you can't see Our Crucified Lord in him, and a person infinitely loved by Christ. Then tell me whether you could fly over his house and drop bombs or withold food and medicine from him in "sanctions" (which is just the modern word for "siege"). What human heart could be so hard? And if we, the Orthodox followers of the Lord Jesus Christ, can conceive of doing such inhuman things, then I cannot accept that we are His True Church.  Remember what I said:
scared people can more easily be made to do crazy things or agree to them and scared people can be made to act contrary to love, even the natural love common to all human beings, so they can inflict torture, kill, and terrorize.
Perfect Love drives out all fear, and the reverse is also true. If we allow our leaders to scare us into breaking the Gospel commandment of Love, then let's not fool ourselves that we are doing Christ's will, instead, we have bowed down to him who is the "prince of this world" and "a murderer from the beginning". We have worshipped the false idols of "National Security" and "National Interests" with blood sacrifices, and have turned our backs on Christ.
Orthodox Christians only fight to defend their nations and cities against a real attack. They do not "pre-emptively" strike first because of imaginary, possible, future ones.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2006, 08:15:24 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #43 on: February 03, 2006, 10:50:32 AM »

Reading through the Iranian Blog entries, I've only just realised SouthSerb, this is the wrong question to ask. In all honesty, the only question we can ask before taking any action against Iran is the question, "Do the Iranians love their children too?" If you read what they themselves say, I think you'll find they do.
Read "Mr. Behi's" story of being a terrified, traumatized seven year old  child who witnessed his friend blown up in a mortar attack and tell me you can't see Our Crucified Lord in him, and a person infinitely loved by Christ. Then tell me whether you could fly over his house and drop bombs or withold food and medicine from him in "sanctions" (which is just the modern word for "siege"). What human heart could be so hard? And if we, the Orthodox followers of the Lord Jesus Christ, can conceive of doing such inhuman things, then I cannot accept that we are His True Church. 

Well, whether or not you believe we are the truth Church, in the tradition of the Empire we have done such things, we have massacred villages and used the Legions against heretics, often with the blessings of the Church. But in large part the people brought it upon themselves they are the ones who support Islamic regimes, they are the ones that tolerate anti-western rhetoric from their leaders, the people share some responsibility for their government, and when their government becomes a threat they will also share in some of the hardship.

Quote
Remember what I said:Perfect Love drives out all fear, and the reverse is also true. If we allow our leaders to scare us into breaking the Gospel commandment of Love, then let's not fool ourselves that we are doing Christ's will, instead, we have bowed down to him who is the "prince of this world" and "a murderer from the beginning". We have worshipped the false idols of "National Security" and "National Interests" with blood sacrifices, and have turned our backs on Christ.
Orthodox Christians only fight to defend their nations and cities against a real attack. They do not "pre-emptively" strike first because of imaginary, possible, future ones.

Any strike against Islam is but another battle in an ancient war, it is, by its very nature, not pre-emptive, Islam struck first and when possible they will strike again...while they are off balance and incapable of striking we should use our tactical advantage and strike with everything we have.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
observer
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 546

Vivre die Raznitsa!


« Reply #44 on: February 03, 2006, 11:44:09 AM »

I fear that I hear 'peace in our time' from down-under. I am against attacking Iran or Russia or Syria.. because of innocent lives. I don't think we have a true parallel with Nazi German either.  What bothers me is that Israel is threatened and that means the anti-semitism card is being played by some power mongers.  I noticed that Syria, Iraq, Iran and N.Korea are singled out as terrorists, when the great dragon is considered a democracy!  We don't know what goes on behind the scenes, the double-dealing - remember the Balfour agreement?  Why did the US sell 30,000 guns to Hamas?  All I know is that there are churches in Iran and I pray for this country enslaved by a madman (who  is not necessarily a Hitler or Ben Gurion).
Logged

Thou shalt not prefer one thing to another (Law of Liberalism)
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #45 on: February 03, 2006, 09:04:41 PM »

Quote
in the tradition of the Empire we have done such things

GiC, I want you to write this a hundred times: "Church and Empire are not the same thing, as proven by the fact that the Church existed before and after the Empire."
 Cheesy
 And I wonder why so many Emperors held off baptism until their deathbeads? Was it perhaps because you can't run an Empire without sinning against Christ? Wink
The first Holy Roman Empire was founded by a catechumen.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2006, 09:19:31 PM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Mo the Ethio
Proud Capitalist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
Posts: 453



« Reply #46 on: February 03, 2006, 09:50:49 PM »


... Islam struck first and when possible they will strike again...while they are off balance and incapable of striking we should use our tactical advantage and strike with everything we have.
         My sentiments exactly !!!
Logged

"Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names."
- John F. Kennedy (1917-1963)
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #47 on: February 03, 2006, 09:56:39 PM »

So then, despite the rhetoric about a "War on Terror" this is really a war on Islam?
I wonder what else you've been lied to about?
« Last Edit: February 03, 2006, 10:09:31 PM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #48 on: February 03, 2006, 10:19:05 PM »

A war on militant Islam with a watchful eye on North Korea would be an apt description.  But it would be unfair to say the US only has targetted Islamic terror groups.  The FBI wiped out the Ku-Klux-Klan using tactics that were illegal and unconstitutional.  In the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing lots of radical right wing militias were broken up as well. 
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #49 on: February 03, 2006, 10:26:38 PM »

[quote author=Νεκτάριος link=topic=8074.msg105945#msg105945 date=1139019545]
A war on militant Islam with a watchful eye on North Korea would be an apt description. [/quote]

I suppose that's too long a title for CNN and Fox News to fit in the headline banner. Cheesy
You say "militant Islam", GiC and Mo say "Islam"........
« Last Edit: February 03, 2006, 10:27:54 PM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
DavidH
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 531



WWW
« Reply #50 on: February 03, 2006, 10:30:56 PM »

 ÃƒÆ’‚  I read some of the blogs of the Iranians and believe they are sincere. I am sure many of them don't want war with the U.S. However, I don't think this will be very comforting to the Americans who also love their children when a "Made in Iran" dirty nuke goes off in one of our cities..........are there any practical ways of keeping this from happening other than decrying "can't we all just get along"?
 ÃƒÆ’‚ 
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #51 on: February 03, 2006, 10:33:19 PM »

when a "Made in Iran" dirty nuke goes off in one of our cities.

Another lie you've been fed to scare you into submission.
"Dirty bombs" don't work. And the government knows this.
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ss/stories/s1523404.htm
« Last Edit: February 03, 2006, 10:48:23 PM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #52 on: February 03, 2006, 11:13:35 PM »

Quote
You say "militant Islam", GiC and Mo say "Islam"........

To say the US is fighting Islam and not militant Islam would force a person to overlook the fact that there are many Islamic citizens of the United States that live here like any other American citizen and that the United States and Turkey have a long relationship as allies in addition to other allies in the Muslim world (who are just as terrified of bin Laden as the American government is). 
Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #53 on: February 03, 2006, 11:30:30 PM »

Since I brought it up - I'd also like to point out that the tactics used by the FBI to destroy the KKK were very questionable.  Since the goal of the operation was to disrupt the KKK, seeking convictions was only secondary.  Hence warrents weren't used, brutal scare tactics were in force, even cases of FBI informants committing murders.  KKK leaders were documented engaging in extra-marital affairs and the evidence then delievered to their wives.  Much of this is clearly not legal, and most likely not overly Christian, but the US government did all this against a domestic terror group composed of American citizens.  I don't always think the ends justify the means, but the world is definetly a better place with the KKK mostly eliminated. 
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #54 on: February 04, 2006, 12:09:08 AM »

[quote author=Νεκτάριος link=topic=8074.msg105954#msg105954 date=1139022815]
(who are just as terrified of bin Laden as the American government is). 
[/quote]
Then why not seriously go after Bin Laden (instead of giving him a three month head start)? Why invade Iraq if he is a Saudi in Afghanistan?

[quote author=Νεκτάριος link=topic=8074.msg105954#msg105954 date=1139022815]To say the US is fighting Islam and not militant Islam would force a person to overlook the fact that there are many Islamic citizens of the United States that live here like any other American citizen[/quote]
"Like any other American citizen"? Ha ha ha!!!!!!! Cheesy
Remember when the planes were grouded across America after September 11? When Even George Bush senior couldn't fly? Well guess who could fly and was given permission to be flown out of the US to Saudi Arabia (where, by the way, most of the hijackers came from)? All of Bin Laden's family, that's who. Funny, isn't it, that a "war on militant Islam" actually started with flying all the family of a "militant Islamist" out of your country after that "militant Islamist" had just attacked it, and when no other US citizen was permitted to fly? Who's safety was the first consideration here? If you're looking for a mass murderer, shouldn't you ask his family about him? Isn't inconveniencing them by detaining them and questioning them justified?
"War on militant Islam" my Aunt Fanny!!!
« Last Edit: February 04, 2006, 12:23:54 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
DavidH
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 531



WWW
« Reply #55 on: February 04, 2006, 12:33:44 AM »

[quote author=Νεκτάριος link=topic=8074.msg105954#msg105954 date=1139022815]
To say the US is fighting Islam and not militant Islam would force a person to overlook the fact that there are many Islamic citizens of the United States that live here like any other American citizen and that the United States and Turkey have a long relationship as allies in addition to other allies in the Muslim world (who are just as terrified of bin Laden as the American government is). 
[/quote]


   Islam is historically militant and this is given strong support in their foundational texts. There are very few countries that did not become so through militant agression. That they have not taken over any countries by the sword since the seventeenth century is a result of the fact that "the West" finally won the "arms race". The modern phenemenon of terrorism is simply old-fashioned Islam trying to assert itself under modern circumstances. Certainly we are not at war with 21-st century Islam per se; those who have embraced western values and no longer hold to the historical version of jihad are quite alright. Those who still embrace the type of militant Islam exhibited by Muslims from the time of Mohammed to the 17th century Ottomans are the ones we must battle.
  Here is the difference between a Muslim terrorist and a "Christian" one. The Muslim one is widely hailed as a martyr by his co-religionists and has very clear foundational texts from his religion to justify his actions. The "Christian" one is widely derided by his co-religionists and has no foundational texts in Scripture or Tradition to justify his actions. Examples of Muslim terrorists are Legion while Christian ones are not. Terrorists of ANY OTHER religion are also few and far between. Moral equivalency simply denies the historically obvious fact that although EVERY religion is composed of fallen humans, SOME religions do officially sanction evil behavior.

In Christ,
Rd. David

   P.S. Not being a nuclear physicist, I don't know whether the "dirty bomb" link is bogus or not (niether, presumably, would the poster) but, really, can we allow such a country to develop even conventional nuclear weapons?- At what point does tolerance become a form of suicide?
Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #56 on: February 04, 2006, 01:03:51 AM »

Quote
Then why not seriously go after Bin Laden (instead of giving him a three month head start)? Why invade Iraq if he is a Saudi in Afghanistan?

I don't know and not something that I concern myself with. 

I simply answered a few of the points brought up in this thread (hopefully) showing that it is mistaken to say that America is simply at war with Islam in general and that the US government hasn't hesitated in the past to take out hostile groups, even if they are composed entirely of white American citizens.  As for the invasion of Iraq, the war on terror and other such political matters, I offer no opinion.

Quote
Well guess who could fly and was given permission to be flown out of the US to Saudi Arabia (where, by the way, most of the hijackers came from)? All of Bin Laden's family, that's who. Funny, isn't it, that a "war on militant Islam" actually started with flying all the family of a "militant Islamist" out of your country after that "militant Islamist" had just attacked it, and when no other US citizen was permitted to fly? Who's safety was the first consideration here? If you're looking for a mass murderer, shouldn't you ask his family about him? Isn't inconveniencing them by detaining them and questioning them justified?

I think you've watched Fahrenheit 911 a few too many times. 

Quote
"War on militant Islam" my Aunt Fanny!!!

A more precise definition would be appropriate.  War on militant Islam that is directly hostile to the interests of the United States.  As history has shown America is more than willing to work will Muslims when there is a common objective, even Jihadists. 

 
Logged
Cyprian
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 40



« Reply #57 on: February 04, 2006, 01:09:26 AM »

[quote author=Νεκτάριος link=topic=8074.msg105862#msg105862 date=1138949971]
Lest we get too caught up in our own propaganda, America supported and sold arms to Hussien. Ãƒ‚ 
[/quote]That statement, while technically true, is misleading.  Hussein has changed a lot since coming into power (at least externally, it's another matter whether he was always "really" what he later became)  The Americans supported the Ba'ath party originally because it was the most stable and internationalist force in Iraq.  The Ba'ath movement was founded by a Syrian Christian, and was present in a number of Arab countries.  The time of Hussein's rule up to the war with Iran was a time of economic prosperity, social egalitarianism and internal stability.  It was only during the fiscal crunch following the war with Iran that Hussein began to become aggressive externally, and extremely reactionary internally.  Even his controversial use of chemical weapons during the war with Iran was only resorted to in desperation and only aimed at military targets.  Hussein was in power for decades, and that length of time can greatly change a man.  It's irrelevant whether America supported Hussein at an earlier time, because the Hussein of earlier times was, for all intents and purposes, a different Hussein from the one that would come later.
Logged

Extra ecclesiam non salutis est
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #58 on: February 04, 2006, 01:11:25 AM »

[quote author=Νεκτάριος link=topic=8074.msg105960#msg105960 date=1139029431]
A more precise definition would be appropriate.  War on militant Islam that is directly hostile to the interests of the United States.  [/quote]
How did Iraq fit this "more precise" definition?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Cyprian
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 40



« Reply #59 on: February 04, 2006, 01:15:47 AM »

Neither Russia nor China believe this- interestingly, the two countries who also did not believe there were WMD's in Iraq and refused to support the invasion....and they were right, and we were wrong.
This isn't entirely accurate.  People were looking for a "smoking gun" during the invasion, which was naive.  The inspectors didn't find such a smoking gun, but they did find smaller caches, as well as evidence that some materials had been destroyed during the war and others exported other Arab states.  It should also be kept in mind that the weapons weren't the only causus belli.  There was also the Iraqi support of Palestinian militants and repeated Iraqi violations of the Gulf War ceasefire to consider.  Iraq had been toying with the UN and its inspectors for years before the invasion, violating regulation after regulation, then backing off at the last moment, while even then limiting themselves to minimal, often nominal, compliance.
Logged

Extra ecclesiam non salutis est
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #60 on: February 04, 2006, 01:18:25 AM »

I don't think it does.  I'm on the conservative side of the Republicans (i.e Pat Buchanan style) on many issues, so I'm not a big propenent of the Iraq war.  But it is still foolish to argue America is at war with Islam in general.
Logged
DavidH
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 531



WWW
« Reply #61 on: February 04, 2006, 01:18:43 AM »

GiC, I want you to write this a hundred times: "Church and Empire are not the same thing, as proven by the fact that the Church existed before and after the Empire."
 Cheesy
 And I wonder why so many Emperors held off baptism until their deathbeads? Was it perhaps because you can't run an Empire without sinning against Christ? Wink
The first Holy Roman Empire was founded by a catechumen.

 ÃƒÆ’‚ I must confess that I believe I have a kindred spirit on this matter with GiC so I will begin writing on this matter:
 ÃƒÆ’‚ "The persecuted Church is NOT the same thing as the pagan persecuting Empire, as proven by the fact the the Church existed before and after the (first pagan/ then secular) Empire."......and the fact remains (whether one favors Orthodox Christian Monarchy or not): "Christian leaders and citizens are accountable before God to pass and follow only God-pleasing laws and form God-pleasing societies when they may do so."
 ÃƒÆ’‚ And "so many emperors held off baptism until their deathbeds"? Really, apart from he whom the Church venerates as St. Constantine the Great, who did this? And WHY he did this is surely easily understood in light of the times without prejudice to his sanctity which the Church affirms?
 ÃƒÆ’‚ Also, I think we all know who the catechumen referred to was- AND that he was widely regarded by the Orthodox as an usurper?
 ÃƒÆ’‚ When approaching the interplay of Church and State or trying to understand current events with an Orthodox mindset, let's depend less on Charles Gibbon. the humanist Renaissance, and Michael Moore and more on the Holy Fathers and actual historical precedent.................

In Christ,
Rd. David
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #62 on: February 04, 2006, 01:25:01 AM »

� When approaching the interplay of Church and State or trying to understand current events with an Orthodox mindset, let's depend less on Charles Gibbon. the humanist Renaissance, and Michael Moore and more on the Holy Fathers and actual historical precedent.................
Who should we depend on? The Westboro Baptist Church? Pat Robinson?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
DavidH
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 531



WWW
« Reply #63 on: February 04, 2006, 01:42:46 AM »

WHICH Holy Fathers represent the position of the Westboro Baptist Church rather than Holy Orthodoxy, Ozgeorge?
  As fellow Orthodox Christians I would assume you knew what/whom I meant?
  Too much time is wasted in Internet discussions in pointing out the obvious to rebut flippant remarks rather than in real point/ counterpoint discussion...........
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,914


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #64 on: February 04, 2006, 02:13:06 AM »


  Too much time is wasted in Internet discussions in pointing out the obvious to rebut flippant remarks rather than in real point/ counterpoint discussion...........   

Interesting and true observation - I am living proof of that fact (go over the majority of my posts - there is little in the way of productive content therein).
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #65 on: February 04, 2006, 05:56:46 PM »

WHICH Holy Fathers represent the position of the Westboro Baptist Church rather than Holy Orthodoxy, Ozgeorge?
 
David,
Pat Robinson and Westboro Baptist Church are opposite extremes of the same thing. The attempt to treat secular national govenment in the same way the way the Fathers viewed the role of Emperors of the Holy Empire. Westboro holds that the government is failing it's duty, Pat holds that the govcernment is fulfilling God's will. But neither of them is correct because secular government cannot be compared to the role of the Holy Emperors. So the answer is, none of the Fathers do, but attempts are made to do so. The reality is that Christendom no longer exists, and we as a society have chosen this. There is nothing left to defend against immorality or heresy. So lets stop behaving like there is.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
DavidH
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 531



WWW
« Reply #66 on: February 04, 2006, 07:52:54 PM »

Thank you for the explanation, Ozgeorge-

   I agree that Christendom no longer exists as it once did. However I believe a better model for our approach to the situation is to imitate the Fathers who lived before Christendom and how they dealt with the Empire of pagan Rome. Speak up for what is right and strive for God-pleasing changes in the culture. Do not retreat into a spiritual ghetto. By engaging the world we may transform it as we did before......
   Yes, society has largely chosen to form what is. They did so when they stopped believing for the most part. We who still believe ought to choose something different than what is and strive for what ought to be.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,914


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #67 on: February 04, 2006, 08:21:10 PM »

The one place where I think the plan of imitating the fathers of the pre-Constantinian period will come short is that those who do take up the Cross and fight against the nearly-pagan society will not have the same tight-knit, intensely faithful group for support.  These were their bedrocks, people that would be willing to not only take up the Cross from them when they were martyred, but also who were able to use the martyrdom of the Saints as a recruiting call for the Church of the Greatest Martyr Christ.  Now, while I don't like to be a skeptic, I don't think we have these incredibly faithful communities to back up the Saints - but we have the potential.  We have communities on the road to becoming more spiritually mature; but their faith must be tested, and they must endure.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #68 on: February 04, 2006, 09:17:15 PM »

The only way to deal with Iran, to prevent them from proliferating, is for Western nations to disarm. It is rather hypocritical that we can have such dangerous nuclear weapons while Iran cannot.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
DavidH
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: ROCOR
Posts: 531



WWW
« Reply #69 on: February 04, 2006, 10:13:55 PM »

The only way to deal with Iran, to prevent them from proliferating, is for Western nations to disarm. It is rather hypocritical that we can have such dangerous nuclear weapons while Iran cannot.

   How does getting rid of our weapons get rid of their weapons? Are you saying that you believe if we disarm then someone like the current Iranian president would follow suit? I don't see the cause and effect relationship here....
Logged
Mo the Ethio
Proud Capitalist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
Posts: 453



« Reply #70 on: February 04, 2006, 10:34:05 PM »

The only way to deal with Iran, to prevent them from proliferating, is for Western nations to disarm. It is rather hypocritical that we can have such dangerous nuclear weapons while Iran cannot.
   WOW dddddUUDDEE ,you are so right!!!                                                                                                                                                 What planet do you live on ? Disarm ? Are you out of your mind?As I already posted on another thread , you are an automatron. No rational person would ever suggest such an irrational thing...unless they were a robot ...or  a ....( edited  Lips Sealed)
Logged

"Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names."
- John F. Kennedy (1917-1963)
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #71 on: February 04, 2006, 10:35:31 PM »

¦nbsp; ¦nbsp;How does getting rid of our weapons get rid of their weapons? Are you saying that you believe if we disarm then someone like the current Iranian president would follow suit? I don't see the cause and effect relationship here....

That's because you are using the logical part of your brain. Matthew777's brain however is stuck up ... well, nevermind. ¦nbsp;Grin
« Last Edit: February 04, 2006, 10:36:31 PM by TomS » Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,914


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #72 on: February 04, 2006, 11:04:23 PM »

The only way to deal with Iran, to prevent them from proliferating, is for Western nations to disarm. It is rather hypocritical that we can have such dangerous nuclear weapons while Iran cannot.

This idea applies a Christian principle of the Golden Rule to a nation that is neither secular/responsible nor Christian, but rather a faith that is not only opposed in general to Christianity, but also is predisposed to eradicate the True Faith of Christ.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #73 on: February 04, 2006, 11:10:29 PM »

   How does getting rid of our weapons get rid of their weapons? Are you saying that you believe if we disarm then someone like the current Iranian president would follow suit? I don't see the cause and effect relationship here....

If Iran did not feel threatened by other nations, what need would they have for nuclear weapons?

"...Despite these worrisome concerns, there are many reasons to counteract this drift toward more violence in the Middle East.

§ First, the Iranian threat is remote; according to most predictions, should Tehran decide to go nuclear, it would not have weapons before 2008 at the earliest.

§ Second, the United States, and even Israel, will continue to have such overwhelming military superiority as to dissuade Iran from aggressive action unless its leaders are ready to commit national suicide.

§ Third, unlike Iraq in 1981, Iran's multiple nuclear facilities are geographically dispersed and much better defended, with many of them located in underground bunkers, making their destruction, especially by Israel acting alone, far more difficult.

§ Fourth, Iran has the means to launch a devastating retaliation with conventional weapons, including its Shahab-3 missiles, which can reach targets in Israel with reasonable accuracy. And Iran has other military options, including intervention on the Shiite side in Iraq, which could turn the disastrous US occupation there into a worse nightmare, with skyrocketing casualties. Iran could also vastly increase its support to Islamist resistance forces in the Palestinian territories and to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

§ Fifth, as the world's fourth-largest oil producer, Iran could plunge the world into an immediate deep recession by embargoing its oil if it is attacked, or if an attack appears imminent.

§ Sixth, an Israeli or US attack on Iran would almost certainly strengthen Islamist tendencies throughout the region as well as put intense pressure on Arab governments to react much more strongly against the United States and Israel. And heightened threats against Iran would only strengthen the hard-liners there. By all accounts, Iranians--even those who detest the mullahs--overwhelmingly support their country's nuclear ambitions."
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060213/falk
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #74 on: February 04, 2006, 11:13:32 PM »

This idea applies a Christian principle of the Golden Rule to a nation that is neither secular/responsible nor Christian, but rather a faith that is not only opposed in general to Christianity, but also is predisposed to eradicate the True Faith of Christ.

And let's not forget whose leader has publicly stated the goal of wiping another nation state off the face of the map. In no instance has the U.S. or any other Western Nation threatened to eradicate a country - change it's government, yes. But not eradicate its people.

If Iran did not feel threatened by other nations, what need would they have for nuclear weapons?

That is not always the case. Do you think the reason that Hitler rebuilt the German war machine was becasue he felt threatened? I BEG YOU - READ SOME HISTORY!!!
« Last Edit: February 04, 2006, 11:21:43 PM by TomS » Logged
Mo the Ethio
Proud Capitalist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
Posts: 453



« Reply #75 on: February 04, 2006, 11:21:45 PM »

If Iran did not feel threatened by other nations, what need would they have for nuclear weapons?
.

 

§ Second, the United States, and even Israel, will continue to have such overwhelming military superiority as to dissuade Iran from aggressive action unless its leaders are ready to commit national suicide.






regionhttp://www.thenation.com/doc/20060213/falk
   
   That Is exactly the point ,you robot!    As a MILITANT MUSLIM, the President(of Iran) is ready to sacrifice his entire country to fulfill " Allah`s Will".
Logged

"Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names."
- John F. Kennedy (1917-1963)
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #76 on: February 04, 2006, 11:23:49 PM »

   
   That Is exactly the point ,you robot!    As a MILITANT MUSLIM, the President(of Iran) is ready to sacrifice his entire country to fulfill " Allah`s Will".

Or to punish the infidels for publishing a CARTOON!  Wink
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #77 on: February 04, 2006, 11:24:37 PM »

The concept of unilateral disarmament is not as absurd as some may think. In 1948 Costa Rica unilaterally disarmed its entire nation, whereas here we are only discussing nuclear weapons, the  peace dividend of this action by Costa Rica has been sufficient that today it has the highest life expectancy of all the Latin American countries. Furthermore, it should be noted that this concept is not at all foreign to the United States. Prior to the second world war the US military was restricted to numbers that were counted in the 10's of thousands during peace time, we would mobilize for war when necessary, then disband the majority of our military only maintaining enough to have an experienced Senior Officer and NCO corps in event of a future conflict. The economic benifits of such a system should be self-evident.

Of course unilateral disarmament only works if non-agressive and friendly diplomacy is used along with it, while avoiding getting involved in the affairs of others. In the words of Thomas Jefferson, 'Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations -- entangling alliances with none.' Look at Switzerland, how many terrorists have been targeting that country? Where in the world do you hear of the Swiss being revered to as devils? Their approach worked quite well for them, perhaps we too should eliminate our threats to the world pursuing a similar path towards peace and properity.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Mo the Ethio
Proud Capitalist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
Posts: 453



« Reply #78 on: February 04, 2006, 11:48:36 PM »

GiC:
¦nbsp; You and I and everyone knows that ( see original post)¦nbsp; there is not a snowballs chance in hell of that happening. Have you been drinking again? Wink    If so....Hey Bartender , I`ll have what he`s (points at Gic) drinking!
« Last Edit: February 04, 2006, 11:55:32 PM by Mo the Ethio » Logged

"Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names."
- John F. Kennedy (1917-1963)
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,914


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #79 on: February 04, 2006, 11:58:23 PM »

Well, he's standing next to me, and it does not appear that he is drinking (especially after what we went through last night... I don't know if there's much left!)
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #80 on: February 05, 2006, 12:56:16 AM »

   
   That Is exactly the point ,you robot!    As a MILITANT MUSLIM, the President(of Iran) is ready to sacrifice his entire country to fulfill " Allah`s Will".

I think you may be taking his public devotion a little to seriously.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Mo the Ethio
Proud Capitalist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
Posts: 453



« Reply #81 on: February 05, 2006, 01:03:44 AM »

I think you may be taking his public devotion a little to seriously.
   Ummm...do you not read the news? Has he not promised to " Wipe Israel from the face of the earth"?
Logged

"Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names."
- John F. Kennedy (1917-1963)
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,914


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #82 on: February 05, 2006, 01:08:23 AM »

I think you may be taking his public devotion a little to seriously.   

Actually, I don't think you're taking seriously enough the belief by conservative moslems that one cannot divorce their theology from their praxis, thus the president must be willing to sacrifice the entire populous for the sake of Allah, especially if there is a push to destroy the infidel.

Islam struck when it was not threatened in the centuries from the 9th to the 15th/16th.  Islam struck when it was not threatened in the 2000's.  I hope this recent trend does not continue like the last one did!
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.243 seconds with 110 queries.