President

[Tony_SS]

Well since 85 Cutlass wants to call me out by being less than a man, I will respond, but only to say I brought to light want I wanted to share. I'm not the one running for president pal, nor am I his campaign manager. If you want to sit there an attack Ron Paul through me, then knock yourself out - It's pretty good for a laugh. 2nd, I think you ought to do your research before you go on and on bumping your gums like you usually do. Ron Paul is not an isolationist, and if you were informed about the BS you're spouting, you'd know that. It's called non-intervention. Staying out of another country's personal affairs. "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations – entangling alliances with none" - Thomas Jefferson

But if endless babble-preaching and uneducated references make you man, then you are obviously the biggest man here.

 

[KrisW]

I don't have to explain anything. I wasn't there and I didn't do it.

I am saying that non-religious people tend to believe that people are by nature good. Christians are taught by the Bible that people are by nature sinful, and that you must actually work pretty hard every day to overcome that.

The normal is the aforementioned, not being on the same page, selfishness that all people are born with.

 

[megaladon6]

i've found that non-religious people are realistic. they believe that people are neither good nor bad, or both good and bad. religious people (anybody with a belief, faith, religion, ideal, whatever tries to convince others that they are right. it could be choice of music) are taught that you are one way or another and thus force people to go their way. you said that non-religious people try and get everone on the same page, my point with the inquisition etc, is that it's usually the other way.
plus wouldn't it be a better world if everyone believed in the innate goodness of man? i mean come on here, the religion that purports to be of peace and love teaches that everyone is evil. don't you see something wrong there?

 

[85 Cutlass Brougham]

were over there to free them to free a country who was brought up fighting eachother for thousands of years

where did you get that? most of the fighting in the middle east , historically, is due to the europeans and their crusdades. the fanatacism we see today is primarily due to 1 sect that came about recently-wahhabi. hell, islam is only 1400 years old. yes they did spread by the sword about 1000yrs ago, but unlike the catholic chuch they didn't kill anyone but combatants.
if you learn about history from books instead of movies you would know that we were already involved in WW2 years before we declared war. ie lend lease. ever wonder why we got bombed by japan and took 2 years to strike back? but we were fighting in europe right away. besides we drove japan to by being self-centered and greedy. (washington conference 1922)
compare post WW1 europe with post WW2. after ww1 we didn't help out and it depressed the european economy and led DIRECTLY to ww2. it's cheaper in the long run to help people to help themselves than to let them go about it alone.

It did not take us 2 years to strike back at Japan. It took a few months to mount our first attack on the Japanese home island in what was called the "Doolittle Raid"-named after the man who planed it, Jimmy Doolittle and not because it did nothing. We did not immediately attack Japan on a regular basis due to a lack of airfields to launch attacks from and our need to capture islands closer to Japan during the Island Hopping campaign. The long range US bomber of the time, the Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress, did not have sufficient range to reach Japan and return from our available bases. The Doolittle raid was not repeated because it stretched the range of the B-25 Mitchell bomber to it's limit and none were expected to return. It was launched from carriers and the B-25 was not capable of carrier landings. Instead, it was decided they would either ditch or land in China or Burma.

This brings us to the proxy-war we were fighting against Japan with Claire Chenault's "Flying Tigers" who were private US citizens that flew P-40's in China against Japan as independent contractors working for China. (China had yet to be taken over by the Maoists at that point). However, with the beginning of hostilities, Chenault's pilots were immediately drafted into the US military.

Also, we need to remember the whole scope of the Pacific Theater. Japan did not only bomb Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. They also invaded the southern Aleutian Islands and attacked The Philippines within days or weeks following Pearl Harbor. (Doing this from memory and forget a few dates).

It must also not be forgotten who gave them the basic design for the Mitsubishi Zero fighter plane. It was the US. The Zero was based closely on a US training plane model from the period (T-37?). In fact, it was close enough in design that they were used by the prop people in Tora! Tora! Tora! to represent Zeroes in the film ( Those planes are currently flown bu the Confederate Air Force). Who trained Admiral Yamamoto? We did that too. In fact, he originally proposed the whole plan for the Pearl Harbor attack when studying in the US.

 

[85 Cutlass Brougham]

I don't have to explain anything. I wasn't there and I didn't do it.

I am saying that non-religious people tend to believe that people are by nature good. Christians are taught by the Bible that people are by nature sinful, and that you must actually work pretty hard every day to overcome that.

The normal is the aforementioned, not being on the same page, selfishness that all people are born with.

Here is where you run into a real philosophical quagmire: Define good. If everyone can define it for themselves with no absolute standard by which to make a comparison, then everyone can indeed be good because no one can be bad. If there is nothing higher than ourselves and this existence, we are all in essence "gods" ourselves, with each of us all being equally right and equally right in declaring our own individual morality as correct. Joseph Stalin is just as good an righteous as Mother Theresa if there is no higher God than self.

The fact that Christianity is so opposed to the way human beings think is a proof of it's validity to me. Christianity states that there is no righteousness you can have within yourself and no act you do can make up for the evil you do and that is in your heart by nature. Good works will put you in hell just as much as evil works will. A Christian does good not of himself nor in belief that it will earn salvation. Good is done unto God in gratitude for providing the sacrifice necessary for the forgiveness of sin, a sacrifice that no impure man could ever be capable of giving. All other religious systems require good works of the believer in order to achieve salvation whereas Christianity says that he is totally incapable of saving himself. Human nature is to be self sufficient, but the Bible teaches against this.

As for martyrdom, more Christians have been martyred in the 20th century than in the previous 19 centuries combined. The Crusades were evil, yes, but were carried out by a Catholic Church that was more political entity cloaked in religion than an actual Church at the time. It used the illiteracy of most people to lead them astray of scripture. The common man was forbidden from owning a Bible by law and it was also illegal to translate the Bible into a common language. Services were held in Latin that no one outside the Clergy could understand, etc. Eventually, the Reformation came along when Martin Luther said this was all a load of crap. The inquisition and Crusades were certainly bloody, but I do not believe they were any worse than what has happened in Islamic countries like the Sudan, Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, etc. You can't forget too the religious purges of Atheism in countries like China (especially during Mao's "Cultural Revolution", and don't forget Tibet!) and The USSR (Especially under Stalin) in which every religion was attacked and people were put to death for refusing to renounce their faith.

 

[megaladon6]

The inquisition and Crusades were certainly bloody, but I do not believe they were any worse than what has happened in Islamic countries like the Sudan, Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, etc. You can't forget too the religious purges of Atheism in countries like China (especially during Mao's "Cultural Revolution", and don't forget Tibet!) and The USSR (Especially under Stalin) in which every religion was attacked and people were put to death for refusing to renounce their faith.

sudan, afghanistan etc, have been bloody yes. but they haven't been throwing children onto fires and raping women. they haven't taken major cities and slaughtered every single inhabitent. they haven't stolen every single piece of food or valuables a village needs to live. they haven't used forced conscription (at least not on a large scale). and those fights were within their own countries. it's more comparable to northern ireland than the crusades.

Catholic Church that was more political entity cloaked in religion than an actual Church at the time

you say that like things have changed. a church that was "pure" and followed it's principles would have never helped hitler, or ignored priests raping young boys. at the same time that the stories about the priests came out a rabbi was caught haveing sex with a member of his synogogue (a rabbi is allowed to have sex---with his wife only, of course). he was IMMEDIATELY fired and received further punishment (the temple didn't say what). why? he broke his vows to god. and the person he had sex with--an adult woman. but the priests were simply reassigne--after a long court battle.
do you know what religion Stalin left alone for the most part--catholicism. he actually allowed quite a few to leave! the jews he massacred, again.

and who are all these christian martyrs from the 20th century? i can recall plenty of cases from early christianity but christians usually killed after that, not got killed.

i was wrong about 2 years. it took us 1 year before we really started to fight in the pacific--the marines had no support before then, and very little after that. half the time they were eating japanes rations and using j* equipment!
the flying tigers were recruited from the military, that's it. and as you stated once war was official we recalled alot of them and cut off their suuply line--and sent them to europe.


just to clear up one thing, i have ABSOLUTELY so problems with christians of any type, or with their religions. i do obviously have major problems with the churches themselves and the clergy (not necessarily just christianity either).

 

[85 Cutlass Brougham]

Well, you are not the only one who has a problem with many of the so-called "Churches" that are out there today. I do too as I feel many of them have strayed too far from true Biblical teachings and have taken certain passages out of context to fit a certain message they are trying to convey. I am a Christian but I do not rely purely on the words of a preacher. I believe the end recipient of the information has the right and duty to question the context and actual meaning of the Scripture being quoted and not just take what is fed to them at face value because it sounds good. BTW, I am not a Catholic and have many doctrinal differences with what they preach and what I see the Bible as teaching. I find the Doctrine of Papal Infallibility offensive as it would tend to equate the Pope with God when clearly this is not true. The Catholic Church did not always believe this and it came out in the latter part of the 1700's, IIRC as part of the answer to the Reformation.

As for Islam not slaughtering whole cities, yes it actually has. The city of Fez is one instance that comes to mind. I am sure there are others.

 

[1980Gbody]

were over there to free them to free a country who was brought up fighting eachother for thousands of years

where did you get that? most of the fighting in the middle east , historically, is due to the europeans and their crusdades. the fanatacism we see today is primarily due to 1 sect that came about recently-wahhabi. hell, islam is only 1400 years old. yes they did spread by the sword about 1000yrs ago, but unlike the catholic chuch they didn't kill anyone but combatants.
if you learn about history from books instead of movies you would know that we were already involved in WW2 years before we declared war. ie lend lease. ever wonder why we got bombed by japan and took 2 years to strike back? but we were fighting in europe right away. besides we drove japan to by being self-centered and greedy. (washington conference 1922)
compare post WW1 europe with post WW2. after ww1 we didn't help out and it depressed the european economy and led DIRECTLY to ww2. it's cheaper in the long run to help people to help themselves than to let them go about it alone.

It did not take us 2 years to strike back at Japan. It took a few months to mount our first attack on the Japanese home island in what was called the "Doolittle Raid"-named after the man who planed it, Jimmy Doolittle and not because it did nothing. We did not immediately attack Japan on a regular basis due to a lack of airfields to launch attacks from and our need to capture islands closer to Japan during the Island Hopping campaign. The long range US bomber of the time, the Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress, did not have sufficient range to reach Japan and return from our available bases. The Doolittle raid was not repeated because it stretched the range of the B-25 Mitchell bomber to it's limit and none were expected to return. It was launched from carriers and the B-25 was not capable of carrier landings. Instead, it was decided they would either ditch or land in China or Burma.

This brings us to the proxy-war we were fighting against Japan with Claire Chenault's "Flying Tigers" who were private US citizens that flew P-40's in China against Japan as independent contractors working for China. (China had yet to be taken over by the Maoists at that point). However, with the beginning of hostilities, Chenault's pilots were immediately drafted into the US military.

Also, we need to remember the whole scope of the Pacific Theater. Japan did not only bomb Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. They also invaded the southern Aleutian Islands and attacked The Philippines within days or weeks following Pearl Harbor. (Doing this from memory and forget a few dates).

It must also not be forgotten who gave them the basic design for the Mitsubishi Zero fighter plane. It was the US. The Zero was based closely on a US training plane model from the period (T-37?). In fact, it was close enough in design that they were used by the prop people in Tora! Tora! Tora! to represent Zeroes in the film ( Those planes are currently flown bu the Confederate Air Force). Who trained Admiral Yamamoto? We did that too. In fact, he originally proposed the whole plan for the Pearl Harbor attack when studying in the US.

and were did the pilots train that crashed the planes into our building the U.S., who supplied the taliban wiht weapons and money aslo putting oshma in power the U.S. to help them wiht fighting the soviets. who says iraq wont pull something like this even if we pull out of their 10 years from now.

by the way have we found any WMDs yet over in iraq because as i recall that is the main reason we went over there

 

[megaladon6]

"even a paranoid has enemies" Henry Kissinger

"trust, but verify" Ronald Regan

how do you know that somebody you helped yesterday won't come back and sue you? it's happened. does that mean that you should be self serving and never help anyone?

if you're not taking chances, you're not living.

no we haven't found WMD's, just the manufacturing and R&D plants. in 1943 we didn't have nucs did we?
no i don't think WMD's were the only reason we went in, but getting rid of Huessein was worth it. The other official reason for the invasion was that iraq was allowing terrorists to have camps there. seeing as we're fighting terrorists over there i would say that we ain't done yet. the only real problem with the iraq war is that we're using politics and not bullets. it truly mirrors Vietnam and very few people really see it, or the inherent solution.

what's your source on Fez, i'm researching it and i can find a few battle but not total destruction..

 

[1980Gbody]

"even a paranoid has enemies" Henry Kissinger

"trust, but verify" Ronald Regan

how do you know that somebody you helped yesterday won't come back and sue you? it's happened. does that mean that you should be self serving and never help anyone?

if you're not taking chances, you're not living.

no we haven't found WMD's, just the manufacturing and R&D plants. in 1943 we didn't have nucs did we?
no i don't think WMD's were the only reason we went in, but getting rid of Huessein was worth it. The other official reason for the invasion was that iraq was allowing terrorists to have camps there. seeing as we're fighting terrorists over there i would say that we ain't done yet. the only real problem with the iraq war is that we're using politics and not bullets. it truly mirrors Vietnam and very few people really see it, or the inherent solution.

what's your source on Fez, i'm researching it and i can find a few battle but not total destruction..

Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto.
Thomas Jefferson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Fr1dm2Q ... re=related

wow i realy want a person liek this rulling this country what a joke