We apologize for the Iraq War

random thoughts...

a russian friend of mine a work commented during the pres race that if obama got elected it would mean an end to all our warmaking. i laughed in his face. not because of what he wanted to happen, but because hes RUSSIAN and he said that.

'you actually believe what politicians tell ya, eh?'

ever notice how most of the anti war movements just kinda... vanished... after obama was elected? sure, there are a few left. these i think truly are anti-war. the rest of them were just antibush. for all their bluster about the iraq war, im bettin' the huffpo crowd wouldnt have a problem if obma carried through with a slip of the tongue he made during the campaign and sent full ground forces to fight in pakistan. repubs would have a problem with it of course, forgetting that they, on average, didnt have a problem with invading iraq.

lets get one thing historically understood here people. repubs, demos, they both, as parties, LOVE a nice war. democrats say 'we shoudnt bomb iraq', but had no problem with us blasting civilians and military alike to pieces in serbia, did they? nope. a demo got us into that wonderful war in vietnam and, when he took over, a repub decided it was fine and dandy to continue.

wanna know why obama isnt releaseing everything to do with those torture memos? probably because members of his own party would be compromised too.

think obama is gonna give up that wonder power to snoop that bush siezed? nope. its too useful. no one will ever guive it up.

i really hope im wrong though. if obama said tomorrow 'to heck with the fall out, im releaseing EVERYTHING dealing with the torture practices we engaged in' or 'the power bush took was far too much. i'm getting rid of it and urging congress to take action to make sure it doesnt happen again' than i would take my hat off to the man for being principled in that regard.

you all are doing this wrong. these dumb antics of 'submitting to arrest' and what have you change nothing. stop doing them. first, get on your knees and pray. pray a LOT. next, go to your neighbor and convince him to pray. then talk to him about all this and change HIS mind. then get him to go on and keep the work up.

when the apostles left to spread the gospel, did they go at once to rome and try to convert the emperor? no, that would ahve been a waste of time, just like what youre doing. you start at the bottom. then, in time, the emperor will follow.

just sayin'

Now we are worried that the bad people in Pakistan will get control of our nuclear weapons, maybe bomb us. This is a worry, we read what happened when we did this, except we were the "good" people and had the right.
No one has the right and we have to control or destroy the demon we made.

Thanks for the report, John.

I wish that there was something that can be done to erase the last 1700 years of believing more in the idea that Jesus' death was a sacrifice that over ruled 300 years of a nonviolent body of followers of Jesus.

Have the teachings of Jesus become so much of a cliche'? Why does the church not put as emphasis on the teachings of Jesus than it does on the faith that Jesus' brutal death was God's will?

If we had to believe that Jesus was authoritative enough to tell us how to live, then we would have to be exposed to the same sort of violence that Jesus encountered. If we believe that he died so that we could make excuses for not following his teachings, then Jesus died in vain.

I'm sorry if I can't agree with everyone who wants to believe that the United States has the authority to declare war.

Peace!

In retrospect I do not believe that the Iraq war should have happened and agree that we all should have deeply listened to Pope John Paul II at the time. On your comment characterizing the War as a "Mortal Sin" though, I do not agree. Finally, as a Jesuit, a Catholic Theologian and an Apostle of love, you should know better than to describe the War as Mortal Sin. You have a catechetical responsibility to the public and should not be swayed by seular Media. Other than that, keep up the good work in Christ. Christ is rsen! Alleluia! Alleluia!

I believe that rather than an apology we should investigate and prosecute the mass murderers and war criminals of the U.S. government.

I wonder how appropriate it is for people, most of whom, like myself, opposed the war against Iraq even before it started to "apologize" for it. Isn't it up to the "mortal sinners" themselves to repent, apologize, and make as much restitution as possible? And I am not just speaking of those who actively supported the war. Many of those folks actually believed the Bush/Cheney b.s about WMDs. No, I am speaking of those, bishops and laity both, who plaster themselves with the "pro-life" brand and who, knowing better, kept their mouths shut about the war and about torture and about "shock and awe" for political reasons because they did not want to publically criticize an anti-abortion ally George W.Bush. These are the folks who need to apologize, yet most of these are the folks who are ranting about "war" against President Obama.

Promoting peace is always a good thing so I strongly support it. To be more effective in conveying the message, though, facts need to be close to correct to be taken seriously. For instance, we have not "waged war upon Iraq" for over 6 years now. We waged war upon Iraq for 3 weeks in 2003. Iraq has been an ally of ours for the last 6 years, so it would be counter-productive to wage war against our friends. We have helped our allies, the Iraqis, fight their enemies (Sunni extremists and Shiite militias) for the last 6 years. Why? Because they insist on slaughtering each other. We have tried to prevent them from doing this to achieve - peace! If wanting "a quicker end to the war on Iraq" means pulling out and allowing a civil war that would undoubtably become a regional war as the surrounding countries join in to back their respective factions, then where is the peace in that? Wouldn't peace come from keeping these incredibly violent organizations separated until the Iraqis can arrest most of their members? Until Iraq is fully on its feet, keeping US soldiers there is the only way to keep Iraq's enemies away from each other so there is at least a chance of peace. Pulling out now ironically promotes a huge regional war. Pulling out now prevents any chance of peace. Also, the thought of dead innocent Iraqis is heartbreaking, but over dramatically referring to the tens of thousands to possibly as many as a hundred thousand innocent dead Iraqis as "millions" will not earn many credibility points with anyone you try to promnote peace to. It wouldn't hurt to point out that the vast majority of these innocent Iraqis that have been tragically killed were killed by Iraq's extremist enemies on both sides of the Sunni/Shiite divide, not by us nor our Iraqi allies. The only way to try to get the message of peace across to prevent future wars is to use a credible, realistic voice in discussing past and present wars. Thank you for reading and God Bless!

Thank you orion 71 for your succinct comments!!!

The apologists have it wrong and have likely, spent little-no time in Iraq or the ME.

After initiating emergency medical and humanitarian relief for 300,000 non-combatant refugees from Najaf and Fallujah, as well as thwarting assassination attempts on a very senior ayatollah, I was invited to the Imam Ali and Imam Hussein shrines, pursuant to audiences with Grand Ayatollah and senior-most Shiite clerics in Najaf and Kerbala.

All, having personally witnessed great suffering, seemed to have a better grasp of GOD's Divine Plan than the several hundred apologists in that GOD makes ALL Things good.

Additionally, ayatollahs, civic leaders were all decidedly pleased when President George Bush soundly Defeated John Kerry in 2004. Their support was not at all confined to the war, which gave them freedom from the despotic Sadaam Hussein, or the casualties.

It was their shared beliefs with the President as a man of GOD, a "Believer in the Book," that a soul is imputed to a human being At Conception; as well as his staunch opposition to abortion and homosexual marriages.

I was there and held these conversations pursuant to arranging for the first secure meeting of Shiite executive clergy and the US Embassy. There is a difference in being with them in principle than in-fact; as well as the price and the value of freedom, which too many Americans and desk pilots take for granted.

S/F
GM

I don’t think it wise to say what God is saying or thinking, unless he has given divine revelation.

Though it’s fair to say what we believe God’s views might be on today’s issues based on past revelations, we need to always be humble enough to admit these are our conclusion and are subject to error.

Claiming our thoughts and words are God’s thoughts and words are false prophesies and a very dangerous path to take.

Saying God has been wondering what got into his head when he created us verges on blasphemy.

I am amazed by the naivete of Father Dear and his associates, such as this Kathy Kelly person. She wants the US to set aside its military, can she truly be naive enough to believe that is a good idea? Can she, and the others like her, truly be naive enough to believe that, if the US disbanded is military forces, our enemies would not take advantage of that in a heartbeat? Do they truly believe that if we lay aside our weapons and no longer wage war, our enemies will instantly become our friends?

That may work at a personal level, but it does not work at the level of nation-states. I can deal with, talk to, and befriend the person who dislikes me because, most likely, he does not wish me dead, nor does he wish to see me broken and bloody so he can confiscate and take my home, my lands, my family, etc. Oh, perhaps on the rare occasion, one could find a person who hates one that much, but that is exceedingly rare. I can presume my foe's good will at heart. But such a presumption cannot be made at nation-state level.

I use Nazi Germany as an example. One could not presume the goodness of the Nazi regime. Hitler and his people were intent on global conquest, on extending tyrrany and fascism, on racism and on genocide. Chamberlain tried to placate Hitler and tried to reach a peaceful settlement. This resulted in Hitler becoming even more powerful, in having his rule legitimized, and in the conquest of the nation of Czechoslovakia. Ultimately, Hitler decided he wanted more and, in the belief that Europe, and specifically Britain, would not try to stop him, he invaded Poland. Fortunately, Britain had replaced Chamberlain with an effective leader in Churchill.

The United States vowed, publicly, to not involve its military in the war, though FDR did provide military aid to Britain in the form of armaments and weapons. But, it was publicly known, that the President of the United States had no intention of committing military forces to the defense of Europe. In response, Germany's ally Japan bombed the Naval base at Pearl Harbor. This, despite the fact that the US, at least publicly, did not intend to commit military forces.

In this instance, the reaction and response to passivity was direct attack. Is Father Dear, Ms. Kelly and the others so naive to think that this would not be the response today?

Father Dear and his crew can apologize all they want for the war in Iraq and for the military and for this and for that. They can also speak for themselves because they DO NOT speak for me and millions of other Americans like me. I support the military and I believe in its mission to protect and defend this nation and its citizens from those who would gladly see us utterly defeated and destroyed.

As for the question of the morality of war, that is something to be decided by the prudential judgment of each person.