Did I Hear Bush Right

One source is reporting up to a hundred and thirty troops killed today. The story may or may not prove to be true.

JD - I think he's said that in public before.

Edgar, this is from the Yahoo website, 15 minutes ago.

Right now I have been watching Ted Coppell's Night Line and they are discussing this thing called the Black Water an army of civilian warriors, a private contractor. Apparently made up of ex SEALs,USA and British Special Ops. They are calling these contractors the second biggest Army in Iraq.

They, this unknown army is more charge in Iraq than the US Government and US Army. The issue that should be before the people of the US is that this private army is not subject to the USCMJ or USC but are private contractors hired by our government and its agents to do what.

Why is our government using the 1st MARDIV to exact revenge for the killing of contractors - military positions out sourced (mercenaries as mentioned above) that were dragged through the streets of Iraq last week.

My belief is that Osama and Saddam have just trumped our Ace and finessed our King. I don't do chess just bridge.

I think that most leaders in most wars do the stupid"god on our side" thing. The Islamist radicals, of course, do just this - which is presumably seen as evidence of primitive thinking by Bush and cohorts?

Both are seen as such by me. Both worry me.

But an unchallenged USA in the grip of full-flight religious lunacy at the top is as scary as the damn terrorists.

It's sad that this vocal minority fears the mention of God more than the reality of terrorism.

It's heartening to remember that you are a very small minority.

We don't fear a mention of God - We do not condone letting religious fanatacism rule our nation. As you well know, but you just want to be partisan and therefore twist word meanings.

I do not consider the statement by a man of faith that God is on our side evidence of religious fanaticism. I am inclined to consider those who do to be anti-religious fanatics.

A politiian who caters to the religious right to get votes is not in my opinion and man of faith but just another politician casting about for votes.

The meaness of the religious right is what I object to not religion, faith, or a belief in god.

What about the "men" of faith on the other side - often, historically, also christians, busily fervently saying, and sometimes even believing, the same thing?

How does god divide itself up?

Are you saying it is only correct when the religious on "your" side say it? All the others are incorrect, fanatical, what?

I think your position on this laughably myopic, Scrat.

Using God as a battle cry is a misuse of religion.

Plain and simple.

dlowan - With respect, I would suggest that your position is myopic regarding mine. (That's not meant as an insult, it just genuinely appears that you've failed to take my meaning.) I'm not saying that God is on our side, I'm saying that there's nothing inherently wrong or sinister in a person of faith making that statement, including our president. That so many are willing to judge him and others on their FAITH rather than on their ACTIONS is what I consider bigoted.

To put the lie to the words you shoved down my throat, I'd ask you which side is my side, and which persons of faith was I leaving out in my statements? You assume much, and all of it wrong. (Perhaps you'd do better asking me what I mean rather than telling me.)

It's maddening sometimes here in A2K that when you try to stand up for reason or principle people think you're standing up for a side of an issue. My comments here weren't in defense of Bush, they were in defense of the right of people to hold religious beliefs, act based on their understanding of what that religion asks of them, and speak of those beliefs.

Many from the vocal liberal minority seem to be setting a standard that freedom of religion in America does not extend to mentioning God or one's faith. Their position and their statements belittle and denigrate people of faith. I think that's wrong, and I think the people who do it are bigots. I would think the same thing if the targets of their venom had a specific skin color rather than a specific faith. They are the new KLAN.

So then, why don't they do what every 'rational' king, emporer, or dictator of the past has frequently done;
put their 'champion' in the field, winner takes all, let the best ...er...'god' win.
the god of Islam vs the 'god' of Christianity; they could sell the TV rights for millions, and the gambling sites would drool over it.

And, best of all, it would leave all the innocent civilians out of it.

Then I assume that you think the terrorists should stop it immediately. :wink:

Politically speaking you are, of course, correct.

However, if I were a person of faith I would find the idea that the creator of the Universe was on my side a bit strange.

I would be much more concerned that I was on God's side.

I would feel more comfortable if Bush and the terrorists stopped using religion as a battle cry immediately.

Thank you for thinking so.


Can you accept the possibility that when some people say the one they mean the other?

Yes.

Using God to motivate people to kill is a misuse of both the Christian and Islamic religions. And all other religions that I know of. I find it despicable wherever I hear it.

I know of no one on our side who is using the name of God in this way.