www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Victory in Baghdad

April 9, 2003

Victory for coalition forces and the People of Baghdad

Non Nobis Domine

Non nobis Domine, Domine,
Non nobis Domine,
Sed Nomini, sed Nomini
Tuo da gloriam.

Not to us O Lord, not to us
but to Your Name give glory

Psalm 115:1a


Pray that the war ends soon. Grace and peace to Iraq.

Paul

There is another beautiful psalm who says in Greek:

"Πρόσθες αυτοίς κακά, Κύριε, πρόσθες αυτοίς κακά τοις ισχυροίς της γης"

Ο έχων ώτα ακουείν ακουέτω

This is no victory for those who have lost thier lives, and thier families, in this unjust war.

Peter

There is victory for all persons created by God with the gift of free will.

Peter,

There was also no victory for all the thousands of innocent Iraqis who were brutally murdered by their own government over the past few decades before one coalition tank rolled into their country.

Saddam will rightfully take his place next to Hitler and Stalin.

To be brutally murdered by your own government or to be brutally murdered by a foreing goverment who comes to your country to "libarate" you and to take your oil does not make a difference for those who are brutally murdered in Irak, but from the point of view of the international law and international relationships that makes a great difference. The point is not to choose among foreing or domestic tyranny. By the way, there are a lot of Christians and non Christians peoples waiting to be "libarated" in other areas of the world (Armenians, Kurds, Palestinians, Assyrians, Northern Cyprus), in "pseudo-democratic" countries like Turkey, Israel or Saudy Arabia where human rights are not respected and which have all they fair relations with the USA. Why to libarate Irak and not to liberate Arabia? By the way, is not Ossama Bin Ladin from Arabia? Was not with Arabian money that thousands of inocent people, Americans and not Americans, were brutally murdered in NY on 11 September? Why does not your country, a majoritary Christian country, libarate the Holy Land (Palestinian territories according to UNO resolutions under Israel ocupattion)? Who is the person who decides who must and who must not be libarated from tyranny? When war should be used againts a country which does not respect UNO relolutions? May the Lord have mercy of all those who have fallen in this war, may the Lord grant them the true "freedom" of all their sins and all their pains in his heavenly kingdom.

This comment shows the fallacy of a "just war".

There is no such thing as a "just war". War is war. People loose their lives and their families in every war, does it make it ok just because someone proclaims it a "just war"? I think not.

Another thing, those who love to call this war unjust and love to protest against it and our government do not seem to have any ideas as what could have been done besides the war. Seems they just love to rant against the war instead of attempting to offer alternatives.

And do not say "inspections" as those have been tried and did nothing, 12 years of nothing. Also do not say "diplomacy" as diplomacy has never cured anything with out threat of arms behind it. That threat means nothing if it is never used.

We must also remember that we are talking about an Islamic nation here, the same goes with the PLO. One must understand islam. A treaty made by an muslim with a non-muslim is binding on the non-muslim but, as with contracts, is not binding on the muslim.


David

Francisco,

The difference between Iraq and the other countries you mentioned is this. Iraq with its chemical and biological weapons, combined with madman Saddam are a grave and imminent threat to the USA and most of the world.

It is important to know that Saddam's grave threat was the primary reason for the war. Liberating the Iraqi people is wonderful, but a secondary goal.

Countries you mentioned do not represent a grave and imminent threat to the USA. For them we are left to diplomacy.

Paul

Dear Paul,

The Psalmic quote you gave was, by the way, the motto of the Templar Knights who fought in the Holy Land!

One may still see it on Templar promontories in Europe along with their emblem, a Cross pattee in the centre of a Star of David.

And St Bernard of Clairvaux, in drawing up the Rule of the Templars, said emphatically that the Knight's job is to defend Christians and fight the enemies of Christendom.

Just some thoughts . . .

Alex

Yes. I heard the beautiful Non Nobis Domine (Psalm 115:1a) in the movie Henry V.

midi file:

http://www2.prestel.co.uk/church/templars/nonnobis.htm

(click on the speaker)

Paul

Dear Paul!

Bene!

Alex

Francisco,

When so-called 'international law' serves to buttress, protect, and legitimatize Stalinesque regimes, it is no longer 'law' but the mockery of law.

The Iraqi people--Christians and Muslims--have suffered too long to be mocked by the French, Russians, Germans, as well as other Arab nations and the UN, and treated like mere chess pieces in the lethal game of totalitarian political machinations.

In the hour of their freedom, may their joy be complete.

Dear Paromer,


You say "Iraq with its chemical and biological weapons, combined with madman Saddam are a grave and imminent threat to the USA and most of the world". My question is why were not chemical and biological weapons used by Sadam's Army? Was not with American suport that Sadam remained in the power for years in Irak (do not forget that USA and Sadam were aliees during the war with Iran?

You say "Countries you mentioned do not represent a grave and imminent threat to the USA. For them we are left to diplomacy". Taking into account that Ossama Bin Laden was a Saudy Arabian and that his organization Al-Kaida is supported by Arabian money if you do not consider this country an inminent threat to the USA, well, that is not my problem, but, please, do not not use the security argument for the war in Irak.

Dear Sonny,

Using your own words "Christians and Muslims have suffered too long" in many countries, Israel is one of them. Could you , please, answer to a question, Why the external policy USA, a country of Christian majority, has got so intense "Hebrew" colour?

During the I Gulf War Sadam Houseim as not killed or arrested by USA Army. During Afganistan War Ossama Bin Laden was not killed or arrested by USA Army. During the War of Kosovo Slovodam Milosevic was not killed he remained in the power till the Servian people decided that that was enought. During II Gulf War Sadam has disappeared and no body seems to know where he is. My question is: Were Sadam Houseim, Milosevic or Osama Bin Laden the reason of these wars? If the purpose of these wars was Sadam Houseim, Milosevic or Osama Bin Laden, I am sorry to say that you are not making your work.

Greetings from Europe (things seem always different in Europe)

Yours in Christ

I see that the question of the Chemical and Biological weapons has come up again. I find it very interesting that we have not found anything that could even come close to a checmical ot biological weapon. Where are they? If we had the proof that they were there, then where are they? We control the whole country, with the exception of one large city, and we have come up with nothing.
We, for the first time in our history, have been the aggressors here. If the president made the statement that we were invading because of moral reasons, okay, go for it, but we were looking for the WMD. Why don't we look in Anniston, Alabama where the worlds largest collection of chemical weapons are stored. I forget, who was the only country to ever use a nuclear weapon? United States, or Iraq.
On the moral grounds, what are we doing about the people who are starving in our own country, or perhaps all of the millions of men women and children who are without health insurance.
Before we go telling the world how to run their lives, we need to look out our own windows.

Peter

Peter,

I often wondered whether Johnson's "War on Poverty" and the trillions of dollars spent for decades actually improved things in our own backyard.

Be careful about the number game played in determining those without health insurance. My wife once refused her employer's insurance since the insurance thru my employer was better and it eliminated the red tape with primary and secondary insurance games. Hillary's healthcare task force still considered her 'uninsured' because she didn't have insurance thru her own employer. Don't believe every statistic out there.

The Church plays the wealthy preferance too. If I can only afford to pay-by-month for my son's parochial school tuition, I have to pay the full amount (the not so wealthy penalty). If I was more well to do and paid it up front before the school year begins, I get a ten percent discount (read: the wealthy benefit). In the meantime the tuition rises to become "more competitive" with public schools during a recession. My son has seen half of his friends since kindergarted leave due to high tuition. Then I get a letter in the mail telling me how the Catholic School system is trying their hardest to make an education at their schools more accessible. But for whom? The poor kids end up in the local public school system. Non-parishioners like me pay over 100% more. We used to get a smalll discount for being "practicing Catholics," but now are rolled into the same tuition structure with non-practicing Catholics and non-Christians. We all have to pay via a third party payment plan and have the tuition automatically withdrawn from our bank account to insure the school that they get their money. Its all about money.

But I can go on and on about this, but it only infuriates me to no end. We still opt to send him there since our own public school system is lousy - even after all those tax levies. The majority of the money goes to salaries and benefits, not the children. In a nearby school district the teachers fought for a levy "for the children" and got their pay raises (during a recession), but the children's parents then had to pick up additional costs for purchasing textbooks! But its all for the children. Teachers in Cleveland were complaining about possible budget cuts, and then stated that the children were their children. No they weren't. The children belonged to their parents and/or guardians, not the teachers.

Oh well.

Joe