Evidence for God from Science

Jac3510 wrote:In one sense, you and I are responsible for the deaths of so many unborn, Rick. We are members of a country that murder our own children. That's our society. Have you read Daniel's confession of national sin?

In another sense, there is a difference in the guilt of individual members of society and the collective actions of people as a government. The government itself does not kill children (although we do execute murderers). The government itself does, however, declare war and intervene to protect its people. So American interventionalism is a product of the natural function of government, whereas abortion is not. So there is a significant difference in the two cases that must be maintained.

Jac,

I'm just teasing you. It's what I do.

melanie wrote:

Byblos wrote:

melanie wrote:Assad killed his own civilians and apparently unleashed chemical weapons?? According to whom?.
Apart from allegations from the US I have seen no credible evidence to back this up.
Obama didn't want to get involved?.
He has systematically shown aggression and a mentality of war mongering in Syria. Whilst some media have been a little more honest in reporting.
Russia has tried relentlessly to form a coalition with the US to combat ISIS, but the US has taken a renegade attitude to combat a region they have no Intel on.
Every time Russia tried to combat ISIS and form a united front, the US declined. Russia had ground troupes on the forefront and all the US did was bombard the public with misinformation. Apparently Russia bombed hospitals without proof. Of any kind. Apprently they bombed civilians without Intel or any proof again.
The only nation that has bombed and killed civilians with absolute proof is the US.
They are trying to topple Assad for their own profit and have no interest in the Syrian people.
Is that any surprise when you look at what happened to Libya or Iraq.
The only saving grace is the rest of the world is waking up.

With all due respect Melanie, you know not of what you speak. I'm not (just) some imperialist American. I was born in the Middle East. I grew up at Assad's doorstep. I've experienced first hand his atrocities and his father's before him. I've fought wars against his terrorist so-called soldiers long before the term war on terror was popularized. I don't care what the US motivation is behind insisting on his removal. Assad is the very definition of pure evil.

As is Mugabe,
Omar al-Bashir
Kim Jong-Il
Than Shwe
King Abdullah
Jinping
Sayyid Ali Khamenei
Isayas Afewerki
And the list continues,....
Acting as world police is not the US' role.
This role is rought with personal gain and profit. Which is why one country in invaded whilst another is ignored.
The US intervention in foreign governments is purely based upon personal profit and NOT based upon the needs of the people.

Why do you think we are against both political parties in the US and want change? We are trying to change things. We see the corruption both political parties have engaged in and the terrible foreign policy decisions that have made. We are fed up with neo-cons who fight wars for profit and not is what is in the interest of the people we effect. We see the problems and are trying to change things. But America must be the world police because we are the only country that can,bad foreign policy decisions does not change it.

abelcainsbrother wrote:

melanie wrote:

Byblos wrote:

melanie wrote:Assad killed his own civilians and apparently unleashed chemical weapons?? According to whom?.
Apart from allegations from the US I have seen no credible evidence to back this up.
Obama didn't want to get involved?.
He has systematically shown aggression and a mentality of war mongering in Syria. Whilst some media have been a little more honest in reporting.
Russia has tried relentlessly to form a coalition with the US to combat ISIS, but the US has taken a renegade attitude to combat a region they have no Intel on.
Every time Russia tried to combat ISIS and form a united front, the US declined. Russia had ground troupes on the forefront and all the US did was bombard the public with misinformation. Apparently Russia bombed hospitals without proof. Of any kind. Apprently they bombed civilians without Intel or any proof again.
The only nation that has bombed and killed civilians with absolute proof is the US.
They are trying to topple Assad for their own profit and have no interest in the Syrian people.
Is that any surprise when you look at what happened to Libya or Iraq.
The only saving grace is the rest of the world is waking up.

With all due respect Melanie, you know not of what you speak. I'm not (just) some imperialist American. I was born in the Middle East. I grew up at Assad's doorstep. I've experienced first hand his atrocities and his father's before him. I've fought wars against his terrorist so-called soldiers long before the term war on terror was popularized. I don't care what the US motivation is behind insisting on his removal. Assad is the very definition of pure evil.

As is Mugabe,
Omar al-Bashir
Kim Jong-Il
Than Shwe
King Abdullah
Jinping
Sayyid Ali Khamenei
Isayas Afewerki
And the list continues,....
Acting as world police is not the US' role.
This role is rought with personal gain and profit. Which is why one country in invaded whilst another is ignored.
The US intervention in foreign governments is purely based upon personal profit and NOT based upon the needs of the people.

Why do you think we are against both political parties in the US and want change? We are trying to change things. We see the corruption both political parties have engaged in and the terrible foreign policy decisions that have made. We are fed up with neo-cons who fight wars for profit and not is what is in the interest of the people we effect. We see the problems and are trying to change things. But America must be the world police because we are the only country that can,bad foreign policy decisions does not change it.

Trump 2016

RickD wrote:

Jac3510 wrote:In one sense, you and I are responsible for the deaths of so many unborn, Rick. We are members of a country that murder our own children. That's our society. Have you read Daniel's confession of national sin?

In another sense, there is a difference in the guilt of individual members of society and the collective actions of people as a government. The government itself does not kill children (although we do execute murderers). The government itself does, however, declare war and intervene to protect its people. So American interventionalism is a product of the natural function of government, whereas abortion is not. So there is a significant difference in the two cases that must be maintained.

Jac,

I'm just teasing you. It's what I do.

Byblos wrote:

melanie wrote:To suggest that motivation is not important whilst I rob your household, take your wealth, kill where I see fit, topple your head of state, disable your economy and leave you bankrupt.
Have you asked an Iraqi how pleased they were that you the US intervened?
Or a Libyian?

I am well aware of the anti-American sentiment. Again, I've lived it, on both sides. It is an ignorant, emotional one, nothing more.

And yes, I have asked Libyans, Iraqis, Egyptians, and on and on. I have many friends from those countries. The overwhelming (albeit private, for obvious reasons) is that no matter how bad it is today, they are certainly much better off than before.

@ Libya and Iraq.

I think when Trump gets in, hopefully, more will get revealed about how corrupt the US government has been. I notice, some who were part of the Republican establishment equally don't want Trump in. George HW Bush, voting Hillary? What are dark secrets are in the closet?

Philip wrote:If Assad is removed (the only significant power, backed by Russia), then we immediately have a MUCH bigger mess, as the removal of dictators in Iraq and Libya have well demonstrated. If Assad is taken out, those nasty Islamic factions will then battle for the crumbs. Meanwhile, the civilians and children will be continuously caught between them. That's always gonna be the dilemma when the factions fighting a dictator are just a brutal, as so often there are NO good guys.

Yes, that's how Hillary and Western media portrayed Gaddafi, but not everyone saw him that way (this shows a very different side):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLflLdIJeMw

Kurieuo wrote:Those rebel forces just happened to be an offshoot of Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda. Should have made a few missiles hit them too, instead it seems Russia cleaned up our mess. I'm personally not phased about the Syrian soldiers, but there was an agreement in place (which the US doesn't want released).

If the US had their way, and gave the Syrian rebels weapons to topple Assad then things would be much the worse. As German intelligent reported, 95% of the Syrian rebels come from abroad and were likely members of Al-Qaeda and other extremists. Thankfully Russia did step in and get Obama to back down, things I expect would be much worse otherwise. ISIS might have owned Syria and had greater strength.

In support of this here is something I stumbled across, on an Australian show late 2012 called Insight:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrEPadG0pQk

We should have never messed in Libya, messed in Syria, and perhaps not meddled in Iraq. These places are definitely not better off today for our having done so.

We should have never messed in Libya, messed in Syria, and perhaps not meddled in Iraq. These places are definitely not better off today for our having done so.

These misadventures were built upon the myth of the "good" Islamists guys against the evil, Western-supported dictators. Sure, the average person in the street and village largely just wants peace and to be able to eat and sleep safe. But the factions of Islamic revolutionaries are always ready to stir the "hate" pot, to exploit traditional rivalries and hatreds. Yep, the West has dealt with many such dictators - AS OPPOSED TO having to deal with a wide variety of violent factions, only hating each other more than the West, each asserting a superior religious mandate, or a different branch of Islam. AT LEAST the dictators, while still causing many problems, have largely kept key countries stable - that is, as opposed to civil war and discombobulation! Yep, in this imperfect world, we have to choose between levels of evil. Unfortunately. But we've also bought into the idea of nation-building and encouraging democracies in places where their beliefs are incongruent with democracy.

The other issue we must always balance, is where can we reasonably interject ourselves with positive results. And what situations can we AFFORD to get involved, and not risk some quagmire. The U.S. and it's allies don't have the ability to financially play policemen, not beyond today's much more limited scale. Also, the U.S. has protected so many allies out of it's own pocket - particularly in Europe. This must stop! Everyone needs to pony up and pay their cost of security!

I don't really care how the rest of the world sees it. That's their problem, not ours.

LOL, ok Trump.

Go read Edwin Friedman, overfunctioning enabler.

Jac3510 wrote:Go read Edwin Friedman, overachieving enabler.

Fixed that for you.

On the contrary, the term I used has a specific meaning. There's an irony in your response, but I'll led you educate yourself with Friedman to find it.

Jac3510 wrote:On the contrary, the term I used has a specific meaning. There's an irony in your response, but I'll led you educate yourself with Friedman to find it.

I was being facetious with you because I Assumed you were being so with me.
It you weren't then were you just being rude?
I'll give you points for style, not so much for smarts if that is the case.

Hmm... seriously... we expect Russia to go for this?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IDEPcKcujI

Wonder what's next...