argent_paladin Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 [quote name='Phazzan' date='Mar 4 2005, 07:45 AM'] Wasn't the original reason for going to war to rid Sadaam and his regime of the Weapons of Mass Destruction the CIA and Pentagon allegedly had proof of? Yeah it was, but once they realised he had no WMD they tried to sugercoat it with sentiments of "freedom" and "liberation" for the Iraqi people. [/quote] Yep, it was all about the WMDs. That's why the name for the operation was.... Operation Iraqi Freedom. Wait, that can't be right! We weren't planning on Iraqi freedom until *after* we invaded and found no weapons. Then how could it be called "Iraqi Freedom" before we invaded... Well, Phazzan, you must have a good explaination. Maybe the Bush administration traveled back in time and changed the name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
argent_paladin Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 DonCamillo, The Holy Father himself never specifically condemned US action in Iraq. Laghi and Soldano did. The Holy Father spoke strongly against war, especially preemptive war. But, you cannot interpret the Holy Father's statements concerning war and peace in such a way as to rule out all war, because that would go against thousands of years of Just War tradition. The pope cannot condemn all war, no matter how unjust the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phazzan Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 Wow, you really did your research on that one, didn't you. Perhaps a more fitting title would've been 'Operation blow the sh*t out of Iraq', yeah? Think hard about that one dude, think real hard.. In the meantime, he's a transcript for you to ponder through regarding the military reasons for [u][b]'Operation Iraq Freedom'[/b][/u].. [quote]The military objectives of Operation Iraqi Freedom consist of first, ending the regime of Saddam Hussein. [b]Second, to identify, isolate and eliminate, Iraq's weapons of mass destruciton. [/b]Third, to search for, to capture and to drive out terrorists from the country. Fourth, to collect intelligence related to terrorist networks. Fifth, to collect such intelligence as is related to the global network of illicit weapons of mass destruction. Sixth, to end sanctions and to immediately deliver humanitarian support to the displaced and to many needed citizens. Seventh, to secure Iraq's oil fields and resources, which belong to the Iraqi people. [b]Finally, to help the Iraqi people create conditions for a transition to a representative self-government. [/b][/quote] You see dude, the Americans cannot justify an invasion on a sovereign nation based solely on the idea of freeing people from oppression. There must be a self serving reason for going to war, and for America that reason was to eliminate weapons of Mass Destruction they alleged Sadaam had. At what point did the final objective in Operaiton Iraqi Freedom become the main priority? It's when they realised Sadaam had no weapons, not any, none at all, contrary to the supposed "evidence" they had. So the focus of the war changed, and people like you still follow blindly thinking their reasons are genuine. Freeing, liberating, whatever the Iraqi people is merely a byproduct, an offshoot, of the greater goal, which is the war on terror. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonCamillo Posted March 7, 2005 Share Posted March 7, 2005 (edited) [quote name='argent_paladin' date='Mar 6 2005, 09:42 PM'] DonCamillo, The Holy Father himself never specifically condemned US action in Iraq. Laghi and Soldano did. The Holy Father spoke strongly against war, especially preemptive war. But, you cannot interpret the Holy Father's statements concerning war and peace in such a way as to rule out all war, because that would go against thousands of years of Just War tradition. The pope cannot condemn all war, no matter how unjust the situation. [/quote] Sorry argent_paladin but you are wrong on this one. You cannot be more specific than "No to war!" (John Paul II) It is not war only if certain conditions apply, it is categorically a "NO", and in this instance he was speaking about Iraq. Also, you should be familiar of the role of an emissary. The emissary is not to speak for himself, but on BEHALF of someone else, in this regard our Holy Father. (What Cardinal Pio Laghi said was what the Holy Father wanted him to say.) The purpose of Cardinal Pio's visit to the White House was to try to convince President Bush [b]NOT to go to war[/b]. (Again on behalf of our Pope.) This is very clear. Everything points to this, without any doubt or uncertainty, that our Holy Father was CATEGORICALLY against the war in Iraq. (And so were our Bishops, which is also of great importance for us Catholics, as our Bishops are our spiritual leaders.) Sorry to contradict you, but I have to stand up for the truth. I try to do it with Love and consideration. Peace to you. Edited March 7, 2005 by DonCamillo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now