|
|
Post by TheSilentDemon on Nov 18, 2003 22:28:08 GMT -5
cause you can't just go jumping into a war . thats how u lose lives. we were going to get into the war eventually pearl harbor just spead up the process. and that ratio thing is what mark just clarified with the lives lost must be....
a lot of the principles make sense. and i agree with most of them
|
|
|
|
Post by scott on Nov 18, 2003 22:28:36 GMT -5
where are these war laws? The Catholic Church made them up. And he didn't edit his post count... |
|
|
|
Post by Mark617 on Nov 18, 2003 22:33:15 GMT -5
"nice job, and u didnt have to edit ur post count either"--
note the "didnt". Seeing as a certain admin slightly altered his post count....just a joke, not need to get offended. The whole point of the "just war principle" is to give peole (mostly catholics, but anyone can agree with them) a way to justify a war that is for the greater good.
|
|
|
|
Post by scott on Nov 18, 2003 22:40:55 GMT -5
Ah I misread that,sorry.
And mine is back to the real count,unedited.My raw,pure post count.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark617 on Nov 18, 2003 22:45:55 GMT -5
nice, as the infamous mr hyska would say, "integrity always gets an 'A'" (as he hands back an 'A' quiz that someone cheated on)
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Mildrid the Nut Schlapper on Nov 19, 2003 16:24:00 GMT -5
there are loopholes in every law. and yes when Jesus came along there was a new covenant hence the NEW TESTAMENT. just like there is a loophole for killing, in the case of self defense, there are also loopholes for other things one instance being war. there is a list of "just war principles" that must be followed in order for a war to allowed in the eyes of God. one is like don't enter a war unless it is positive that your side will win, another is something along the lines of casualities of your troups and the casualty of enemy troups have to be at a ratio in your favor. there are various others. so there are grey areas these are just a few. No, not in the "eyes of God". God can't protest. These "just war" principles were devised by the Roman Catholic Church which means they are human and hence fallible. Their is also strong overtones of the pope trying to siez back power the previous popes lost 400 years ago. "one is like don't enter a war unless it is positive that your side will win, another is something along the lines of casualities of your troups and the casualty of enemy troups have to be at a ratio in your favor." These principles are from the book The Art of War, unfortunatly I can't remeber who wrote it but he was from Japan or China if I remember correctly. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Mildrid the Nut Schlapper on Nov 19, 2003 16:25:54 GMT -5
umm...i dont think i would agree with many of them at all... I sure you wolud, the real ones are made by the Catholic Church Jesus. Their pretty much everything thing you stated. Their desing to prevent war, not give war justification. I belive most of the points are crap. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Mildrid the Nut Schlapper on Nov 19, 2003 16:28:21 GMT -5
then why were they so hesitant... (post 1000) "The justification of war" points were really formed after the second world war. Secondly, the United States tried to stay neutral (study history  ) in both World Wars, however and I belive luckily we were pulled into both of them and came out the the second a Super Power next to the USSR. |
|
|
|
Post by TheSilentDemon on Nov 19, 2003 21:22:21 GMT -5
what do u mean most of them are crap. you would start a war if u knew you were going to lose and sacrifice all or most of your men anyways. that doesn't make much sense. and about the losing less lives than if no action was taken or however u phrase it. how does that not strick a tone of sensibility.
|
|
|
|
Post by scott on Nov 19, 2003 22:34:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by William on Dec 18, 2003 23:28:40 GMT -5
ok...as to allow a new hope for this...and maybe some more damage..(either to others, or me from scott) i deny scotts power, and rebuke his action...
it is open...and back to democratic vs. republcian...
what are the main differences (not similarities) in democratic and republicans...
|
|
|
|
Post by scott on Dec 19, 2003 7:33:27 GMT -5
ok...as to allow a new hope for this...and maybe some more damage..(either to others, or me from scott) i deny scotts power, and rebuke his action... Hey if you can get it on topic go for it.I tried before,didn't happen,so the lock down occured.Stay on topic people... Here is what I see: Rep=Pro-life Dem=Anti-life |
|
|
|
Post by Brian on Dec 19, 2003 12:10:57 GMT -5
I say Power to the People!!! Damn The Man!!!!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Dec 19, 2003 16:13:46 GMT -5
damnation is pretty harsh my friend. the man isn't all bad. I like the American man a helluva lot more than any foreign man.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark617 on Dec 19, 2003 17:57:18 GMT -5
Rep=Pro-life Dem=Anti-life not quite true. in some instances (abortion) thats true. but in others (death penalty) its just the opposite. a main difference with democrats and republicans that republicans stress self reliance more, while democrats believe that the government should provide more for people. although i think that some welfare is needed, we (as a country) need to cut back on the amount of money spent by the government in welfare. |
|
