What Do You think about the Iraq War

[shevafan]

This has been a very big problem in the unted states. it seems that if the US pulls out then they will loose the whole point of the envasion and the old government will take over. if they stay more american troops will continue to get killed. this is really getting on the american people's nerves.

[ColtPython74]

US government and politicians will do what they want. They don't care about ordinary people .
This is about Afghanistan

What the U.S. doesn’t want you to know about the “War on terror”
Ahmed Abdullah – Al Jazeera.com April 2, 2007

More than five years after the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan that ousted the Taliban regime, Afghans say their lives have become more insecure.

"We have more bloodshed, more poverty and more grievances than during the Taliban's time," Haji Agha, a resident of Lashkargah, the provincial capital, told IRIN.

Taliban military chief Mullah Dadullah has been quoted recently as saying that thousands of Taliban fighters have been deployed across Afghanistan and are preparing to attack occupation bases as well as the puppet Afghan Government.

Mullah Dadullah’s remarks, which were rejected by Afghan Defence Ministry spokesman Zahir Azimi who labeled them as “psychological tactics”, came to assert a recent assessment by two Afghanistan experts who suggested recently that the situation in the war-torn country was getting out of control of the occupation and NATO forces, citing fledging support of Afghans to the NATO mission, probably as a result of recent surge in civilian casualties as a result of indiscriminate NATO and occupation forces’ attacks.

Over 4,000 people, a quarter of them civilians, according to Reuters, were killed last year.

Speaking to Commons committee, U.S. scholar Barnett Rubin and Gordon Smith painted a bleak image for the situation in Afghanistan.

Their remarks as well as remarks by Mullah Dadullah contradicted a statement made a few days earlier by Canada's top military commander, Gen. Rick Hillier, who claimed that great progress is being made in Afghanistan.

On one hand, Dadullah asserted that Taliban, which although ousted from power in 2001 its fighters maintained a hit-and-run guerrilla war against U.S.-led occupation and Afghan forces, now has the ability and the weapons to fight foreign troops for a long time.

"We have sent thousands of Taliban fighters to all Afghan cities for attacks on foreign troops and their Afghan puppets," Dadullah said.

"We will turn our motherland into the graveyard of the U.S. forces and their families should wait for their dead bodies.

"The Taliban's war is only for the freedom of Afghanistan from the enemies of Muslims."

On the other hand, Rubin, who has been to Afghanistan 29 times, believes that Afghans’ anger over the failure of the Western powers to stabilize the country is growing day after day.

Their support to the NATO forces is fading away, he said.

"They're not at all happy. Support for both the international presence and the government has plummeted in the past year or so," he told the foreign affairs committee, adding that Afghans’ anger is stemming from the failure of the occupation forces to bring the stability and democracy the U.S. boasted about prior the occupation.

"The main complaint that I hear from Afghans is ... that we haven't delivered what they think we promised."

Also political experts attribute the possible return of Taliban to the lack of development in Afghanistan.

"People are poor, unemployed and affected by drought. Instead of offering them assistance to survive, the government has eradicated their poppy fields and has installed corrupt and incompetent provincial officials," Engineer Matin, an MP from Helmand, said.

In a recent article published in Foreign Affairs magazine, Rubin warned that Afghanistan "is at risk of collapsing into chaos," attributing that to the underestimation of the influence of Pakistan, a strong ally in Bush’s so-called “war on terrorism”, by Washington.

He said Pakistan has become a "safe haven" to the Taliban.

On the other hand, Smith, now executive director of the Centre for Global Studies at the University of Victoria, suggested that there’s growing evidence that fighters with ties to Osama Bin Laden’s Al Qaeda network are more potent than before.

"The Al Qaeda problem has not gone away," he told MPs. "It's important that we not forget the original motivation for going to Afghanistan, and that was to deal with Al Qaeda."

In a recently released report titled Canada in Afghanistan: Is it Working? Smith raised questions over whether the occupation and the NATO forces can achieve their goals in Afghanistan or not, even within 10 years.

The U.S.-led occupation overthrew the Taliban regime after its leadership refused to hand over Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden following the September 11 attacks on the United States, which Washington blames on Al Qaeda network.

But the U.S. is failing to win the so-called “war on terrorism”.

The Bush administration’s campaign has undertaken an active and highly publicized agenda domestically and overseas to rid the world of “evildoers,” but as remarks and assessments in this article made clear, more than fiver years after embarking on this campaign following 9/11, the American public hasn’t become freer or safer, both at home and when traveling.

Bush’s administration’s foreign policies have only ensured Americans will see both their security and liberty eroded .

[ColtPython74]

And this is about Iran.

Iran may be the greatest crisis of modern times
by John Pilger – Anti-War.com April 13, 2007

The Israeli journalist Amira Hass describes the moment her mother, Hannah, was marched from a cattle train to the Nazi concentration camp at Bergen-Belsen. “They were sick and some were dying,” she says. “Then my mother saw these German women looking at the prisoners, just looking. This image became very formative in my upbringing, this despicable ‘looking from the side’.”

It is time we in Britain and other Western countries stopped looking from the side. We are being led towards perhaps the most serious crisis in modern history as the Bush-Cheney-Blair “long war” edges closer to Iran for no reason other than that nation’s independence from rapacious America. The safe delivery of the 15 British sailors into the hands of Rupert Murdoch and his rivals (with tales of their “ordeal” almost certainly authored by the Ministry of Defence – until it got the wind up) is both a farce and a distraction. The Bush administration, in secret connivance with Blair, has spent four years preparing for “Operation Iranian Freedom”. Forty-five cruise missiles are primed to strike. According to Russia’s leading strategic thinker General Leonid Ivashov: “Nuclear facilities will be secondary targets... at least 20 such facilities need to be destroyed. Combat nuclear weapons may be used. This will result in the radioactive contamination of all the Iranian territory, and beyond.”

And yet there is a surreal silence, save for the noise of “news” in which our powerful broadcasters gesture cryptically at the obvious but dare not make sense of it, lest the one-way moral screen erected between us and the consequences of an imperial foreign policy collapse and the truth be revealed. John Bolton, formerly Bush’s man at the United Nations, recently spelled out the truth: that the Bush-Cheney-Blair plan for the Middle East is “an agenda to maintain division and ethnic tension". In other words, bloodshed and chaos equals control. He was referring to Iraq, but he also meant Iran.

One million Iraqis fill the streets of Najaf demanding that Bush and Blair get out of their homeland – that is the real news: not our nabbed sailor-spies, nor the political danse macabre of the pretenders to Blair’s Duce delusions. Whether it is treasurer Gordon Brown, the paymaster of the Iraq bloodbath, or John Reid, who sent British troops to pointless deaths in Afghanistan, or any of the others who sat through cabinet meetings knowing that Blair and his acolytes were lying through their teeth, only mutual distrust separates them now. They knew about Blair’s plotting with Bush. They knew about the fake 45-minute “warning”. They knew about the fitting up of Iran as the next “enemy”.

Declared Brown to the Daily Mail: “The days of Britain having to apologise for its colonial history are over. We should celebrate much of our past rather than apologise for it.” In Late Victorian Holocausts, the historian Mike Davis documents that as many as 21 million Indians died unnecessarily in famines criminally imposed by British colonial policies. Moreover, since the formal demise of that glorious imperium, declassified files make it clear that British governments have borne “significant responsibility” for the direct or indirect deaths of between 8.6 million and 13.5 million people throughout the world from military interventions and at the hands of regimes strongly supported by Britain. The historian Mark Curtis calls these victims “unpeople”. Rejoice! said Margaret Thatcher. Celebrate! says Brown. Spot the difference.

Brown is no different from Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and the other warmongering Democrats he admires and who support an unprovoked attack on Iran and the subjugation of the Middle East to “our interests” – and Israel’s, of course. Nothing has changed since the US and Britain destroyed Iran’s democratic government in 1953 and installed Reza Shah Pahlavi, whose regime had “the highest rate of death penalties in the world, no valid system of civilian courts and a history of torture” that was “beyond belief” (Amnesty).

Look behind the one-way moral screen and you will distinguish the Blairite elite by its loathing of the humane principles that mark a real democracy. They used to be discreet about this, but no more. Two examples spring to mind. In 2004, Blair used the secretive “royal prerogative” to overturn a high court judgment that had restored the very principle of human rights set out in Magna Carta to the people of the Chagos Islands, a British colony in the Indian Ocean. There was no debate. As ruthless as any dictator, Blair dealt his coup de grâce with the lawless expulsion of the islanders from their homeland, now a US military base, from which Bush has bombed Iraq and Afghanistan and will bomb Iran.

In the second example, only the degree of suffering is different. Last October, the Lancet published research by Johns Hopkins University in the US and al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad which calculated that 655,000 Iraqis had died as a direct result of the Anglo-American invasion. Downing Street officials derided the study as “flawed”. They were lying. They knew that the chief scientific adviser to the Ministry of Defence, Sir Roy Anderson, had backed the survey, describing its methods as “robust” and “close to best practice”, and other government officials had secretly approved the “tried and tested way of measuring mortality in conflict zones”. The figure for Iraqi deaths is now estimated at close to a million – carnage equivalent to that caused by the Anglo-American economic siege of Iraq in the 1990s, which produced the deaths of half a million infants under the age of five, verified by Unicef. That, too, was dismissed contemptuously by Blair.

“This Labour government, which includes Gordon Brown as much as it does Tony Blair,” wrote Richard Horton, editor of the Lancet, “is party to a war crime of monstrous proportions. Yet our political consensus prevents any judicial or civil society response. Britain is paralysed by its own indifference.”

Such is the scale of the crime and of our “looking from the side”. According to the Observer of 8 April, the voters’ “damning verdict” on the Blair regime is expressed by a majority who have “lost faith” in their government. No surprise there. Polls have long shown a widespread revulsion to Blair, demonstrated at the last general election, which produced the second lowest turnout since the franchise. No mention was made of the Observer’s own contribution to this national loss of faith. Once celebrated as a bastion of liberalism that stood against Anthony Eden’s lawless attack on Egypt in 1956, the new right-wing, lifestyle Observer enthusiastically backed Blair’s lawless attack on Iraq, having helped lay the ground with major articles falsely linking Iraq with the 9/11 attacks – claims now regarded even by the Pentagon as fake.

As hysteria is again fabricated, for Iraq, read Iran. According to the former US treasury secretary Paul O’Neill, the Bush cabal decided to attack Iraq on “day one” of Bush’s administration, long before 11 September 2001. The main reason was oil. O’Neill was shown a Pentagon document entitled “Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts”, which outlined the carve-up of Iraq’s oil wealth among the major Anglo-American companies. Under a law written by US and British officials, the Iraqi puppet regime is about to hand over the extraction of the largest concentration of oil on earth to Anglo-American companies.

Nothing like this piracy has happened before in the modern Middle East, where Opec has ensured that oil business is conducted between states. Across the Shatt al-Arab waterway is another prize: Iran’s vast oilfields. Just as non-existent weapons of mass destruction or facile concerns for democracy had nothing to do with the invasion of Iraq, so non-existent nuclear weapons have nothing to do with the coming American onslaught on Iran. Unlike Israel and the United States, Iran has abided by the rules of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, of which it was an original signatory, and has allowed routine inspections under its legal obligations. The International Atomic Energy Agency has never cited Iran for diverting its civilian programme to military use. For the past three years, IAEA inspectors have said they have been allowed to “go anywhere”. The recent UN Security Council sanctions against Iran are the result of Washington’s bribery.

Until recently, the British were unaware that their government was one of the world’s most consistent abusers of human rights and backers of state terrorism. Few Britons knew that the Muslim Brotherhood, the forerunner of al-Qaeda, was sponsored by British intelligence as a means of systematically destroying secular Arab nationalism, or that MI6 recruited young British Muslims in the 1980s as part of a $4bn Anglo-American-backed jihad against the Soviet Union known as “Operation Cyclone”. In 2001, few Britons knew that 3,000 innocent Afghan civilians were bombed to death as revenge for the attacks of 11 September. No Afghans brought down the twin towers. Thanks to Bush and Blair, awareness in Britain and all over the world has risen as never before. When home-grown terrorists struck London in July 2005, few doubted that the attack on Iraq had provoked the atrocity and that the bombs which killed 52 Londoners were, in effect, Blair’s bombs.

In my experience, most people do not indulge the absurdity and cruelty of the “rules” of rampant power. They do not contort their morality and intellect to comply with double standards and the notion of approved evil, of worthy and unworthy victims. They would, if they knew, grieve for all the lives, families, careers, hopes and dreams destroyed by Blair and Bush. The sure evidence is the British public’s wholehearted response to the 2004 tsunami, shaming that of the government. Certainly, they would agree wholeheartedly with Robert H Jackson, chief of counsel for the United States at the Nuremberg trials of Nazi leaders at the end of the Second World War. “Crimes are crimes,” he said, “whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct which we would not be willing to have invoked against us.”

As with Henry Kissinger and Donald Rumsfeld, who dare not travel to certain countries for fear of being prosecuted as war criminals, Blair as a private citizen may no longer be untouchable. On 20 March, Baltasar Garzón, the tenacious Spanish judge who pursued Augusto Pinochet, called for indictments against those responsible for “one of the most sordid and unjustifiable episodes in recent human history” – Iraq. Five days later, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, to which Britain is a signatory, said that Blair could one day face war-crimes charges.

These are critical changes in the way the sane world thinks – again, thanks to the Reich of Blair and Bush. However, we live in the most dangerous of times. On 6 April, Blair accused “elements of the Iranian regime” of “backing, financing, arming and supporting terrorism in Iraq”. He offered no evidence, and the Ministry of Defence has none. This is the same Goebbels-like refrain with which he and his coterie, Gordon Brown included, brought an epic bloodletting to Iraq. How long will the rest of us continue looking from the side?

[ColtPython74]

And finally something interesting about Iraq.

Iraq: A War For Israel 06/03/2007

By Mark Weber – IHR.org

The United States invasion of Iraq in March-April 2003, and the occupation of the country since then, has cost more than three thousand American lives and many tens of billions of dollars, and has brought death to tens of thousands of Iraqis.

Why did President Bush decide to go to war? In whose interests was it launched?

In the months leading up to the attack, President Bush and other high-ranking US officials repeatedly warned that the threat posed to the US and world by the Baghdad regime was so grave and imminent that the United States had to act quickly to bomb, invade and occupy Iraq.

On Sept. 28, 2002, for example, he said:

“The danger to our country is grave and it is growing. The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons, is rebuilding the facilities to make more and, according to the British government, could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order is given... This regime is seeking a nuclear bomb, and with fissile material could build one within a year.”

On March 6, 2003, President Bush declared:

“Saddam Hussein and his weapons are a direct threat to this country, to our people, and to all free people... I believe Saddam Hussein is a threat to the American people. I believe he’s a threat to the neighborhood in which he lives. And I’ve got good evidence to believe that. He has weapons of mass destruction... The American people know that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction.”

These claims were untrue. As the world now knows, Iraq had no dangerous “weapons of mass destruction,” and posed no threat to the US. Moreover, alarmist suggestions that the Baghdad regime was working with the al-Qaeda terror network likewise proved to be without foundation.

So if the official reasons given for the war were untrue, why did the United States attack Iraq?

Whatever the secondary reasons for the war, the crucial factor in President Bush’s decision to attack was to help Israel. With support from Israel and America’s Jewish-Zionist lobby, and prodded by Jewish “neo-conservatives” holding high-level positions in his administration, President Bush – who was already fervently committed to Israel – resolved to invade and subdue one of Israel’s chief regional enemies.

This is so widely understood in Washington that US Senator Ernest Hollings was moved in May 2004 to acknowledge that the US invaded Iraq “to secure Israel,” and “everybody” knows it. He also identified three of the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in prodding the US into war: Richard Perle, chair of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary; and Charles Krauthammer, columnist and author. [1]

Hollings referred to the cowardly reluctance of his Congressional colleagues to acknowledge this truth openly, saying that “nobody is willing to stand up and say what is going on.” Due to "the pressures we get politically," he added, members of Congress uncritically support Israel and its policies.

Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: “Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel." [2]

Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the “war against terrorism is going okay,” he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: “The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.” [3]

Bush also spoke candidly about why the US was going to war during a White House meeting on Feb. 27, 2003, just three weeks before the invasion. In a talk with Elie Wiesel, the well-known Jewish writer, Bush said: “If we don’t disarm Saddam Hussein, he will put a weapon of mass destruction on Israel and they will do what they think they have to do, and we have to avoid that.” [4]


Fervently Pro-Israel

President Bush’s fervent support for Israel and its hardline government is well known. He reaffirmed it, for example, in June 2002 in a major speech on the Middle East. In the view of “leading Israeli commentators,” the London Times reported, the address was “so pro-Israel that it might have been written by [Israel prime minister] Ariel Sharon.” [5] In an address to pro-Israel activists at the 2004 convention of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Bush said: “The United States is strongly committed, and I am strongly committed, to the security of Israel as a vibrant Jewish state.” He also told the gathering: “By defending the freedom and prosperity and security of Israel, you’re also serving the cause of America.” [6]

Condoleeza Rice, who served as President Bush’s National Security Advisor, and later, as his Secretary of State, echoed the President’s outlook in a May 2003 interview, saying that the “security of Israel is the key to security of the world.” [7]


Long Range Plans

Jewish-Zionist plans for war against Iraq had been in place for years. In mid-1996, a policy paper prepared for then-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu outlined a grand strategy for Israel in the Middle East. Entitled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,” it was written under the auspices of an Israeli think tank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies. Specifically, it called for an “effort [that] can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq, an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right...” [8]

The authors of “A Clean Break” included Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser, three influential Jews who later held high-level positions in the Bush administration, 2001-2004: Perle as chair of the Defense Policy Board, Feith as Undersecretary of Defense, and Wurmser as special assistant to the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control.

The role played by Bush administration officials who are associated with two major pro-Zionist “neoconservative” research centers has come under scrutiny from The Nation, the influential public affairs weekly. [9]

The author, Jason Vest, examined the close links between the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) and the Center for Security Policy (CSP), detailing the ties between these groups and various politicians, arms merchants, military men, wealthy pro-Israel American Jews, and Republican presidential administrations

JINSA and CSP members, notes Vest, “have ascended to powerful government posts, where... they’ve managed to weave a number of issues – support for national missile defense, opposition to arms control treaties, championing of wasteful weapons systems, arms aid to Turkey and American unilateralism in general – into a hard line, with support for the Israeli right at its core... On no issue is the JINSA/CSP hard line more evident than in its relentless campaign for war – not just with Iraq, but ‘total war,’ as Michael Ledeen, one of the most influential JINSAns in Washington, put it... For this crew, ‘regime change’ by any means necessary in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority is an urgent imperative.”

Samuel Francis, author, editor and columnist, also looked into the “neo-conservative” role in fomenting war. [10]

“My own answer,” he wrote, “is that the lie [that a massively-armed Iraq posed a grave and imminent threat to the US] was fabricated by neo-conservatives in the administration whose first loyalty is to Israel and its interests and who wanted the United States to smash Iraq because it was the biggest potential threat to Israel in the region. They are known to have been pushing for war with Iraq since at least 1996, but they could not make an effective case for it until after Sept. 11, 2001...”

In the aftermath of the 2001 Nine-Eleven terror attacks, ardently pro-Zionist “neo-conservatives” in the Bush administration – who for years had sought a Middle East war to bolster Israel’s security in the region – exploited the tragedy to press their agenda. In this they were backed by the Israeli government, which also pressured the White House to strike Iraq.

“The [Israeli] military and political leadership yearns for war in Iraq,” reported a leading Israeli daily paper, Haaretz, in February 2002. [11]

The Jerusalem correspondent for the Guardian, the respected British daily, reported in August 2002: “Israel signalled its decision yesterday to put public pressure on President George Bush to go ahead with a military attack on Iraq, even though it believes Saddam Hussein may well retaliate by striking Israel.” [12]

Three months before the US invasion, the well-informed Washington journalist Robert Novak reported that Israeli prime minister Sharon was telling American political leaders that “the greatest US assistance to Israel would be to overthrow Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi regime.” Moreover, added Novak, “that view is widely shared inside the Bush administration, and is a major reason why US forces today are assembling for war.” [13]

Israel’s spy agencies were a “full partner” with the US and Britain in producing greatly exaggerated prewar assessments of Iraq’s ability to wage war, a former senior Israeli military intelligence official has acknowledged. Shlomo Bron, a brigadier general in the Israel army reserves, and a senior researcher at a major Israeli think tank, said that intelligence provided by Israel played a significant role in supporting the US and British case for making war. Israeli intelligence agencies, he said, “badly overestimated the Iraqi threat to Israel and reinforced the American and British belief that the weapons [of mass destruction] existed.” [14]

The role of the pro-Israel lobby in pressing for war is examined in an 81-page research paper by two prominent American scholars, John J. Mearsheimer, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, and Stephen M. Walt, professor of international affairs at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. [15]

In the paper, “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy,” they write:

“Pressure from Israel and the [pro-Israel] Lobby was not the only factor behind the decision to attack Iraq in March 2003, but it was critical. Some Americans believe that this was a war for oil, but there is hardly any direct evidence to support this claim. Instead, the war was motivated in good part by a desire to make Israel more secure… Within the United States, the main driving force behind the Iraq war was a small band of neoconservatives, many with close ties to Israel’s Likud Party. In addition, key leaders of the Lobby’s major organizations lent their voices to the campaign for war.”

Important members of the pro-Israel lobby carried out what professors Mearshiemer and Walt call “an unrelenting public relations campaign to win support for invading Iraq. A key part of this campaign was the manipulation of intelligence information, so as to make Saddam look like an imminent threat.”

For some Jewish leaders, the Iraq war is part of a long-range effort to install Israel-friendly regimes across the Middle East. Norman Podhoretz, a prominent Jewish writer and an ardent supporter of Israel, has been for years editor of Commentary, the influential Zionist monthly. In the Sept. 2002 issue he wrote:

“The regimes that richly deserve to be overthrown and replaced are not confined to the three singled-out members of the axis of evil [Iraq, Iran, North Korea]. At a minimum, the axis should extend to Syria and Lebanon and Libya, as well as ‘friends’ of America like the Saudi royal family and Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, along with the Palestinian Authority, whether headed by Arafat or one of his henchmen.”

Patrick J. Buchanan, the well-known writer and commentator, and former White House Communications director, has been blunt in identifying those who pushed for war: [16]

“We charge that a cabal of polemicists and public officials seek to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America’s interests. We charge them with colluding with Israel to ignite those wars and destroy the Oslo Accords. We charge them with deliberately damaging US relations with every state in the Arab world that defies Israel or supports the Palestinian people’s right to a homeland of their own. We charge that they have alienated friends and allies all over the Islamic and Western world through their arrogance, hubris, and bellicosity...

“Cui Bono? For whose benefit these endless wars in a region that holds nothing vital to America save oil, which the Arabs must sell us to survive? Who would benefit from a war of civilizations between the West and Islam?

“Answer: one nation, one leader, one party. Israel, Sharon, Likud.”

Uri Avnery – an award-winning Israeli journalist and author, and a three-time member of Israel’s parliament – sees the Iraq war as an expression of immense Jewish influence and power. In an essay written some weeks after the US invasion, he wrote: [17]

"Who are the winners? They are the so-called neo-cons, or neo-conservatives. A compact group, almost all of whose members are Jewish. They hold the key positions in the Bush administration, as well as in the think-tanks that play an important role in formulating American policy and the ed-op pages of the influential newspapers... The immense influence of this largely Jewish group stems from its close alliance with the extreme right-wing Christian fundamentalists, who nowadays control Bush's Republican party. ... Seemingly, all this is good for Israel. America controls the world, we control America. Never before have Jews exerted such an immense influence on the center of world power.”

In Britain, a veteran member of Britain’s House of Commons bluntly declared in May 2003 that Jews had taken control of America’s foreign policy, and had succeeded in pushing the US into war. “A Jewish cabal have taken over the government in the United States and formed an unholy alliance with fundamentalist Christians,” said Tam Dalyell, a Labour party deputy and the longest-serving House member. “There is far too much Jewish influence in the United States,” he added. [18]


Summary

For many years now, American presidents of both parties have been staunchly committed to Israel and its security. This entrenched policy is an expression of the Jewish-Zionist grip on America’s political and cultural life. It was fervent support for Israel – shared by President Bush, high-ranking administration officials and nearly the entire US Congress – that proved crucial in the decision to invade and subdue one of Israel’s greatest regional enemies.

While the unprovoked US invasion of Iraq may have helped Israel, just as those who wanted and planned for the war had hoped, it has been a calamity for America and the world. It has cost tens of thousands of lives and many tens of billions of dollars. Around the world, it has generated unmatched distrust and hostility toward the US. In Arab and Muslim countries, it has fueled intense hatred of the United States, and has brought many new recruits to the ranks of anti-American terrorists.

Americans have already paid a high price for their nation’s commitment to Israel. We will pay an ever higher price – not just in dollars or international prestige, but in the lives of young men squandered for the interests of a foreign state – until the Jewish-Zionist hold on US political life is finally broken

[ARBANITAI]

The Best thing would be if the Us simply pull of their troops now.. more times to go, only will brings more troubles, we can clearly see that the US and plan for a "Democratic Iraq" failed, thats because they will never change anything in Iraq as long as they are there, the Us invasion has brought no peace or "Democracy" as they say in Iraq, instead more conflicts and fights has started and yet more seem to come.. there is a problem here the us have to realize it that their not going to bring peace anymore as it simply doesnt work out anymore.. the best solution can be, and thats very simple, pull out the troops, and leave the country to the iraqis and see if they can do something of their own instead of.
While i think this is the best time for the Us to pull off their troops out now, and realize that their presence in Iraq is allready over, and they dont have much of a bussines to stay there anymore.. my opinion.

[Saraj Fanático]

Umm... the US embarrassed themselfs already enough as it is. They lost thousands of lifes for nothing. Only for more of a non-secure state of Iraq. With more Militias then anyone in the US Government can dream of. Troops are still getting killed for nothing at all.

The US and Iraqi Government should really accept this. IRAQIS WILL NEVER ACCEPT AMERICA IN THEIR NATION, NOT ONLY THAT BUT THEY WILL NEVER EVER ACCEPT A GOVERNMENT BASED ON ISRAELS PROTECTION AND GIVING FREE OIL TO AMERICA. PERIOD!

Now its up to the US how many more young troops will be sent home in body bags. Dieing for nothing but the Zionists and for the Oil of the people that do not give a damn about them or their own nation. Iraq is a war zone, and it will remain that way until the 'War for oil' isn't stopped.

[shevafan]

the thing is that if they pull out, the democratic government in iraq will fall right away to the ones that are still fighting for Sadam's views. (i just dont get why, he slayed so many iraquis) then afterwards when they take over they will start making terrorist attacks on the US. US knows this so they want to secure Iraq. maybe some part of the american army will go back home, but american troops will be in iraq atleast until the next presidential elections.

[Saraj Fanático]

the thing is that if they pull out, the democratic government in iraq will fall right away to the ones that are still fighting for Sadam's views. (i just dont get why, he slayed so many iraquis) then afterwards when they take over they will start making terrorist attacks on the US. US knows this so they want to secure Iraq. maybe some part of the american army will go back home, but american troops will be in iraq atleast until the next presidential elections.


lol the Democratic Government in Iraq doesn't even exist mate! Its just false. They aren't serving anybody except the United States. The people down there who are fighting in Iraq aren't even for Saddam. Most of the Militia just want the US out now. They want them gone so that their nation doesn't become a puppet for another Superpower. Many rebels have lost family also which actually makes them get involved in the Jihad or whatever you may call it.

Iraqis have never attacked the US. Yet the US has attacked them. With a bigger Terrorist attack then 9/11 or any other attack on US soil. The United States has created many more Jihad groups then there ever was with this war. And we all agree on that. Iraqis never had such groups until the US attacked them.

The only way the US will get attacked is if they stay in Iraq. Just like Britain. But take a look at the nations that never participated. Such as France. They are as safe as possible.

[Bosnian Unit]

It might be sad, but its true.

They need to bring back Saddam, oh they cant........well someone like he was.

Becouse only he could controle that country, and keep it safe. Well he did some bad things , so what...... he had to kill those who try to take him down but by that he protected 25 million.

Now nobady is safe, country is in ruins, and it will take 100 years to come to that point where it was during Saddam.

Even Iraqis are saying this.





Was Iraq Better Off Under Saddam

BAGHDAD, Iraq, May 24, 2006
(CBS) Many Iraqis think conditions have gotten so bad in their country, they'd like to see Saddam Hussein back in power, according to some of the seven young Iraqi men who had a candid discussion with The Early Show co-anchor Harry Smith.
http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2006/05/24/image1649572g.jpg


All are college-educated and speak English.

"When the Americans started this whole war issue," said one, who will be referred to as person No. 1, "we started to see the light at the end of the tunnel, and we walked toward it. But when the war happened, that light was the American train coming the other way that ran us over."

He told of a recent day when he "saw a body on the sidewalk, and it was covered with cardboard, and people were still in their shops, saying hello to each other and inviting each other for tea, and I asked about him, and they said, 'He got killed this morning.' 'Oh, OK, yeah, see ya later.' "

"They are killing people for what they say, just like Saddam," said a young man who will be referred to as person No. 2. "They kill people because the people say, 'I don't like (this one or that one).' You get killed for that.

"They're using horrible ways to kill people. They're not just shooting them in the head. They suffocate them, strangle them, burn them. Horrible things, things we heard about only during Saddam's days are coming back now. It's an effort to terrorize people, not just to eliminate your enemy, but to force everyone to shut up and stay home.


This was in 2006 Bush (and its supporters) would say, things are much better now:sad: ! Yea right, i would say.......its much worse now, and thats why you keep sending more troops in !

[shevafan]

the Muslim culture just cant live under democracy. i dont know why US is trying to establish it there. its not going to work. one reason why US is holding their troops in Iraq might be that they want them to be there for maybe a future invasion of Iran.

[ARBANITAI]

the Muslim culture just cant live under democracy. i dont know why US is trying to establish it there. its not going to work. one reason why US is holding their troops in Iraq might be that they want them to be there for maybe a future invasion of Iran.

It´s not true the Muslim religion has its own democracy, and is a peacefull religion, you dont have to count on "bad ppl" to generelize all muslim culture for that sake.. Islam is more democratic then christianity is but ppl dont understand that really, in islam women has all their rights allmost equal to men..

[Bosanac]

Okay, look at this from their perspective..


Would you live by the rules Muslims set in your Christian country, after they've killed all your people, destroyed your government (no matter how corrupt it was) and than created a new government to fit their needs. Would you live by the rules that people who killed your relatives created?

[Gavmundo]

Well Iraq is now a puppet government everyone knows that and the U.S won't be letting anyone just take over so it doesn't really matter who things their right or wrong the fact is the troops won't be pulled out for sometime to come. The country will be used yet again to gain votes in the future elections in the U.S. but no government that takes over will pull those troops out and risk losing the country it currently controls. Politicians say a lot of things and there is very little truth in anything they do say. No matter what the U.S. is there to stay in Iraq for a long time to come.

[CambriaFan]

Okay, look at this from their perspective..


Would you live by the rules Muslims set in your Christian country, after they've killed all your people, destroyed your government (no matter how corrupt it was) and than created a new government to fit their needs. Would you live by the rules that people who killed your relatives created?
Brilliantly said :clap2:

Everyday we hear about the deaths of British and American soldiers and - even more upsettingly - dozens of civilian deaths that are so regular they are only mentioned as an after thought on the news. And what for? What has this invasion achieved? Nothing (apart from a bigger US stake in Iraqi oil :mad2: )

Blair and Bush are tyrants and cowards. I can't believe nobody has taken responsibility for this farce and resigned. I hope that all those involved face justice for their war crimes some time in the future.

Pull the troops out now and try and stop this bloodbath:mad2: :mad2: :mad2: !!!

[CambriaFan]

the Muslim culture just cant live under democracy. i dont know why US is trying to establish it there. its not going to work. one reason why US is holding their troops in Iraq might be that they want them to be there for maybe a future invasion of Iran.
Islam countries can have stable democracies. This is taken straight from wikipedia (with the muslim percentage of the population in brackets)

Albania (Europe) (70% Muslim)
Algeria (North Africa) (99%)
Bangladesh (South Asia) (83%)
Comoros (South eastern Africa) (98%)
Indonesia (South-East Asia) (88%)
Iran (Middle-East) (98%)
Kyrgyzstan (Central Asia) (75%)
Lebanon (Middle-East) (59.7%)
Nigeria (West Africa) (50%)
Malaysia (South-East Asia) (62%)
Mali (West Africa) (90%)
Morocco (North Africa) (98.7%)
Niger (West Africa) (80%)
Senegal (West Africa) (94%)
Sierra Leone (West Africa) (60%)
Turkey (Europe / Asia) (99.8%)
Yemen (Arabian Peninsula - Asia) (+90%)

[Saraj Fanático]

This isn't about Islamic nations accepting Democracy or not. Its how it is accepted. We have 2 religions involved in this mess. Christianity and Islam. Now in Democratic Christian nations you have a different culture. You see many different things and how life is lived. You cannot just expect Muslims to take that huge step to where the US is in now. People in Iraq are used to living with their own culture and style. Its like Muslims telling Christians to pray more for their god etc... Off course people wouldn't find it comfterable because some do and some don't pray all that long and it would just be strange. But for Muslim nations like Iraq its a part of life to spend a good share of your day to prayer. We all have different societies. Let Iraqis accept Democracy on their own terms and style.

For me I think Islamic Democracy is the best system of Government. Or for nation such as Iraq at least. Its not what the media made it look like with the Taliban, and the Saudi Government. They are just US puppets. A real Islamic Democracy is nearly as similar as the Government of Iran except that it allows more rights to Females even though Iran does have a good share of rights for women, and it has to be completely united with Shiites and Sunnis working together with 1 nation and people with even non-Muslims involved.

[shevafan]

if a country is 95% or more islam, then yes democracy might work. but when you have the country split up between christians and muslims it will not work. rem that anyone who is not muslim to a muslim is an infadel and a muslim in their religion has every right to even kill that person. and im not lying this is true.
another thing is that muslims who come to the US or other countries like canada or britain or france laugh at us. they take advantage of everything we give like welfare, food banks and other things. u have a muslim family of 10 people basically mostly kids and you have all the kids on welfare while their parents own a convenience store. and they say that they have no job so they need to go on welfare. im not saying all muslims are like this but i have seen these types of situations and am disgusted. u have all opportunities in the united states and yet you choose this cheating way.
One other thing i would say is that I'M NOT a racist and never was and never will be. But all the christians that have been killed in the middle east, its just not right. and yes there were a lot of christians in the middle east.

[ARBANITAI]

if a country is 95% or more islam, then yes democracy might work. but when you have the country split up between christians and muslims it will not work. rem that anyone who is not muslim to a muslim is an infadel and a muslim in their religion has every right to even kill that person. and im not lying this is true.
another thing is that muslims who come to the US or other countries like canada or britain or france laugh at us. they take advantage of everything we give like welfare, food banks and other things. u have a muslim family of 10 people basically mostly kids and you have all the kids on welfare while their parents own a convenience store. and they say that they have no job so they need to go on welfare. im not saying all muslims are like this but i have seen these types of situations and am disgusted. u have all opportunities in the united states and yet you choose this cheating way.
One other thing i would say is that I'M NOT a racist and never was and never will be. But all the christians that have been killed in the middle east, its just not right. and yes there were a lot of christians in the middle east.


I can tell you straight that NO as a muslim you have no right to kill anyone.. Ever read the Quran mate? the islamic holy book, it says that no one has the right to kill anyone especially it is a big sin to kill(Innocent ppl) if you do that, your just not a muslim anymore, the term Jihad doesnt mean to kill non-muslims thats a big propaganda and a big fake, Jihad means to defend your self, thats if someone or a foreign country attacks you or your religion then you have the right to take up the arms and stand up for the protection of your religion. but i can see ur knowlegde in islam is not much, so i think there is alot more for you to learn in the future, i say that jugding to your error opinions about islam as a religion.. So no I dont agree with you, the Christians that lives in middleeast are still there, you have arab christians and other middle eastern christians today, and they are still there, The Muslims through years has been mostly tolerants towards the christians because muslims has to respect the holy bible while we consider it the book from God, though we dont believe that the current bibles that the christians have now most probably from (Mathew,Mark,John and Luka) are the original bible´s that has been given to jesus, as we believe the original bible has been changed and corrupted over times by humans as i mentioned these names before.
and the Quran still remains original copy of the word of god since the time it was revealed to prophet muhammed, without Man changing it or adding new things. the fact tells us, that today you can find over millions of different versions of bible and they are not same, while there is only one version of the Quran.


and morefor the word "Islam" means "Peace" and submission to the will of God. The Muslim God, or the God of the Quran is the same God of the bible torah and psalms, Quran is the last holy book sended by God. and bible and torah are books that have been sended before the Quran by the same God to jesus, Moses and David, all these statments you can read in the Quran.

[poutismalakas]

I thought Jihad was a inner struggle between ones sins and rightousness? At least that it was supposed to mean?

[ARBANITAI]

I thought Jihad was a inner struggle between ones sins and rightousness? At least that it was supposed to mean?
Here it is:

Jihad means (struggle in the cause of God) it is also Against injustice and oppression and a struggle for the defence of Islam if it is needed. but in no way it is an oppression to anyone as its a protection for the religion. and for the cause of God.

The primary aim of jihad is not the conversion of non-Muslims to Islam by force, but rather the expansion and defense of the Islamic state.

So even many ppl today tries to claim its an (opression for non-muslims) It is still NOT, as it is for the protection of Islam, However it is Normally to tell ppl about Islam about its beauty and of its rightous religion but not to force them to do it as long as he doesnt bother you in your religion.

[PAO_HELLAS]

This has been a very big problem in the unted states. it seems that if the US pulls out then they will loose the whole point of the envasion and the old government will take over. if they stay more american troops will continue to get killed. this is really getting on the american people's nerves.

"They should pull out right now"

I voted this because as long as they are in Iraq, the country will be destroyed more while more Iraqis and American soldiers will be losing their lives, not because of the "american people's nerves". I don't think that their majority are already so worried that they are not able to eat their hamburger and drink their coca-cola..

[shevafan]

I can tell you straight that NO as a muslim you have no right to kill anyone.. Ever read the Quran mate? the islamic holy book, it says that no one has the right to kill anyone especially it is a big sin to kill(Innocent ppl) if you do that, your just not a muslim anymore, the term Jihad doesnt mean to kill non-muslims thats a big propaganda and a big fake, Jihad means to defend your self, thats if someone or a foreign country attacks you or your religion then you have the right to take up the arms and stand up for the protection of your religion. but i can see ur knowlegde in islam is not much, so i think there is alot more for you to learn in the future, i say that jugding to your error opinions about islam as a religion.. So no I dont agree with you, the Christians that lives in middleeast are still there, you have arab christians and other middle eastern christians today, and they are still there, The Muslims through years has been mostly tolerants towards the christians because muslims has to respect the holy bible while we consider it the book from God, though we dont believe that the current bibles that the christians have now most probably from (Mathew,Mark,John and Luka) are the original bible´s that has been given to jesus, as we believe the original bible has been changed and corrupted over times by humans as i mentioned these names before.
and the Quran still remains original copy of the word of god since the time it was revealed to prophet muhammed, without Man changing it or adding new things. the fact tells us, that today you can find over millions of different versions of bible and they are not same, while there is only one version of the Quran.


and morefor the word "Islam" means "Peace" and submission to the will of God. The Muslim God, or the God of the Quran is the same God of the bible torah and psalms, Quran is the last holy book sended by God. and bible and torah are books that have been sended before the Quran by the same God to jesus, Moses and David, all these statments you can read in the Quran.
yes, but you see in the muslim opinion we as christians are attacking their religion by worshipping God(Allah) in a wrong way. basically not worshipping God how the muslims do it is in their mind an offence against God.
and by the way the catholic version of the bible has never been changed. only the denominations of the catholic church like protestants have changed the bible because of their certain views. catholics use the original one.

[blupid]

It's only an offence in the minds of the tiny proportion of muslims who occupy 99% of news headlines because they are threatening the west and blowing themselves up.

[Saraj Fanático]

if a country is 95% or more islam, then yes democracy might work. but when you have the country split up between christians and muslims it will not work. rem that anyone who is not muslim to a muslim is an infadel and a muslim in their religion has every right to even kill that person. and im not lying this is true.
another thing is that muslims who come to the US or other countries like canada or britain or france laugh at us. they take advantage of everything we give like welfare, food banks and other things. u have a muslim family of 10 people basically mostly kids and you have all the kids on welfare while their parents own a convenience store. and they say that they have no job so they need to go on welfare. im not saying all muslims are like this but i have seen these types of situations and am disgusted. u have all opportunities in the united states and yet you choose this cheating way.
One other thing i would say is that I'M NOT a racist and never was and never will be. But all the christians that have been killed in the middle east, its just not right. and yes there were a lot of christians in the middle east.

:lol: Okay that is a very bias statement. Its also false to the fullest. You my friend happen to be very brainwashed by propaganda and this war on Islam that is happening as we speak. Most Muslims in Britain, France, and Canada are loyal to those nations and are working hard for their families just like other immigrants.

Your statement about how it is okay for Muslims to kill another is the biggest crap I have heard. In one of the famous quotes from the Quran it is mentioned '“If you save one life, it will be as if you have saved all of humanity; if you take one life, it will be as if you take all of humanity.” Murder or killing in Islam is not tolerated. The only time a man can kill in the name of god is during Jihad Defence. If one attacks your home and tries to kill you then you have the right to take his life before he does that. It is forbidden in Islam to invade and attack the innocent people. This is like me saying Christianity is to be considered as a religion that allows their followers to take the life's on nonbelievers because of some many wars which have been launched by Christians. Now is it true? I don't know, but I will find out if I ever do read the bible before I go ahead and judge. And thats what you have to do if you really ever want to see the truth. Pick up a copy of the Quran.

Now Muslims here have 10 times more of a reason of testing if Christianity really allows killings. There is an official belief in Christianity that the Cross can save any human who has committed which ever crime. Now I am not sure again if it indeed is mentioned but I have seen Christians declare it in this documentary I saw once. So you actually challenging Islam about this issue is really stupid.

Yeah your not a racist but perhaps you should think about how Muslims feel waking up everyday and see non-Muslims slaughter great numbers of Muslims in Chechnya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, and Dagestan, without the world not ever raising a finger to help stop the killings and instead say that the Mujahideen or Jihad fighters are the terrorists. NOW THAT IS MESSED UP! :mad2:

[shevafan]

:lol: Okay that is a very bias statement. Its also false to the fullest. You my friend happen to be very brainwashed by propaganda and this war on Islam that is happening as we speak. Most Muslims in Britain, France, and Canada are loyal to those nations and are working hard for their families just like other immigrants.

Your statement about how it is okay for Muslims to kill another is the biggest crap I have heard. In one of the famous quotes from the Quran it is mentioned '“If you save one life, it will be as if you have saved all of humanity; if you take one life, it will be as if you take all of humanity.” Murder or killing in Islam is not tolerated. The only time a man can kill in the name of god is during Jihad Defence. If one attacks your home and tries to kill you then you have the right to take his life before he does that. It is forbidden in Islam to invade and attack the innocent people. This is like me saying Christianity is to be considered as a religion that allows their followers to take the life's on nonbelievers because of some many wars which have been launched by Christians. Now is it true? I don't know, but I will find out if I ever do read the bible before I go ahead and judge. And thats what you have to do if you really ever want to see the truth. Pick up a copy of the Quran.

Now Muslims here have 10 times more of a reason of testing if Christianity really allows killings. There is an official belief in Christianity that the Cross can save any human who has committed which ever crime. Now I am not sure again if it indeed is mentioned but I have seen Christians declare it in this documentary I saw once. So you actually challenging Islam about this issue is really stupid.

Yeah your not a racist but perhaps you should think about how Muslims feel waking up everyday and see non-Muslims slaughter great numbers of Muslims in Chechnya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, and Dagestan, without the world not ever raising a finger to help stop the killings and instead say that the Mujahideen or Jihad fighters are the terrorists. NOW THAT IS MESSED UP! :mad2:
lol brainwashed. trust me one person that is not brainwashed in this world would be me. and just to let you know americans didnt go into iraq to give back for all the killings that muslims did to christians. i could care less to what the american government is doing. what i do care about is the people who are affected.

"There is an official belief in Christianity that the Cross can save any human who has committed which ever crime. Now I am not sure again if it indeed is mentioned but I have seen Christians declare it in this documentary I saw once. So you actually challenging Islam about this issue is really stupid."

what do u mean by this? ^^^
the bible clearly says you cannot kill anyone. now if you do kill someone and you are extremely sorry for this and actually want to change this in your life you can do this through confession. and only God is your judje. see in Christianity its a little different. somewhat of a direct quote from the bible by Jesus - "When someone hits you, turn to your other cheek and let him hit you again" - what does this mean? this means that if someone attacks you in any way, let him do it again and then maybe he will understand that people should not fight against each other, but live in peace.
ofcourse christianity has been quite different in some ways. one thing that could prove that, would be the crusades but thats a long story.

one conclusion that i would draw though is that the Muslim culture should not blame Christianity. A good christian isnt in support of any fighting at all that is going on. and i hope all the religions in the world would come up with a statement in their beliefs that everyone should be equal no matter what.

[Centarfor9]

if all religions would do as their books tell them to do the world would be a noce place ...but they do not so here we are

i think Bush started this war for no reason ...it's funny how he blamed that UN guy in charge of inspections in Iraq that he didn't know what was going on ...but later that guy got nobel prize for peace ...and Bush is a loughing stock of the world

Iran is next ...i think
http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/2721/ahmadinejadpointspj6.jpg (http://forums.soccerfansnetwork.com/)

[shevafan]

if all religions would do as their books tell them to do the world would be a noce place ...but they do not so here we are

i think Bush started this war for no reason ...it's funny how he blamed that UN guy in charge of inspections in Iraq that he didn't know what was going on ...but later that guy got nobel prize for peace ...and Bush is a loughing stock of the world

Iran is next ...i think
http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/2721/ahmadinejadpointspj6.jpg (http://forums.soccerfansnetwork.com/)
well except jahowa's witnesses =) they basiaclly dont tollerate any religion except theirs.
the invasion of iran in my opinion is inevitable.

[Saraj Fanático]

lol brainwashed. trust me one person that is not brainwashed in this world would be me. and just to let you know americans didnt go into iraq to give back for all the killings that muslims did to christians. i could care less to what the american government is doing. what i do care about is the people who are affected.

lol okay yeah your that one person. Sure.

The Americans went into Iraq for two reasons. Oil and protection of the terrorist state of Israel. Period.

"There is an official belief in Christianity that the Cross can save any human who has committed which ever crime. Now I am not sure again if it indeed is mentioned but I have seen Christians declare it in this documentary I saw once. So you actually challenging Islam about this issue is really stupid."

what do u mean by this? ^^^
the bible clearly says you cannot kill anyone. now if you do kill someone and you are extremely sorry for this and actually want to change this in your life you can do this through confession. and only God is your judje. see in Christianity its a little different. somewhat of a direct quote from the bible by Jesus - "When someone hits you, turn to your other cheek and let him hit you again" - what does this mean? this means that if someone attacks you in any way, let him do it again and then maybe he will understand that people should not fight against each other, but live in peace.
ofcourse christianity has been quite different in some ways. one thing that could prove that, would be the crusades but thats a long story.

No. I have seen people go to the Priest and they get cured from the guilt they them selfs possess. I have seen priests say that the Cross is so powerful that it can forgive any sin. No matter what that person did. So many go to the priest and confess they raped someone or murdered a person and thats it. Then after words he goes on doing the same thing. In Islam no Imam (priest) can cure you for your sins. Every human soul is responsible for his own sins. He must confess to God and not to another Human being which might just carry more sins then he who confesses himself! Its a human and god. Thats all to it. But am just saying some facts of Islam like your saying facts of Christianity. And its interesting how everything comes along between these two very interesting religions.

I would support that quote from the Bible if only Humans weren't the way they are. If one person gets hit on the cheek and you turn the other cheek to him and he does it again, he will keep on if he really hates you enough to hit you the first time. Thats why I say Eye for and Eye tactics are the best ways to deal with that. Humans will kill their own species that they differ from in any way. No matter if the attacked is not fighting back. Thats the way we are, sadly.

However I am pretty sure that there is an idea that every sin can be removed in Christianity but then again I am not going to make this 100% official since I never fully read the Bible except some big parts of it.


one conclusion that i would draw though is that the Muslim culture should not blame Christianity. A good christian isnt in support of any fighting at all that is going on. and i hope all the religions in the world would come up with a statement in their beliefs that everyone should be equal no matter what.


When is the Muslim culture accusing anyone of anything? Even if there are many many things Islam can blame on Christianity. I actually think that in modern times its the other way around when I see what CNN is writing and other Medias.

[Saraj Fanático]

The day Iran gets invaded I will become the first man to make flying shoes. :lol:

[shevafan]

lol okay yeah your that one person. Sure.

The Americans went into Iraq for two reasons. Oil and protection of the terrorist state of Israel. Period.



No. I have seen people go to the Priest and they get cured from the guilt they them selfs possess. I have seen priests say that the Cross is so powerful that it can forgive any sin. No matter what that person did. So many go to the priest and confess they raped someone or murdered a person and thats it. Then after words he goes on doing the same thing. In Islam no Imam (priest) can cure you for your sins. Every human soul is responsible for his own sins. He must confess to God and not to another Human being which might just carry more sins then he who confesses himself! Its a human and god. Thats all to it. But am just saying some facts of Islam like your saying facts of Christianity. And its interesting how everything comes along between these two very interesting religions.

I would support that quote from the Bible if only Humans weren't the way they are. If one person gets hit on the cheek and you turn the other cheek to him and he does it again, he will keep on if he really hates you enough to hit you the first time. Thats why I say Eye for and Eye tactics are the best ways to deal with that. Humans will kill their own species that they differ from in any way. No matter if the attacked is not fighting back. Thats the way we are, sadly.

However I am pretty sure that there is an idea that every sin can be removed in Christianity but then again I am not going to make this 100% official since I never fully read the Bible except some big parts of it.





When is the Muslim culture accusing anyone of anything? Even if there are many many things Islam can blame on Christianity. I actually think that in modern times its the other way around when I see what CNN is writing and other Medias.

what do u mean confess to a person who did more sins than you. a real priest in the catholic church usually is the most harmless human being. beeing a priest is devoting your whole life to God.
you know why you have to confess to a priest? ill tell you why. its the easiest thing to just pray to God and say you are sorry. see in the Christian religion God already knows what you have done because he sees everything what you have done. good or bad. a priest on the other hand is a person. would you be able to tell all your sins to a person? you might feel a little embarrassed. through the priest God tests your devotion and love to him. if you really are sorry you will admit to your sins.
and if a person confesses and then goes and does it again, than he is obviously not sorry for what he did. if you truly at heart were sorry for what you did, you wouldnt do it again.
and what do u mean cure from your sins? if you killed someone for example, and you think it was the right thing to do, then you cant get "cured" from it. the guilt in yourself of what you did is the real cure.

[Saraj Fanático]

what do u mean confess to a person who did more sins than you. a real priest in the catholic church usually is the most harmless human being. beeing a priest is devoting your whole life to God.
you know why you have to confess to a priest? ill tell you why. its the easiest thing to just pray to God and say you are sorry. see in the Christian religion God already knows what you have done because he sees everything what you have done. good or bad. a priest on the other hand is a person. would you be able to tell all your sins to a person? you might feel a little embarrassed. through the priest God tests your devotion and love to him. if you really are sorry you will admit to your sins.
and if a person confesses and then goes and does it again, than he is obviously not sorry for what he did. if you truly at heart were sorry for what you did, you wouldnt do it again.
and what do u mean cure from your sins? if you killed someone for example, and you think it was the right thing to do, then you cant get "cured" from it. the guilt in yourself o what you did is the real cure.


No am not trying to say Priests are guilty. But how do you know for sure that he is clean of all sins? A person cannot confess himself to another person is what I think. With all due respect to Christianity off course.

Prayer is not easy. For me I think prayer is very hard in my religion. You must learn it and memorize so much all to show how how much you are willing to spend time for the lord and worship him. God indeed sees everything you done and think but if he already knows that, why is the priest needed to connect your sins to him? Why would god want his mighty creation to show love and loyalty to another of his creations? Religion in my opinion is only between God and you. If you kill a person, why wouldn't god want you to speak before him and tell him your sorry? Like a true follower? Not go and tell this to a priest all to just show loyalty. If he knows what you have done then why would he want you to express yourself to a person who cannot have the ability to excuse you of your guilt. Since only god can do that. So the priest is basically used to test how much a creation has loyalty to another creation? He wants you to talk to him and pray to him for forgiveness. Not to just express emotion to a person and just leave without seeing his face. The whole idea of prayer isn't to be a 'easy' or 'hard' way to say sorry. But its to show complete loyalty and fear of the greatest above all.

My answer to your last question is this. A person who kills another in self defence hasn't even sinned. I am speaking of killing an innocent soul. If you kill an innocent soul you have basically killed one of gods dearest creations which hadn't or couldn't harm you. Then you must confess yourself to the creator. Not another creation. But in Islam you go to hell if you take an innocent life. God can show mercy to some points. However he cannot save you from hell fire if you did this with full knowledge of your action and then say sorry. Thats why a person must always worry about what he/she does in this world before actually doing it.


PS: All of this is just me Comparing and Contrasting Islam and Christianity. I am also curious. And I am willing to go further into these two religions since I think your pretty mature enough for a good and open religious conversation. I just want to have a religious talk without any rude comments to anyone of the two religions. Am looking forward to continuing this tomorrow. Good Night!

So whoever wants to join me and Sheva in this is welcomed. Thanks! :)

We should put this in an new religious thread.

[shevafan]

No am not trying to say Priests are guilty. But how do you know for sure that he is clean of all sins? A person cannot confess himself to another person is what I think. With all due respect to Christianity off course.

Prayer is not easy. For me I think prayer is very hard in my religion. You must learn it and memorize so much all to show how how much you are willing to spend time for the lord and worship him. God indeed sees everything you done and think but if he already knows that, why is the priest needed to connect your sins to him? Why would god want his mighty creation to show love and loyalty to another of his creations? Religion in my opinion is only between God and you. If you kill a person, why wouldn't god want you to speak before him and tell him your sorry? Like a true follower? Not go and tell this to a priest all to just show loyalty. If he knows what you have done then why would he want you to express yourself to a person who cannot have the ability to excuse you of your guilt. Since only god can do that. So the priest is basically used to test how much a creation has loyalty to another creation? He wants you to talk to him and pray to him for forgiveness. Not to just express emotion to a person and just leave without seeing his face. The whole idea of prayer isn't to be a 'easy' or 'hard' way to say sorry. But its to show complete loyalty and fear of the greatest above all.

My answer to your last question is this. A person who kills another in self defence hasn't even sinned. I am speaking of killing an innocent soul. If you kill an innocent soul you have basically killed one of gods dearest creations which hadn't or couldn't harm you. Then you must confess yourself to the creator. Not another creation. But in Islam you go to hell if you take an innocent life. God can show mercy to some points. However he cannot save you from hell fire if you did this with full knowledge of your action and then say sorry. Thats why a person must always worry about what he/she does in this world before actually doing it.


PS: All of this is just me Comparing and Contrasting Islam and Christianity. I am also curious. And I am willing to go further into these two religions since I think your pretty mature enough for a good and open religious conversation. I just want to have a religious talk without any rude comments to anyone of the two religions. Am looking forward to continuing this tomorrow. Good Night!

So whoever wants to join me and Sheva in this is welcomed. Thanks! :)

We should put this in an new religious thread.
no but you see a priest isnt just a person. he is in a way a representation of God. a priest represents God in our world today. you see when u confess,the priest says various prayers to connect your words spiritually to God. the priest himself as a person forgives you too for these sins. if you do not learn to forgive what christian are you? in the world every human being is as deer as anyone. God loves every one of his creations. in the christian religion there isnt such as killing in self defence. if someone is about to kill you, dont try to kill him before he does it to you. if you sacrifice your life to not sin its considered a very christian thing to do. but that takes a lot of faith and some people cant do it. see the thing about christianity is "love your neighbour like yourself". jesus loved everyone, and even at last moments of his life when he was about to die after he was nailed to the cross.he said to God "Please God forgive these people because they do not know what they are doing" Jesus tryed to show the people through the years he was alive that revenge is not the way to live. even though its hard to forgive sometimes.

[shevafan]

also one thing i forgot to say is that, ofcourse religion is between you and God. there are various prayers of forgiveness you can pray, or just make one yourself where you talk to God and just ask him to forgive you for your sins. but Christianity is obviously a very public thing too. obviously if you did something bad to a person you should ask forgiveness from them. there's no question about that. usually when you go to confession and you say something like i didnt listen to my parents a lot, the priest maybe will tell you to try to do something good to your parents like help around the house. if you confess something like - i punched a guy in school yesterday. the priest might tell you, go up to that guy and tell him that you didnt want to punch him and you want to become friends. but this is just general stuff, i mean im not a priest. also christianity is a very much involved in a community. we like to celebrate different christian holidays as a community and pray as a community. and the church obviously encourages this because it just bring people together.

[Centarfor9]

well except jahowa's witnesses =) they basiaclly dont tollerate any religion except theirs.
the invasion of iran in my opinion is inevitable.
that would be the best/worst war in human history

best because it would be the greatest (largest and most destructible etc etc) war in history of man kind

worst because it could lead to WW3

i wonder who would China and Russia support

http://vwt.d2g.com:8081/putin_ahmad2.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/90/20060420_d-0298-772v.jpg

[shevafan]

that would be the best/worst war in human history

best because it would be the greatest (largest and most destructible etc etc) war in history of man kind

worst because it could lead to WW3

i wonder who would China and Russia support

http://vwt.d2g.com:8081/putin_ahmad2.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/90/20060420_d-0298-772v.jpg
in my opinion US can take over Iran just as fast as they took over Iraq. russia and china wont support anyone in this situation. i mean that they wont support anyone in a materialistic way like providing weopons or troops. russia and china might say that they support US but they wont do anything else. and you do know that handshakes mean very little in the political world today =)

[Centarfor9]

in my opinion US can take over Iran just as fast as they took over Iraq. russia and china wont support anyone in this situation. i mean that they wont support anyone in a materialistic way like providing weopons or troops. russia and china might say that they support US but they wont do anything else. and you do know that handshakes mean very little in the political world today =)
i totally disagree with this post (i entirely disagree with everything you just said)

Russia (that is Putin) is waitng for an oppurtunity to thank USA for the democracy.

China wants to be number one so they will do that. But will they go against USA so soon? I don't know. If China would go in a war with USA the first thing they would do is dump all the US currency on the world market...that would impact US economy in an unimaginable way (also that would have an huge negative impact on world economy).

But would China do that and risk all the money USA owes them ...if it comes to that i think they would. I think it's way too soon for China to do that.

Also Iran is not a pushover in any way[.]

[shevafan]

i totally disagree with this post (i entirely disagree with everything you just said)

Russia (that is Putin) is waitng for an oppurtunity to thank USA for the democracy.

China wants to be number one so they will do that. But will they go against USA so soon? I don't know. If China would go in a war with USA the first thing they would do is dump all the US currency on the world market...that would impact US economy in an unimaginable way (also that would have an huge negative impact on world economy).

But would China do that and risk all the money USA owes them ...if it comes to that i think they would. I think it's way too soon for China to do that.

Also Iran is not a pushover in any way[.]
putin doesnt give two shits about the US or Iran. all he wants is to gain money. you dont even know how corrupt the russian government is. right now hes trying to change the constitution so he can be re-elected for the third time. china on the other hand is not going to do anything either trust me. they are too occupied in enriching their economy. if US invades Iran, it is going to be something like Iraq 3 years ago except a bit bigger and obviously somewhat more casualties. i think US might actually get more support from UN and some other nations like Britain because this war would make more sense than the one they started in Iraq.

[shevafan]

i dont see another world war happening. most superpowers in the world right now are working together. china is basically alone but i dont really see them as a superpower. russia i dont even consider a super power. in my opinion in the next 10 years we are going to see a very big revolution in Russia, and there will be blood. someone who would try to spark up a world war in my opinion could be the crazy north korean government. now this is where China has to make a very big decision. in my opinion if this moment comes up china will not support north korea because they themselves see that they are crazy, and then the north koreans are screwed because china is basically thei only theoretical ally.

[Centarfor9]

putin doesnt give two shits about the US or Iran. all he wants is to gain money. you dont even know how corrupt the russian government is. right now hes trying to change the constitution so he can be re-elected for the third time. china on the other hand is not going to do anything either trust me. they are too occupied in enriching their economy. if US invades Iran, it is going to be something like Iraq 3 years ago except a bit bigger and obviously somewhat more casualties. i think US might actually get more support from UN and some other nations like Britain because this war would make more sense than the one they started in Iraq.
i have idea what is happening in Russia ...and it's all because of the 'democracy' :)

after Russia listened to USA (Bush) their country went down the tubes...GDP cut down in half...mafia took over the country (gov't and economy)

Putin is trying to get everything back. (Privatization in Russia was a hoax)

Iran is (potential) source for Russia (energy wise and money wise).

USA has no support from UN (they messed up big time).

China also has their eyes open. (Mr. Hu and Mr. Wen are two tough guys who only look for Chinese interest and interest of Chinese [market] socialism)

that leaves us with other powers UK and France (possibly Italy)

UK will try to do this diplomatically (they were fooled once already).

France [period] :D


USA has more power than Iran in the UN. USA played better and had better cards at the UN.

I don't know we will see but USA is not ready to go into this war alone (despite their unmatchable military power).

It would be a war of wars two military countries battling it out (i'm not sure that Iran is military country but they are Persians so i assume ...i hope they are better than how they did in 300 :) ). Which country is willing to lose the most?

btw i wouldn't let Bush watch 300 he might get some crazy ideas :smoking:

i dont see another world war happening. most superpowers in the world right now are working together. china is basically alone but i dont really see them as a superpower. russia i dont even consider a super power. in my opinion in the next 10 years we are going to see a very big revolution in Russia, and there will be blood. someone who would try to spark up a world war in my opinion could be the crazy north korean government. now this is where China has to make a very big decision. in my opinion if this moment comes up china will not support north korea because they themselves see that they are crazy, and then the north koreans are screwed because china is basically thei only theoretical ally.
Putin is the most popular politican in Russia. :)

[shevafan]

i have idea what is happening in Russia ...and it's all because of the 'democracy' :)

after Russia listened to USA (Bush) their country went down the tubes...GDP cut down in half...mafia took over the country (gov't and economy)

Putin is trying to get everything back. (Privatization in Russia was a hoax)

Iran is (potential) source for Russia (energy wise and money wise).

USA has no support from UN (they messed up big time).

China also has their eyes open. (Mr. Hu and Mr. Wen are two tough guys who only look for Chinese interest and interest of Chinese [market] socialism)

that leaves us with other powers UK and France (possibly Italy)

UK will try to do this diplomatically (they were fooled once already).

France [period] :D


USA has more power than Iran in the UN. USA played better and had better cards at the UN.

I don't know we will see but USA is not ready to go into this war alone (despite their unmatchable military power).

It would be a war of wars two military countries battling it out (i'm not sure that Iran is military country but they are Persians so i assume ...i hope they are better than how they did in 300 :) ). Which country is willing to lose the most?

btw i wouldn't let Bush watch 300 he might get some crazy ideas :smoking:


Putin is the most popular politican in Russia. :)
lol ur viewing this as a video game. two big nations battling it out =)
russia trusting US about democracy? what do u mean lol since the communist government fell in 1991 the whole russian government has been running by the mafia. the first pres was yeltsin. while he was pres a shit load of money was stolen. have you heard of someone called abramovich? i thought you did. he was one of those people who stole billions of dollars. then the government kind of took a little twist. when putin came to power he started geting all of these oligarchs out of russia and puttin his own friends in these big political spots so they can steal money. putin use to be an old KGB agent and he basically put his KGB buddies on to these spots like the minister of internal affairs and shit like that. you rem that thing that happened in ukraine when they were cheating in the voting? so they had to revote and like 10million people made a peacefull revolution. well u cant even imagine how much more corrupet the voting is in Russia. im telling you, big bussinessmen who dont pay taxes love Putin. everyone else would want him to die. but i dont see anything happening to change the system in russia. the only way Russia can change is through revolution. Russian people are very hard to deal with, and i know this from personal experience.

[Centarfor9]

lol ur viewing this as a video game. two big nations battling it out =)
russia trusting US about democracy? what do u mean lol since the communist government fell in 1991 the whole russian government has been running by the mafia. the first pres was yeltsin. while he was pres a shit load of money was stolen. have you heard of someone called abramovich? i thought you did. he was one of those people who stole billions of dollars. then the government kind of took a little twist. when putin came to power he started geting all of these oligarchs out of russia and puttin his own friends in these big political spots so they can steal money. putin use to be an old KGB agent and he basically put his KGB buddies on to these spots like the minister of internal affairs and shit like that. you rem that thing that happened in ukraine when they were cheating in the voting? so they had to revote and like 10million people made a peacefull revolution. well u cant even imagine how much more corrupet the voting is in Russia. im telling you, big bussinessmen who dont pay taxes love Putin. everyone else would want him to die. but i dont see anything happening to change the system in russia. the only way Russia can change is through revolution. Russian people are very hard to deal with, and i know this from personal experience.
don't worry Putin will take care of the country and put those russian mafiosos to work in Siberia :smoking:

[ARBANITAI]

lol okay yeah your that one person. Sure.
No. I have seen people go to the Priest and they get cured from the guilt they them selfs possess. I have seen priests say that the Cross is so powerful that it can forgive any sin. No matter what that person did. So many go to the priest and confess they raped someone or murdered a person and thats it. Then after words he goes on doing the same thing. In Islam no Imam (priest) can cure you for your sins. Every human soul is responsible for his own sins. He must confess to God and not to another Human being which might just carry more sins then he who confesses himself! Its a human and god. Thats all to it. But am just saying some facts of Islam like your saying facts of Christianity. And its interesting how everything comes along between these two very interesting religions.

I would support that quote from the Bible if only Humans weren't the way they are. If one person gets hit on the cheek and you turn the other cheek to him and he does it again, he will keep on if he really hates you enough to hit you the first time. Thats why I say Eye for and Eye tactics are the best ways to deal with that. Humans will kill their own species that they differ from in any way. No matter if the attacked is not fighting back. Thats the way we are, sadly.

However I am pretty sure that there is an idea that every sin can be removed in Christianity but then again I am not going to make this 100% official since I never fully read the Bible except some big parts of it.


nicely said. You´v said everything what what i wanted to say..

and yes it is obvious that the christians uses to go to priests when they want to apologize for something or when they commited a sin and want to be forgiven, but i wonder how much can a priest really help you, the priest cannot help u in anyway nor he can forgives your sins, for what ever things you´v done. and yet even the priest him self must have comited same sins in his life, probably worser then yours, and whos gonna forgive the priest now? him self ??? its only God (Allah) the Allmighty that can help and forgive you, your Creator, so its God you have to pray for forgiveness and not humans...!!

[Saraj Fanático]

no but you see a priest isnt just a person. he is in a way a representation of God. a priest represents God in our world today. you see when u confess,the priest says various prayers to connect your words spiritually to God. the priest himself as a person forgives you too for these sins. if you do not learn to forgive what christian are you? in the world every human being is as deer as anyone. God loves every one of his creations. in the christian religion there isnt such as killing in self defence. if someone is about to kill you, dont try to kill him before he does it to you. if you sacrifice your life to not sin its considered a very christian thing to do. but that takes a lot of faith and some people cant do it. see the thing about christianity is "love your neighbour like yourself". jesus loved everyone, and even at last moments of his life when he was about to die after he was nailed to the cross.he said to God "Please God forgive these people because they do not know what they are doing" Jesus tryed to show the people through the years he was alive that revenge is not the way to live. even though its hard to forgive sometimes.

also one thing i forgot to say is that, ofcourse religion is between you and God. there are various prayers of forgiveness you can pray, or just make one yourself where you talk to God and just ask him to forgive you for your sins. but Christianity is obviously a very public thing too. obviously if you did something bad to a person you should ask forgiveness from them. there's no question about that. usually when you go to confession and you say something like i didnt listen to my parents a lot, the priest maybe will tell you to try to do something good to your parents like help around the house. if you confess something like - i punched a guy in school yesterday. the priest might tell you, go up to that guy and tell him that you didnt want to punch him and you want to become friends. but this is just general stuff, i mean im not a priest. also christianity is a very much involved in a community. we like to celebrate different christian holidays as a community and pray as a community. and the church obviously encourages this because it just bring people together.

So based on what you said and how you represent the power of the common priest you say that he is above other humans? Correct? But I really don't see the point of having creations be bigger then others. See the problem with this is that Jesus, Moses, and all other prophets will be just as big of prophets as the Priests. Then you have prophets every single week of the earth if Priests are indeed representatives of god. Because Jesus, and Moses were both representatives of God and here we have them in more verses and mentioned in prayers all the time? So what differs Jesus from a priest?

Now about self defence. I am going to say that probably only 8% of Christians really follow this. And the Christian world doesn't really fallow it at all with all these attacks on nations and people. When one creation attacks you then you should have the right to protect yourself. Since as god mentions they are a broken soul. And broken souls cannot be put in the same condition they once where if they killed a Creation of god. If a soul such as that is forgiven then the soul he took becomes waste. God allows justice and justice is having the right to protect yourself and your children, and wife from what may kill them. If it were that you shall let him do as he wishes the world today would probably one deep hole. I am very shocked that I have never seen a person mention this quote of sacrifice when I see gangs and people fighting each other.

Now here is a big point I am about to throw at you. If a person reads the bible and he reads the words 'Do not kill' or the quotes of Sacrifice he is suppose to be a Christian and accept it. Since 95% of the Christians that ask god for forgiveness were Christian before they committed the act. And they go out and shoot someone dead on the spot. Wasn't it on purpose if he had already read the Bible and accepted Jesus' ways before that? So basically he was completely not thinking of Jesus nor the Bible when he committed murder. Even though he has been a follower? So he basically has promition to make such mistakes? Any person can feel sorry for killing another but he has promition not to feel sorry or think of his action before actually pulling that trigger? In my religion you can make minor mistakes and apologize. However there is no way you can commit one of the biggest mistakes of your life and be forgiven. That sin and guilt sticks to you till death, just like any other sin you have committed on earth. And it is indeed big enough to take you to hell. Other sins are not but they do damage your true belief in gods word.

Also, what is the point of prayer to God at all? What is the point of sacrificing in Gods name. If the Priest has the representation of him. Its as if god is completely hidden from seeing his creations step up to him and say that they indeed are sorry. If a soul isn't willing to confess to god one-on-one he is to be hidden from him and go to his exact representation? Isn't it basically the same thing? Why not just confess to him spiritually? If it is that a human can understand better then I really see Gods powers being limited because God sees all and hears all you do which should give him 100 times the better understanding of your sins and guilt. If he isn't ready to spend time praying to god for forgiveness and bow to him then he basically isn't that sorry to begin with!!!

[shevafan]

a priest is not any higher than a person. nor is a person lower than the priest. God on the other hand is higher than a person. he is the creator and our master. he gave us life and we thank him for this in our religion. actually i could go all day about this. its just i cant really write the whole meaning of our church.
the comment you made about confession. you dont have to go to confession if you dont want to. hell you dont even have to go to church if you dont want to. its all your choice. were not pressuring anyone to do certain things in our church. ofcourse you can pray to God and tell him your sins. infact you do that in confession too. you pray a prayer after you confess your sins. i think the prayer is called The Apostles Creed.
besides leading the mass, a priest has many puposes in our religion. our bible sometimes doesnt give all answers about life. well actually it does its just really hard to understand some of it to some people. the priest is the one you can ask about certain things in your life.
this is hard to explain for me because you can literally write hundreds of books about everything that christianity stands for.
and again i say that it is not christians who are attacking countries like Iraq.
you see in countries like USA and Canda, religion isnt bonded with government because we except all religions. in the Muslim culture government and religion is together and this is why its hard for muslims to fully understand the Christian culture.
if you really want to understand the christian culture you can start by reading the bible. and thats form the beggining in the old testament.

[shevafan]

moses was a prophet. but he was a person just like anyone. jesus on the other hand was God and person, because he was the Son of GOD.
see God in christianity is 3 things: The Father, The Son and the Holy Spirit.
they at the same time seperate and at the same time as ONE.

[Centarfor9]

a priest is not any higher than a person. nor is a person lower than the priest. God on the other hand is higher than a person. he is the creator and our master. he gave us life and we thank him for this in our religion. actually i could go all day about this. its just i cant really write the whole meaning of our church.
the comment you made about confession. you dont have to go to confession if you dont want to. hell you dont even have to go to church if you dont want to. its all your choice. were not pressuring anyone to do certain things in our church. ofcourse you can pray to God and tell him your sins. infact you do that in confession too. you pray a prayer after you confess your sins. i think the prayer is called The Apostles Creed.
besides leading the mass, a priest has many puposes in our religion. our bible sometimes doesnt give all answers about life. well actually it does its just really hard to understand some of it to some people. the priest is the one you can ask about certain things in your life.
this is hard to explain for me because you can literally write hundreds of books about everything that christianity stands for.
and again i say that it is not christians who are attacking countries like Iraq.
you see in countries like USA and Canda, religion isnt bonded with government because we except all religions. in the Muslim culture government and religion is together and this is why its hard for muslims to fully understand the Christian culture.
if you really want to understand the christian culture you can start by reading the bible. and thats form the beggining in the old testament.
:faint2:

[shevafan]

:faint2:
explain

[ARBANITAI]

moses was a prophet. but he was a person just like anyone. jesus on the other hand was God and person, because he was the Son of GOD.
see God in christianity is 3 things: The Father, The Son and the Holy Spirit.
they at the same time seperate and at the same time as ONE.

thats the most confused thing about christianity, how can 3 persons at the same time be as ONE ?

christianity is not a monotheism religion as long as they believe in trinity, and so i dont get why you say your are a monotheism religion when you actually believe in trinity. Islam in the other hand is 100% monotheism as we believe in only ONE God!

[Saraj Fanático]

a priest is not any higher than a person. nor is a person lower than the priest. God on the other hand is higher than a person. he is the creator and our master. he gave us life and we thank him for this in our religion. actually i could go all day about this. its just i cant really write the whole meaning of our church.
the comment you made about confession. you dont have to go to confession if you dont want to. hell you dont even have to go to church if you dont want to. its all your choice. were not pressuring anyone to do certain things in our church. ofcourse you can pray to God and tell him your sins. infact you do that in confession too. you pray a prayer after you confess your sins. i think the prayer is called The Apostles Creed.
besides leading the mass, a priest has many puposes in our religion. our bible sometimes doesnt give all answers about life. well actually it does its just really hard to understand some of it to some people. the priest is the one you can ask about certain things in your life.
this is hard to explain for me because you can literally write hundreds of books about everything that christianity stands for.
and again i say that it is not christians who are attacking countries like Iraq.
you see in countries like USA and Canda, religion isnt bonded with government because we except all religions. in the Muslim culture government and religion is together and this is why its hard for muslims to fully understand the Christian culture.
if you really want to understand the christian culture you can start by reading the bible. and thats form the beggining in the old testament.


Well co'mon I think that if a priest is to represent god he should be considered higher then an human being. Since he is basically the lord on earth then. Well I understand that you don't have to confess but going to church or praying? I mean its just too simple. There really just doesn't seem much if any time for god. But I am not going to sweat you on that since both religions have a very different definition and way of how to be a believer. So there is really nothing to say on that subject except an opinion. So I kinda want to jump to the Apostles Creed as you mentioned. Is that prayer directed to god or to the priest? Since it then really makes it pointless to speak to a priest. You basically praying to god about a sin. So your confessing to him then. So really there is no point of talking to a priest about it if you have a prayer which reaches god.

About the science of life I would be interested to see what Christianity think about the creation of nature and life. But we won't be jumping into that.

Oh hold on a minute there. Islam accepts other religions too. See during the times of Muhammad, non-believers were also very free within the Islamic Empire. They had to give more money to the state then Muslims but they were deeply protected and were given as much freedom as Muslims. Also, during the end of the biggest Crusade when Salahuddin Ayubi took over Jerusalem back into Muslim hands he actually gave protection to the Christians there. Not only that but he gave promition to the Jews of the region to return home. Here is actually a quote from the Quran on this issue "As for such (of the unbelievers) as do not fight against you on account of your faith, and neither drive you forth from your homelands, Allah does not forbid you to show them kindness and to behave towards them with full equity. Indeed, Allah loves those who act equitably. Allah only forbids you to choose for your allies those that fight against you because of your faith, and drive you forth from your homelands, or aid others in driving you forth. Those of you who choose such people for their allies are truly wrongdoers."

[Centarfor9]

...in the Muslim culture government and religion is together and this is why its hard for muslims to fully understand the Christian culture....
:faint2:

explain
search for the enligtenment :)

look at history or current situation

also look at the claim you are making (the relavance, basis etc etc)

[shevafan]

the prayer is directed to God. i mentioned before, the reason why there is a priest to basically test your faith to God. also a priest gives you sort of a blessing at the end of the confession because you are a clean soul now. also after confession you receive holy communion. this is kind of gets weird here for non christians but ill explain. basically you receive bread and wine. the bread and wine represents body of jesus. and this isnt some sick shit like eating someones flesh. its just simply to represent jesus. u see when jesus said at the last supper: eat this bread because it is the body of me. drink this wine because it is the blood of me, and everyone at the table at that moment was what are you talking about jesus. how can we eat your flesh? i know this might be funny for a non christian =) but jesus explained that this bread represents me.
basically after you had confession you are a clean soul and you are in a way like jesus. sinless.
this whole process was really put together by St. Peter i think. he was one of the 12 apostles that was told by Jesus to make a foundation of the Catholic church. basically he was the first Pope.

[shevafan]

:faint2:


search for the enligtenment :)

look at history or current situation

also look at the claim you are making (the relavance, basis etc etc)
ok answer me this question. a muslim state lets say, Iran.

when they go to war
will the people say we fight in the name of Iran
or
we fight in the name of Allah
???

[Centarfor9]

ok answer me this question. a muslim state lets say, Iran.

when they go to war
will the people say we fight in the name of Iran
or
we fight in the name of Allah
???
:faint2:

was this the basis for your earlier assumtion

[shevafan]

:faint2:

was this the basis for your earlier assumtion
no i just want to make a comparison. because lets say you take US. this country is very patriotic and whenever they fough in any wars they always fought in the name of the United States of America. (im not american, this is just an example)

[Centarfor9]

no i just want to make a comparison. because lets say you take US. this country is very patriotic and whenever they fough in any wars they always fought in the name of the United States of America. (im not american, this is just an example)
:lol: this is entirely false

[shevafan]

:lol: this is entirely false
what do u mean?

[ARBANITAI]

Eh so Whats wrong saying..
"In the name of God (Allah)" and when we know God is the creator of the heavens and the earth, more Important then any other thing in the whole universe so its worth swearing in the name of the Allmighty Allah (God).

much more sensable then saying "in the name of Usa" or anyother countries.. as muslims ppl says "in the name of God" before they starts anything for everything and even when they go to war, because their aware of that God might and will protect him/her. so they want God´s protection, but God doesnt protect you, if you are a criminal or a terrorist only if you are reasonable and defending your nation. God knows best for whatever persons mind.

basically every chapter of the Quran starts with this praphase.

"In the Name of God (Allah) the Most Merciful the Most Benificent"

:)

[Centarfor9]

^ same thing like USA i.e. Americans say In God We Trust or God Bless America

what do u mean?
i mean your claim is false ...study up on the USA

[ARBANITAI]

yes, but you see in the muslim opinion we as christians are attacking their religion by worshipping God(Allah) in a wrong way. basically not worshipping God how the muslims do it is in their mind an offence against God.
and by the way the catholic version of the bible has never been changed. only the denominations of the catholic church like protestants have changed the bible because of their certain views. catholics use the original one.


Well Im not going to intervene but the reason why muslims believe christians are astray is because you say Trinity, and that jesus is son of God ?

In the Quran the gospel of jesus is mentioned a few times, and God tells us that it is he God that has given gospel to his beloved prophet Jesus, so we believe the Gospel/Bible is the book of God, but we dont believe in the gospels the christians has now no matter if they are catholic,protestanst or anything else, because the fact that the modern bible is no anymore the original bible as what it was when it was revealled to jesus, so every single bible or gospel has been changed and corrupted over by Men for centuries, so thats why it is not available anymore to see its original version of the gospel, and when we know that there are over thousands of different versions of the bible today, someone says our bible is original, the catholics says no its ours, the orthodox says its ours, who should i believe? yet their not aware that non of their gopsels are actually original. because every single bible today its roots are all from the four canonical Gospels, which are attributed to the Four Evangelists: (Gospel of Matthew, Gospel of Mark, Gospel of Luke and Gospel of John): as i said the Gospel should have been from God directly and there were no place for neither Mathhew, Mark, Luke or John to intervene in the gospel by changing and adding new more words in the bible!!!

[poutismalakas]

Well Im not going to intervene but the reason why muslims believe christians are astray is because you say Trinity, and that jesus is son of God ?

In the Quran the gospel of jesus is mentioned a few times, and God tells us that it is he God that has given gospel to his beloved prophet Jesus, so we believe the Gospel/Bible is the book of God, but we dont believe in the gospels the christians has now no matter if they are catholic,protestanst or anything else, because the fact that the modern bible is no anymore the original bible as what it was when it was revealled to jesus, so every single bible or gospel has been changed and corrupted over by Men for centuries, so thats why it is not available anymore to see its original version of the gospel, and when we know as i said before, there are over thousands of different versions of the bible today, someone says our bible is original, the catholics says no its ours, the orthodox says its ours, who should i believe? yet their not aware that non of their gopsels is actually original. because the bible that the christians have now all bibles, because where does these bibles really came from. the four canonical Gospels, which are attributed to the Four Evangelists: (Gospel of Matthew, Gospel of Mark, Gospel of Luke and Gospel of John): as i said the Gospel should have been from God directly and there were no place for neither Mathhew, Mark, Luke or John to intervene in the gospel by changing and adding new more words in the bible!!!
yes wasn't the quran dictated by an unseen angel? and didn't Mohanad's wife write the quran since he was illiterate?

[Centarfor9]

yes wasn't the quran dictated by an unseen angel?
Gabriel ...unseen? i don't know what you mean

and didn't Mohanad's wife write the quran since he was illiterate?
no

[ARBANITAI]

yes wasn't the quran dictated by an unseen angel? and didn't Mohanad's wife write the quran since he was illiterate?

you hasnt prooved anything. whats your point ?

God revealed the holy Quran through angel Gabriel to his prophet Muhammed.

The Qurʾanic verses were originally memorized by Muhammad's companions as Muhammad recited them, with some being written down by one or more companions on whatever was at hand, from stones to pieces of bark. but at least wrote it down, so that it could not be gone.

And that there were no chance for it to be corrupted by ppl, because muhammed memorized the whole quran, so what he does now, he recite to his companions the whole quran and they wrote it down right away. and there were no place for changings because even if his companions wished to do it, which they wouldnt because they were fully aware of how much important that is, and how a big sin it is to god if you change holy scripts. But they couldnt either because muhammed was there and he wouldnt let such things to happen. but not only prophet muhammed but God said him self that he is going to protect his final book the quran away from any changing into it. the gospel the torah and psalms are the previous God´s books, but the Quran is God´s final book to humankind.

[Al-Arabiya]

you have no evidence that the quran has been changed my friend.

for 14 centuries the quran still remains original since the time it was revealled!

God the allmighty by knowing what happens to his previous books, and the treatmen they got from ppl (gospel,Torah,Psalms) he promised that he will not let changing and corruption to and the same thing to happen in the Quran too, and that he will keep safe the Quran til the end of this world, his final revelation-book as a mercy from God for all humankind.

verses of the Quran God proves that the quran is only from the Lord, and no one elses.

"(This is Quran) the Revelation of the Book in which there is no doubt,- from the Lord of the Worlds. (32:2 Quran)"

"The revelation of the Book is from Allah (GOD) the Exalted in Power, Full of Wisdom. (45:2 Quran)"

"A Revelation from God (Allah), Most Gracious, Most Merciful (41:2)"

"A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail;- a Qur'an in Arabic, for people who understand. (41:3 Quran)"

"We have revealed for you (O men!) a book in which is a Message for you: will ye not then understand? (21:10 Quran)"

"Verily in this (Qur'an) is a Message for people who would (truly) worship (God) Allah.(21:106 Quran)"

"Before this We wrote in the Psalms, after the Message (given to Moses): My servants the righteous, shall inherit the earth." (21:105 Quran)"

"We sent thee not, but as a Mercy for all creatures. (21:107 Quran)"

[ARBANITAI]

[/I]Some more interesting verses of the Quran.

Allah (GOD). There is no god but He,-the Living, the Self-Subsisting, Eternal. (3:2 Quran)

Behold! the