The Evangelical Universalist Forum

How To Live Under An Unqualified President by John Piper

Practices Christian Living
#4183

“Trump has avoided war while reasserting American dominance, demonstrating just how weak Iran truly is, and making it clear that we will no longer tolerate Iranian mischief. If the elites truly cared about the country, they would be happy.” - Karl Notturno

" Consider what Trump has been able to do in the course of a couple of weeks through a targeted strike and some fiery rhetoric on Twitter. Iran effectively has been brought to heel and looks far smaller than before. Trump succinctly reminded the world that the United States is still on top. And he managed this all without losing a single American life. Amazing.

The handwringing from Democrats in Congress and in the mainstream media now looks pathetic and weak. All of the talk of “World War III” has been exposed as overhyped garbage. Trump was even able to turn some of his opponents into apologists for Iran—the top opinion piece in the New York Times on Wednesday actually had the headline “Iranian Blood Is on Our Hands, Too.” Amazing.

Perhaps the funniest moment in this whole saga came when Soleimani’s eulogist suggested at the general’s funeral that Iran should place an $80 million bounty on President Trump’s head. We’re not sure if he realized that he was placing that puny bounty on a man who is a multibillionaire. Seriously. Trump’s plane alone is worth more than that bounty. Amazing.

But even with all of this amazingness, the elite remains unhappy."
https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/08/why-cant-elites-celebrate-our-victory-on-iran/

#4184

As I said, I’m thankful he has calmly ‘tolerated’ their sending 15 missiles to attempt to kill soldiers at our two bases, and now missile strikes on the Green Zone. He seems to sincerely try to strike a balance.

#4185

War is one thing but dropping drone bombs on individual targets is something Obama did dozens & perhaps hundreds of times with no complaints from anyone.

#4186

Obama embraced the US drone programme, overseeing more strikes in his first year than Bush carried out during his entire presidency. A total of 563 strikes, largely by drones, targeted Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen during Obama’s two terms, compared to 57 strikes under Bush. Between 384 and 807 civilians were killed in those countries, according to reports logged by the Bureau.

The use of drones aligned with Obama’s ambition to keep up the war against al Qaeda while extricating the US military from intractable, costly ground wars in the Middle East and Asia. But the targeted killing programme has drawn much criticism.

The Obama administration has insisted that drone strikes are so “exceptionally surgical and precise” that they pluck off terror suspects while not putting “innocent men, women and children in danger”. This claim has been contested by numerous human rights groups, however, and the Bureau’s figures on civilian casualties also demonstrate that this is often not the case."

#4187

No comments on the hundreds of innocent civilians Obama’s orders killed? The approx 600 drone strikes? What if it was Trump? Wait - we already know what that reaction would be - about 600 times worse than the 1 drone that took out a jihadist murderer.

#4188

Canada is now calling, for an investigation. :wink:

And we have technology “failing”. :wink:

And more turmoil, in the US and UK. :crazy_face:

All this BBC news is too exciting - for some folks. :crazy_face:

#4189

It is insane to me that you care more about this issue than abortion.

2 Likes
#4190

As I stated for the hundredth time above two days ago, that is decidedly not the case, and it completely dodges what my post contended.

#4191

As I’ve repeatedly documented and reminded you two days ago, that is “utterly false.”

#4192

" Is Meaningful Dialog Possible with Leftists?

I rather doubt it. Suppose a bunch of leftists such as the editors of Commonweal say the following:

We reject the xenophobia and racism of many forms of ethno-nationalism, explicit and implicit, as grave sins against God the Creator. Violence done against the bodies of marginalized people is violence done against the body of Christ. Indifference to the suffering of orphans, refugees, and prisoners is indifference to Jesus Christ and his cross. White supremacist ideology is the work of the anti-Christ.

First of all, insistence on a nation’s right to control its borders is not xenophobic. To suggest that conservatives have no good arguments for border control and that their insistence on it is based on irrational fear of foreigners is SLANDER. How Christian is that?

Second, illegal aliens do not constitute a race of people. So where is the racism in border control? And where is the white supremacism?

Third, every nation has the right to decide whom to allow to immigrate. There is, after all, no right to immigrate."
more at https://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com/maverick_philosopher/2020/01/is-meaningful-dialog-possible-with-leftists.html

#4193

Amen, has anyone here argued that nations have no right to control their borders? All nations seek that.

#4194

From America’s shortest journalist:
As the post-game analysis of “Operation Desert Burp” continues, we realize that for President Trump’s critics, peace means defeat.
If you listen to the media right now, it’s like we killed Lady Diana or Elvis.
“When Princess Diana died, for example, there was a huge emotional outpouring,” Chris Matthews said on MSNBC. “Elvis Presley, in our culture, he added. “It turns out this general he killed was a beloved hero of the Iranian people to the point – look at the people … look at the crowds coming out. There’s no American emotion in this case, but there’s a hell of a lot of emotion on the other side.”
I’m almost impressed by his stupidity. Chris, you’ve been around. Iran can form a crowd over a sneeze. And they’ll shout “Death to America” over anything, including when HBO canceled “Sex and the City.”
And that idea that killing bad guys makes them martyrs? We better not kill any more bad guys. By that logic, we should’ve stayed out of World War II, and left Usama bin Laden and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi alone.
But, in the media’s world, Trump is Hitler, and a terrorist is Martin Luther King Jr. “What you’re describing feels like the kind of unified national outpouring that is reserved for a small handful of figures in any country, I mean, a beloved president, a civil rights leader like Martin Luther King in the United States,” New York Times podcast host Michael Barbaro said. What an ass.
But Trump once again has driven critics to defend the indefensible. Remember when they bashed Trump for being mean to MS-13? Now he’s got the “The View” applauding white racists! The show’s audience applauded news that a white supremacist tweeted his opposition to Trump. As the idiots squawk, Trump rolls on, handing out great ideas like gift baskets. We don’t deserve him.
Meanwhile, former Mayor Pete Buttigieg tweets that maybe we should share the blame for that downed plane – even though Iran did the shooting.
And he’s running for president.
So Trump once again foils his critics, not just by being right, but by letting them be so wrong.
“They made a serious mistake … by taking this terrorist action against Commander Soleimani,” Masoumeh Ebtekar told CNN. Does she sound familiar to you?
Maybe that’s because, when ABC News asked her many years ago whether she could envision killing Iran’s American hostages, she responded, “Yes. When I’ve seen an American gun being lifted up and killing my brothers and sisters in the streets, of course.”
I’m thinking, CNN: maybe don’t get an opinion on America from someone who threatened to kill American hostages.
But I guess the network has to find one person outside their own newsroom who’s mad Gen. Qassem Soleimani is dead.
That’s hard, because that one person – Soleimani – is dead.” - Greg Gutfeld

#4195

That is insightful commentary.

#4196

Whom shall we believe? Look what Iran says. :crazy_face:

Then on the other hand. :crazy_face:

But Trump can get defense funds, to build a wall. And keep out the zombies from Z-Hell (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9).

image
image1280×720 532 KB

#4198

I don’t see this as one but the issue is how much do we want to gut the economy to speed up the rate of change. Clearly we are moving toward using less fossil fuel as electric cars proliferate and everyone wants more efficiency. My wife and i both have hybrid cars getting over 50 MPG. But you still need natural gas to create the electricity for electric cars.
But the reality is that with China and India together they are opening a new coal mine per day and these two largest polluters in the world are not going to begin any changes until 2030 even with the Paris Accord.
So us changing alone will have a tiny impact on climate change, so i’m all for an evolution but not for destroying our economy.

#4199

It wasn’t a partisan issue back in the days of the Little Ice Age. Problem was, despite non-partisanship, it still lasted over 500 years (c 1300 - 1870).

1 Like
#4200

Still can’t see any mechanism for us to undo the effects of our Sun. It is in control. As the evidence on another thread shows, I think, clearly.
There were catastrophes of climate looooooooong before men started driving cars.

#4201

This seems like a good place to post this quote:

“Men are qualified for civil liberty, in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites; in proportion as their love to justice is above their rapacity; in proportion as their soundness and sobriety of understanding is above their vanity and presumption; in proportion as they are more disposed to listen to the counsels of the wise and good, in preference to the flattery of knaves. Society cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere, and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.”

– Burke, letter to François-Louis-Thibaut de Menonville, 1791

I see some striking truths in there: men have to be qualified for freedom, it is not a natural condition; that qualification comes at the price of moral control of their natural greed, susceptibility to pride and flattery, willingness to curb their own natural appetitites, a willingness to listen to wise men.
In other words, it takes work and discipline.
When those are lacking, the discipline must come from without.

#4202

Sounds right to me

#4204

Or, no! What’s this world coming to? :crazy_face: