I'm not usually one to argue politics, but I ran across an argument that I must comment on. Shane Claiborne, in Irresistible Revolution, makes a pretty up front statement that it was wrong of us to go into Iraq. That it was not a loving thing to do. And he gives quotes from people saying, "What kind of liberation would do this to a child." Speaking of a child with metal shards in it's skin. He says that this is not showing grace.
There is no argument that thousands, even tens of thousands of people, both civilian and military, both Iraqi and American, died these past five years. But what were we supposed to do? Let Saddam continue to violate what we Americans call inalienable human rights!!!? Are we just to stand by and let him (and the culture around him) abuse and kill humans!!!? No doubt that any life lost is tragic, but isn't it worth the risk of lives to ensure safety and health for this and future generations? Maybe I'm wrong...and I'll gladly admit it if you can give me a good argument, but letting the atrocities committed by Saddam continue would not be giving grace or love!
Please set me straight if this is crazy-talk. I want to walk like Jesus walked and I don't think He would stand for what was happening...would He?
1 comment:
Mason, I am willing to wrangle with you, only on an discovery basis. I am not entirely sure where I stand on it, but I know what you are saying...
But, my first challenge for you is to what rights are you talking about? I mean, American or Kingdom of God rights? Those are two different ball camps. You said "what we call American..." Now, is that a democratic perspective? A republican one? Which one is it? Which is one is right?
As Christians, our perspective is from the ethics that follow in the Kingdom of God. Now this poses a tricky forum for us, because we live in the PaxAmericana empire. Was the war (now we know some intentions behind the decision) innocent to bring in liberty? Or was it simply to bolster American enterprise (economy)? Or is to set in place the American story of world liberation as the biggest political battles on home are fought between republican vs. democrat? Republicans want to be seen as heroes so we will do whatever it takes to win... What about the debt that was created by the war, and now the poor are facing a recession in our land? What about the foreclosures in America that was driven by the war? What about foreign relations when other countries that are facing massive genocides and other gross issues we neglect? Is it because it doesn't really meet American standards? Meaning benefit our economy?
What about in Isaiah 40 where God paints Himself as soverign over rulers and that He will take care of them while His followers are to follow the ethics of the Kingdom?
I understand the extreme difficulty in this thinking, because one can point out the genocided commanded by God, but God also points out the liberation story through Jubilee and the Gospel.
I personally, am torn on the issue, because Sadam was a bad dude. But, how many rulers did worse and America didn't get involved because it didn't benefit us? Is America truly concerned about liberation world wide? Or are we concerned about our own freedom and economics?
I am convinced that Sadam, but Americas point of view, was not in the plan on our war on terror. It just gave us a victory in order for us to rally behind the Bush administration.
I don't know. You should watch the movie "Lions for Lambs".
Peace...www.rumorsofchange.com
Post a Comment