Can Bullets and Bombs Establish Justice in Iraq?

Category: Americas, World Affairs Topics: 9/11, George W. Bush, Iraq, Saddam Hussein, Terrorism Views: 3740
3740

President George W. Bush has said on many occasions that he seeks to "bring to justice" those responsible for the 9/11 attacks on the United States. On September 20, 2001, he told a joint session of Congress: "Whether we bring our enemies to justice or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done." Later, he associated the U.S. invasion of Iraq with that same quest for justice. Today, however, as violent resistance to the U.S. occupation increases throughout Iraq and as the Shiites as well as the Sunnis fight pitched battles with the occupation forces, the Bush administration's devotion to justice stands clearly revealed as declaration without substance.

Although convincing evidence of alleged cooperation between the Iraqi government and the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks was never adduced, nobody doubts that Saddam Hussein's regime reeked of injustice, and so the U.S. overthrow of that regime might appear to have been at least consistent with the establishment of justice. The trouble that arose at the very outset, however, reflected the choice of military means to attain the desired end. Notwithstanding all the claims made on behalf of precision weapons, modern warfare always spills over from the guilty to the innocent. Certainly it did so in Iraq, where tens of thousands of men, including many noncombatants, as well as thousands of women and children suffered death or injury as a result of U.S. military actions. Thus were new injustices committed in the process of overthrowing those responsible for old injustices. A net gain for justice?

For U.S. authorities the question never seemed to arise. On the rare occasions when they recognized that their invasion had entailed any evils at all, they always insisted that those evils amounted to only a small cost relative to the great benefits to be enjoyed by the liberated Iraqi people once the immediate turmoil of the fighting had ceased. All along, however, it was plain that many Iraqis held a different view. Indeed, many were so opposed to the U.S. presence in their country that they tossed not the ballyhooed welcoming flowers but rocket-propelled grenades and mortar shells at their self-anointed liberators. Saddam Hussein's regime was quickly dispatched, thereby accomplishing the declared U.S. goal, yet the U.S. forces then settled down for an indefinite stay, and many Iraqis continued to fight them tooth and nail at great risk to themselves and their places of residence. What had become of justice?

Listening to U.S. proconsul L. Paul Bremer tell the story, we might never suspect that anything deserves notice in Iraq besides the sweetness and light of the American "reconstruction" of the country's shattered infrastructure and undemocratic institutions. Responding to questions about the recent widespread violence, Bremer declared: "I know if you just report on those few places, it does look chaotic. But if you travel around the country . . . what you find is a bustling economy, people opening businesses right and left, unemployment has dropped." Maybe so, just as after September 11, 2001, almost everything in the United States (except the airlines) continued to operate much as it had before--a few buildings knocked down here and there and four airliners lost out of a fleet of thousands didn't amount, so to speak, to a hill of beans. One suspects, however, that Bremer and other leaders of the Bush administration would vehemently reject this analogous way of putting things into perspective. After all, they have steadfastly insisted that the events of 9/11 "changed everything."

Speaking of the Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, whose followers have recently joined the fray in several cities, Bremer described the preacher as "a guy who has a fundamentally inappropriate view of the new Iraq." This statement demands close examination. Here is the resident chief of a conquering power seemingly speaking as though he were entitled to say what is appropriate for Iraq. What has happened to government by the consent of the governed? Clearly, although al-Sadr may have little authority to speak for the Iraqi people, Bremer has none at all. Al-Sadr, declared Bremer, "believes that in the new Iraq, like in the old Iraq, power should be to the guy with guns. That is an unacceptable vision for Iraq." It required a great deal of chutzpah for Bremer, who presides over Iraq solely by virtue of the massive firepower of U.S. forces there, to call into question the validity of power that flows from the barrel of a gun. Bremer has utterly no legitimacy as the kingpin of Iraq, and it would be far more becoming if he confined his declarations to topics such as repairs to the water and sewer systems.

In an April 7 press briefing, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld described the Iraqi resistance fighters as a few "thugs, gangs, and terrorists." Minimizing the scope of the resistance, he characterized it as consisting of "a small number of terrorists and militias coupled with some protests." (Rumsfeld routinely speaks of all Iraqis who oppose the U.S. occupation as terrorists.) Moreover, in the briefing, he and General Richard Meyers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, referred repeatedly to al-Sadr as a murderer. Yet no legitimate court has convicted al-Sadr of murder. To be sure, a certain Iraqi court is said to have indicted him. What should we make of such an indictment? Who composes that court, and how did those persons gain their positions? Clearly, the court has no power to enforce any decision except with the approval and cooperation of U.S. occupation forces. One might have thought that the world had seen enough kangaroo courts during the days of Stalin and Hitler to have acquired some suspicion of judicial integrity in extraordinary circumstances. Yet U.S. authorities display no appreciation of what genuine justice requires for either its determination or its enforcement. There is absolutely no rule of law in Iraq; U.S. forces simply do as they please.

Further evidence of this disregard for justice comes from an anonymous source that the Wall Street Journal describes as a "senior Pentagon official." Speaking of previous U.S. deliberations about how to deal with al-Sadr, this official stated, "We've always been really conflicted on how to deal with Sadr. Do you capture or kill him and make him a martyr, or do you ignore him and hope that the Shiites move away from him?" Well, if one seeks to establish justice, one treats him as the rules of justice require. If he is reasonably suspected of having committed a crime, he should be arrested and given a fair trial. In no event, however, is someone who dislikes his sermons or his political views entitled to kill him peremptorily--evidently a live option in discussions among U.S. leaders, according to this nameless official. What sort of justice is it simply to kill an unpopular preacher? Indeed, such a killing would itself seem to be an act of murder that cries out for its perpetrators to be brought to justice.

Meanwhile, here in the tranquil confines of the United States, the dogs of war continue to howl in the mainstream media, and like the U.S. authorities in Iraq and Washington, D.C., they are howling for further bloodshed, not for justice. (As U.S. Army Lt. Colonel Ray Millen recently explained: "'Hearts and minds' is not applicable during a military campaign; that's a long-term solution.") Thus, the Wall Street Journal's editors opined on April 6 that "what's needed now is a reassertion of U.S. resolve. . . . Having let Mr. Sadr's militia grow, the coalition now has no choice but to break it up." Moreover, not content with prescribing bigger doses of U.S. violence in Iraq, the Journal's editors used the occasion to shake their fists at Iran, too. "Iran's mullahs fear a Muslim democracy in Iraq," they asserted, "because it is a direct threat to their own rule. If warnings to Tehran from Washington don't impress them, perhaps some cruise missiles aimed at the Bushehr nuclear site will concentrate their minds."

No one can deny, of course, that incoming cruise missiles do concentrate the mind--the airliners commandeered and turned into guided missiles on 9/11 certainly had that effect on leaders of the Bush administration. Cruise missiles, however, like the 500-pound bombs and M1-A1 tanks being employed to police Iraq today, are not effective instruments for the establishment of justice. There was no justice in the 9/11 attacks on New York City and precious little in the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq; nor is any in prospect should the Bush administration loose its firepower gratuitously on Iran. Such employment of indiscriminate force and violence can accomplish certain things--widespread death and destruction above all--but by its very nature it cannot establish justice. Indeed, its most visible effect is the encouragement of recurrent rounds of attack and counterattack. Does anyone really believe that the recent attacks in an arc that stretches from Bali to Istanbul to Madrid were anything but retaliation against people whose governments had cooperated with U.S. military actions in the Middle East? Until the leaders of the U.S. government come to recognize the distinction between waging war and establishing justice, the world will remain at risk of much unnecessary pain and grief.

Robert Higgs is Senior Fellow in Political Economy at The Independent Institute and editor of its scholarly quarterly journal, The Independent Review. He is also the author of Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government and the editor of Arms, Politics and the Economy: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives.


  Category: Americas, World Affairs
  Topics: 9/11, George W. Bush, Iraq, Saddam Hussein, Terrorism
Views: 3740

Related Suggestions

 
COMMENTS DISCLAIMER & RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
The opinions expressed herein, through this post or comments, contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. These are offered as a means for IslamiCity to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization. The IslamiCity site may occasionally contain copyrighted material the use of which may not always have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. IslamiCity is making such material available in its effort to advance understanding of humanitarian, education, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and such (and all) material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.


Older Comments:
ZINEDINE FROM MOROCCO said:
Salaamu alaikum,

Nick Cameron, part of what you stated here:

"So just as I do not consider the slaughter of Hindus, Christians, and Jews to be a representation of Islam, so too do I consider the French experience in Algeria to be less about Christianity and more about France. So I reject your comments on this entirely."
is partly correct & yes French society is not a religious society but that does not mean that the Catholic Church was not influential in decision making outside the Western World & as far as French Algeria is concerned the Catholic Church was very influential in the sense that it made the French government believe in the need of "civilizing" the "barbarians" or "the Saracens" or "the Savage" and in their historical & unforgotten quest to Christianise the Muslims & the Animists since the times of the Crusades, the West realised that converting the Muslims to St-Paul's version of Christianity is doomed to fail again so they decided to try a new tactic manifest in the ideology of Orientalism, its influence worked to some degree as it manifested itself to be a better idea to colonise what they perceived to be the Oriental, or the Orientalised, control him, exploit him, manipulate him, assimilate him & most importantly represent him since the West believes that the East cannot represent itself. There is this strong belief still looming in the West that they can maintain their control & influence on the East under the disguise of humanism but the East is too smart to buy this lie. Some of the ideals of humanism are manifest in the belief of progress, liberty, fraternity, equality, rationalism, education, economic growth etc & the assimilated elites among the so called Oriental was subjugated to the West under seduction sometimes manifest in bribes, favors etc & wars, genocides threats & consecutive defeats at other times & they realised that the West is militarilly too strong to beat & decided to give the West a chance in modernising their
()

ZINEDINE FROM MOROCCO said:
Salaamu alaikum brother Hudd D'Alhamd,

What a beautiful Arabic name Hudd, a prophet name derived from the word huda meaning straight path & Alhamd meaning praise. And praise be to Allah for having you in this pannel.

I read Nick comments, allegations, slander and defamation of my character. I decided to ignore him because I know many people will laugh at his allegations.

You claim to know French society more than I that is Moroccan, speak French fluently, know European French and worked with French Canadians.

You claim that you're full of love & don't hate Islam & Muslims is a big lie especially when you named yourself Nick "the Dajjal" Cameron.

Proud to be Moroccan Muslim, Greatful to Allah for being a Canadian citizen since 1994 & never visited the Beautiful Hore that is the United Snakes of America!!!

Jazaka Allahu Khairan for defending me!!!

()

YAHYA BERGUM FROM USA said:
Evidently, Iraq had no WMD. Evidently, Saddam's regime was only a threat to various Iraqis. Therefore, in the absence of sovereign Iraqi authority, there seems no justification for foreign forces "softening up" various Iraqis, along with their choice of foreign helpers, who seem likely to oppose the Iraqis who hopefully (or at least likely) would - as Allah wills - end up in control of Iraq.

My hope is that a civil war in Iraq would be averted. I happen to think, however, that Iraqis themselves must decide if such a war needs to be fought. In the meantime, in my opinion, Iraqis at the local level need to be calling the shots. In the absence of local leader's support for Coalition forces, let the local's choice of protectors see to their needs.

Rest assured, from wherever support for local hostilities (astaghfirullah) appears to be originating, hostilities (astaghfirullah) would appear to be destined - if Allah wills. After all, one of the lessons from Afghanistan would appear to be that "insurgency" sooner or later, in some way or another, tends to afflict the countrymen of those who conspired to support it.

Assalamo alaikum wa rahmatullahi.
()

NICK CAMERON FROM UNITED STATES said:
Well Hudd D'Alhamd, it appears you don't know much about French culture. If you did, then you'd realize that they tend to be quite anti-religious. In fact, they've been that way for quite some time (consider it a legacy of the French Revolution). So just as I do not consider the slaughter of Hindus, Christians, and Jews to be a representation of Islam, so too do I consider the French experience in Algeria to be less about Christianity and more about France. So I reject your comments on this entirely.

As far as the subject of dialogue, true dialogue requires an allowance by both parties for at least some disagreement. This makes it possible for people with conflicting views to share ideas and hopefully reach an understanding in the spirit of mutual respect. Otherwise, it would be impossible for people in conflict to ever achieve peace except through coercion.

Most Muslims here seem to disagree with me, and that's fine. I disagree with most of them, and I'm fine with that too. But you and many other Muslims here just can't tolerate the fact that I have a different POV. You, like a number of Muslims here, probably believe that you can change the hearts of non-Muslims by continually browbeating and humiliating us.

Two reasons why your attitude hasn't worked with me. First, I consider all this verbal abuse to be nothing but words on my computer screen. No matter what you say, your insults are mere trifles compared to the suffering and dying of the victims of 9/11. You cannot hurt me with your words, because I know that your brethren have already hurt my people more than Internet flamewars ever could.

Second, whenever you and others like you resort to the same old "you idiot non-Muslim" pot shots at myself or other people here, you only reinforce my belief that bigotry is pervasive in the Muslim world and that many Muslims should indeed be feared by my countrymen. Put simply, your hate says much more about you than it will ever say abo
()

HUDD D'ALHAMD FROM CANADA said:
Wow, wow, wow, Nick Cameron, don't you think that that's a serious allegation you are accusing Zinedine of?! I wouldn't butt in, but you chose to formulate your anwer to his comment as:"Zinedine, as is typical of several Muslims here, has lied in his attempt to discredit my comments." Let me correct your statement:"He claims that when I mentioned Christian love, I referred to the conduct of the French, whose culture outlook is relatively atheist, in Algeria" You know Nick, before I really insult you, consider that even the communist Russians were Christian in fact and they still are. Even if many in North America are atheists, they still belong to the Christian congregation and share similar views about Muslims with their practicing brothers. Tell the French people in Paris that they weren't Christians, they would send you home in a wooden suit for sure! French is Christian, at least 90%. Zinedine just brought about a historic fact to support his theory of Christian love. You are the one that snapped and started barking and snarling about. Again this is just proving Zinedine's theory of this oxymoronic Christian love. You see, Muslims judge by actions not by words. You talk about dialogue, buddy? You are unable of that performance. You expect the Muslims to just listen to you and eventually praise you for your comments. Your comments Nick are a vexation and an insult to anybody's intellect. Maybe you didn't realize that, but Muslims don't buy what you say. You perpetually repeat yourself in the rhetoric of your country's politicians and seldom if ever you come up with a genuine opinion of your own. Everybody on this site would appreciate if you would be more straight forward & original. To do that, it takes a lot of courage and frankly I don't see you capable of it. It is immoral for us in North America to wallow in goods while our human brethren starve all over the world, including in Philipines. How much energy we waste? That's immoral to the rest of the world!
()

NICK CAMERON FROM UNITED STATES said:
I believe that Americans have learned the lesson September 11, 2001. The lesson, my friends, is that we must remain ever vigilant, for there are many profoundly evil people in this world who would murder each us without hesitation if given the opportunity.

We must oppose terrorism in all its forms.
()

RAMSY MAHDI FROM USA said:
We in the USA are simply "slaying them where we find them". Woops, we are actually trying to only kill the bad guys.
()

ZINEDINE FROM MOROCOO said:
Salaamu alaikum Mebrocky,

Briefly: I dont hate the American people but their Zionist controlled governments. Kerry will prove to be as bad as Bush just watch & mark my words. In America there is no way out of the Zionists grip on power except thru tax payers violent masse revolts otherwise your country is bound for destruction from within & from without. Again mark my words on this one too. You shall know governments by their fruits & looking at the US historical record one should not be a fool & surprised at the amount of anti-Americanism out there. Looking at your governments record since the end of WWII, you cannot deny that billions of dollars have been spent to establish or prop up dictatorships in other countries. When you encounter democracy not to your liking, you rush your CIA assets in to crush it as you did with the governments in the following developing democracies: Iran, Laos, Congo, Dominican Republic, Brazil, Indonesia, Bolivia, El Salvador, Chile, Guyana, Ecuador, Guatemala, Haiti & Venezuela. Mebrocky, don't forget what your cherished American democracy did to Chile in Sept 11, 1973. No comments on this one, just type Sept 11th 1973 & you will be horrified when you find out how your CIA staged coup d'ta where over 3000 Chileans died in vain. Allah forgives but does not forget but no lessons learned yet from Sep11,01 yet.
As per your statement concerning disrespect for the Bible please remember that the word Bible simply means book so don't confuse it with Injeel (the original &lost holy scripture that was revealed to prophet Jesus pbuh). The New Testaments 26 books were written by the father of Zionism "Saint" Paul. The so called 4 Gospels authors Mark, Luck, Matthew and John are not Jesus eye witnesses & are not the original authors of the 4 gospels. German Comparative Religions scholars & scholar Ahmed Deedat have shown clear evidence that the Bible has indeed been corrupted many times (i.e. King James Bible has been edited 25 times).
()

CHRIS FROM UK said:
I do not agree with Bush or Blair or the administration of either leader, however I do believe that it is unjust to attack, maim and kill soldiers who, if asked, would not decry Islam or Iraqis but would say they had a job to do. Why attack the ground troops? If they had not entered Iraq, we'd still have terrorist actions funded by Saddam Hussein. They did enter Iraq, but if they left today, what would happen to the country? The Shiite muslims would establish an Islamic state, which are hardly the most liberal and free societies in the world, nor are they bastions of justice. To put it simply, do you think it is just to kill coalition servicemen and women for doing their jobs? They get a wage for being in Iraq, they are not on a crusade to rid the world of Islam. I do not agree that the US and UK acted purely out of greed, although I acknowledge the oil in iraq was a major factor in the invasion. If that were the case, why not just make Iraq into a subject state? Do you really think the west is afraid of the muslim world? Or the fanatics it breeds? No, because if push came to shove, the entire middle east would be a radioactive hole in the ground, and the oil fields manned by ex patriotised muslims from the US and the UK. The west has enough nuclear weapons to obliterate the entire arab world many times, and the other islamic states such as Pakistan would either fall into line or be annihalated too. The reason they don't is that everyone, even the leaders of the UK and US, want a peaceful society, despite what many may think. Is it because muslims have an inferiority complex that they are so quick to cry injustice and embark upon a Jihad?! They are valued members of our society, and I think many should grow up.
()

NICK CAMERON FROM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA said:
Zinedine, as is typical of several Muslims here, has lied in his attempt to discredit my comments. He claims that when I mentioned Christian love, I referred to the conduct of the French, whose culture outlook is relatively atheist, in Algeria. Since I never mentioned the French or Algeria in my comments, clearly Zinedine has demonstrated his apathy towards such things as Truth.

But as I said before, it's not so much a problem with Zinedine as it is a problem that pervades the Muslim world. As I stated previously, many in the Muslim world believe that it is much more important to win rhetorical victories in the War of Words than it is to engage in genuine dialogue. Zinedine is merely the most recent demonstration of this, for anyone who paid close attention to the comments by several Muslims during these past few weeks realizes that Zinedine is not the only one.
()

NICK CAMERON FROM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA said:
mebrocky:

Regarding your "one-sided" comment in reference to Jeffrey O'neil, you just called me out for being "completely stupid and rude" on certain things. Obviously I disagree, but that's not my point. Clearly there have been a number of Muslims here who have made a number of rude, arrogant, and bigotted comments towards myself, my race, my our, and even our country.

If you believe that people here are too "one-sided", then why have you singled me out as opposed including at least some of the Muslims on this site? Furthermore, if you think that I'm "rude", then how do you view your own remarks that refer to my comments as "completely stupid"?

May the peace of our Almighty God be with you.
()

HUDD D'ALHAMD FROM CANADA said:
My poiny exactly. Your kind of Christian love:"The reason why you've never been able to rile me up, despite all the bigotted hatred that you spew daily, is that I know that love is much stronger than the strongest extremist hate." Well, well, well, if these words of yours are words of love, I quiver at the mere thought of how your words of hate would sound?! You petty idiot, whom do you want to fool? I might be a two-handed salesman wearing sneakers, but you are a one-lobed demented man wearing a hood. Get out of here, lover boy, you are stepping in nightpots, fouling yourself and the place. Ridiculous! There is a saying: "A fool is not a fool unless he ridiculed himself." You succeeded to do just that. Congratulations! Keep up the work of revealing yourself and your true colors. Man, you made my day! Long time I didn't have such a laughter with my friends over such a prize idiot! Thank you, Nick, God bless!
Peace out!
()

BNAK said:
The person who calls himself Nick Cameron has tested the patience of many a people who visit this site regularly and express their opinion. I have read many of his comments on a plethora of issues discussed here on his site, and so far I have only seen rare glimpses of his comments being fair enough. No wonder that he has pissed off so many people. Brothers Ahmed, HA, Akbar, Ahmed Asghar, Yahya, Zinedine, Hudd and countless others have tried to reason with him on numerous occasions but to be of no avail. No wonder that he has infuriated those who have tried to reason with him in the most plausible ways and the most rational means. In the end, few like myself, Akbar and Ahmed stopped discussing with him as we saw that it was rather foolish of us to continue doing so when we saw that no amount of trial would enable us elicit any amount of rationality from this guy called Nick Cameron.
More often than not, his comments not only have blatant disregard to the realities of situations but complete bias towards even things that any sane person would consider to be atrocious. Any person who has even a semblance of rationality in his thinking and ideas and has read his comments would easily conclude how biased he is and how he loses no opportunity to demonstrate his Blind Patriotism for USA, his 'Christian Love', and his 'No Lost Love' for Muslims. No person can reason with him without getting infuriated. I would say, if someone is interested in testing one's patience let him discuss with Mr.Nick Cameron. That's my sincere advise to everyone.
()

NICK CAMERON FROM UNITED STATES said:
OK, this bash-Nick-Cameron-and-his-faith party has gone far enough. Let's all refocus on the real issue:

As I said before, the War on Terror, for us, is not primarily about establishing justice for others, although this is a worthy secondary goal. From our POV, the War on Terror is first and foremost a struggle to secure safety and justice for Americans. It is only logical, since well-ordered nation-states must act in the interests of their own populaces before all else.

I believe that it's not for America to reshape the world in our image. As such, we should spend less time and energy trying make everyone else become like us and more of our efforts to furthering our national interests through globalization, strategically allocated aid to other countries, and military prestige.

I disagreed with the decision to go to war in Iraq because it was not the best course to securing our interests. It annoyed many of our allies in the Muslim world and brought the Israel-Palestine issue, a problem that should otherwise not be our country's concern, back to the forefront. Additionally, it damaged our relations with non-Muslim countries because of their fears (justified or not) of an increase in terrorism. Regardless, the War in Iraq has done nothing to prevent the most imminent security threats posed by our enemies like OBL and his ilk. If anything, it has emboldened our enemies because the continuous stream of U.S. casualties give them the wrong impression that we're weak. Anyone familiar with OBL's 1998 interview would realize why the appearance of weakness is so dangerous. Add to all this the hefty pricetag accompanying the reconstruction and occupation of Iraq, and I'm fairly convinced that the negatives outweighed the positives on this one.

Once our military's tasks in Iraq are complete, we need to reasses our policies so that we'll be more effective in neutralizing the threats posed by Muslim extremists.

Peace to you all!
()

ESTHER FROM USA said:
Mustafa no gay priest will ever enter heaven. I for one question the Catholic church. The fact is there are churches that are false. Now before you open your mouth about bloodshed know this before the Crusades and Spanish Inquistition muslims invaded Spain. The Turks also invade Europe for a while. There use to be a thriving community of Aramaic speaking Christian in Iraq. I could go on but I will stop. Do not talk about bloodshed to me truth is you muslims would shed blood any oppurtunity you got. I am not the one with blood on my hands.
()

NICK CAMERON FROM UNITED STATES said:
mebrocky:

You know, if you don't want me to speak about Christian love, then you really shouldn't have commented about it. In any event, why do you believe that a short statement of my belief would "invite retaliation"? I did not say what I said to make people angry; I said it because it's what I truly believe that Christian love is a better approach to how we should handle in Iraq things than the current one. Moreover, it was an offhand comment and should be treated as such. Should we presume that Muslims are so intolerant towards Christianity that even a one-line, off-the-cuff remark about my faith would incite ire?

Yes love should be universal, but we should keep in mind that love is generally *not* universally given. (And if you're a Christian, then you know why I think that's a problem.) Furthermore, I do believe that there's a difference between Christian love and other kinds of love. I won't explain further to prevent this becoming a debate on Christian doctrine, so I refer you to Jesus's two Commandments and invite you to read on your own. Try quoting the passage in the Bible containing these in another religion's discussion forum, and you'll see that there's probably no analogue to the Commandment about "neighbors".

As Christians, we should avoid assuming the worst of people, dismissing them as "stupid and rude", accusing each other of "thinking that we are so perfect and the other guy is an idiot", etc.

May the peace of our Lord be with you!
()

MEBROCKY FROM USA said:
Re; Nick Cameron - if you are going to make statements like the "Christian love" thing, you will invite retaliation. I think some comments were valid, others completely stupid and rude. Love is universal and absolute, no religion or group has a better way. Jesus, Moses, Muhammad, Buddha and the other great prophets- peace be upon them, all told us how to treat our fellow man, and people from all the religions have at various times behaved horribly. The problems today could all be solved if we could remember what we were taught about our fellow man. Not to say it will be simple, things have gone on far too long, but I can assure you that talking to people in the way this article does will never solve things. Arrogance and hate begets arrogance and hate. The hope lies in everyone trying to see both sides, and stop thinking that we are so perfect and the other guy is an idiot.
()

MEBROCKY FROM USA said:
Typical of this group - far to one-sided. To:Jefferey O'neil - great that you are looking to find answers to these questions. You are 18, register and vote for Kerry in November. You will find out over time that although we are acting like the evil empire now this is a land of great deeds as well. It is up to the people to pay attention to what our government is doing, and change it when they no longer represent the ideals that we hold to be the most important.
()

ZINEDINE FROM MOROCCO said:
Salaamu alaikum brothers & sisters,

Brother Dear Hudd D'Alhamd, Abdul Azeez, Irfat & Owen,

Check out the Bible's unconditional Christian love that Nick Cameron is talking about. You will be litterally disgusted. Please read Matt. 3:7; 10:28; Luke 12:5; 21:23; John 3:36; Rom. 1:18; 2:5-13; 3:5-6; 9:22; 12:19; Eph. 5:6; 1 Thess. 2:16; Heb. 3:7-4:13; 10:26-31; Rev. 2:23)(Num. 21:35; 31:17; 1 Sam. 15:3; 2 Sam. 22:19).1 Kings 11:7; 2 Kings 16:3; 17:17; Jer. 7:31; 19:5; 32:35; 33:6; Ezek. 16:20-21).

He meant Humanist Christians of the Enlightnement Era (L'age des Lumieres) that helped kill one million Algerian Shaheed (martyr) during the French colonialism. All in the name of liberty, fraternity and equality. Isn't it just talk and dreams if not deceit. To be honest, I still don't know if Nick C will ever wake up from his deep slumber!

Fi amani Allah

()

MUSTAFA GOODMAN FROM FRANKFURT, GERMANY said:
Own Jubandang, if we Muslims see any more of your "Christian" love we will all be exterminated. Though Allah sent the Bible to you people you went about and changed it completely to suit your own tastes. To date there are recorded 164,000 alterations and omissions in the Bible. Hence you have so many versions that one's head spins. From the inquisition, to crusades, to the Holocaust, to the Atomic bombs on Japan, to the massacre of Palestinians, Afghans, Iraqis, Panamanians, Chileans, your "Christianity" is seeped in Blood and Gore. And to top it all your Priests have cornered the market on Sodomy. Not one day goes by when we don't hear of your priests molesting little boys - enmasse. What is the matter with you people ?Then you have the gall to state that you represent God. Is this what you think Christ is going to come back to? What will Christ think when you Christians extend your hands, dripping with centuries of blood of the innocent, all in his name. And do you think he will embrace you when you are soiled with the sins of sodomy? Worse the receiving Christian priests might in fact be gay? And you think you will go to heaven arm in arm with your Jewish brethren? Each proud of all the injustice, oppression, murder and misery you subject the poor of the world? And incredibly you think God will smile at you? Your hypocrisy is simply inexhaustible. You people disgust me utterly and completely.
()

AKBAR KHAN FROM CANADA said:
Contrary to what the what the one who calls himself Nick Cameron will say next, he cannot deny the fact that not only Christian Americans, but even a Kurdish Muslim, have posted comments on this page refuting Nick's flawed perception of this "war on terror" and that it is somehow making the future a positive one rather than negative.

I think it is no more apparent, and clear than ever before now, that the artist formerly known as Nick Cameron should come about, and realize that his claims are wrong.

In the name of Allah,the Benificient, the Merciful

9:67 The Hypocrites, men and women, (have an understanding) with each other: They enjoin evil, and forbid what is just, and are close with their hands. They have forgotten Allah. so He hath forgotten them. Verily the Hypocrites are rebellious and perverse.

33:60 Truly, if the Hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and those who stir up sedition in the City, desist not, We shall certainly stir thee up against them: Then will they not be able to stay in it as thy neighbours for any length of time:
()

NICK CAMERON FROM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA said:
One other thing. I cannot be held personally responsible for what goes on in Iraq and the sovereign state of Israel. And I am not a "crusader", for I am but a simple man who desires little more than to live a meaningful life free from injustice.

In any event, this article is not about me. So I request that all here stop targetting me because it distracts from the discussion.
()

NICK CAMERON FROM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA said:
Hi Hudd!

Let me tell you a little secret about me. The reason why you've never been able to rile me up, despite all the bigotted hatred that you spew daily, is that I know that love is much stronger than the strongest extremist hate. Even if OBL himself found a way to nuke one of our cities and install a Taliban-esque tyrannny in America, he would never be able to conquer the power of love. Similarly, no matter how many Muslims move towards militancy and hatred, and no matter how many countries they take over, they will never be stronger than God. That's cos God is pretty strong.

Kinda reminds me of one time when I walked into a bar in an expat (or tourist, I'm not sure) section of Jakarta. There were people from all over the world in the joint ranting and cursing about America for everything from globalization to human rights issues. Some of the discussions I heard were fairly vile and loathsome. So what was my response? I turned my head to one particularly boisterous table and sflashed the patrons seated there patrons a wink and a smile, for I knew that no matter how much hatred these folks could muster, the power of love in America would always cancel it out.

And that, my dear friend, is who I am. So peace, love, and understanding to ya! ;)
()

HUDD D'ALHAMD FROM CANADA said:
Nick C. you are the master of hypocracy. Only one person I know that surpassed your hypocracy: Golda Meir. Your comment:". For example, the Kurds no longer fear Saddam Hussein or his henchmen." Of course not, .., they became henchmen killing the Muslim Arabs. US just turned the tables; did not bring justice for reasons you easily can find in this article; if you were less of a narcisist, nurturing your own chimera, like a lunatic petting his peewee. But this is you. Impertinent & insensitive.
I will not comment on the rest of your crap. It would be worthless, both your crap & my comment. One thing though, just not you to believe that you blew us all off our feet with your last opinion: "It is through Christian love that all people can conquer the inequities of Man." Let me start there that Christian love is an oxymoron. Christian sex? Oh yeah, buddy, on that I agree, in no culture(including that of Kama Sutra) a woman would perform on her partner(male or female) what a Christian woman was brought to! In the whole history of mankind there wasn't a religion shared in any nation on the globe, that allowed the cruel, heartless, inhumane and barbaric practices of the Christians, up to date! Allow me a refresher. REMEMBER. The Christianity at her peak established the Inquisition, the institutionalization of Christian love. When, they exhuberantly enfatuated with old women and cats burnt them alive at the stake; all this out of tremendous Christian love that conquered the inequities of old women and cats. Oh boy, how could I forget this ardent and very flammable love was extended to scientists and free-thinkers, like Galileo Galilei that sheared in the love for old women & cats! Oh, this immense Christian love exterminated entire native American tribes; out of love, of course for the purpose of conquering the inequity of man! Let's not forget the great love for the black man of Africa! Out of pure Christian love, the blackman was made a slave, a comodity for trade.
()

NICK CAMERON FROM UNITED STATES said:
Correction of my most recent comments:

I said, "I suppose the recent war in Iraq changed things all over that country as well, and we can acknowledge that they have been for the better."

That should read, "I suppose the recent war in Iraq changed things all over that country as well, and we can acknowledge that SOME have been for the better."

We should also acknowledge that some things have been worse, and will continue to be so in the short term. However, I think the future is more positive than negative.
()

ABDUL AZEEZ FROM USA said:
To Nick Cameron,
What do you mean by "Christian Love"? The Love you guys are showing in Iraq and Palestine?
..
()

IRFAT PASHAH FROM FINLAND said:
Nick Cameron, do you sleep like teh Ostrich, with your head in the sand? I am a Kurd and let me tell you some reality. First the butcher Saddam tried to wipe us out, but at the same time so did the Turks and the Iranians. Then your government supplied Saddam the butcher with poison gas which Saddam the butcher used on my people and also on the Iranians. Every effort our leaders made to make America see what Saddam was doing fell on deaf ears. Then Turkey with Israeli airforce help bombed our villages. Massacred entire villages - Deaf and blind people like you and the whole world never heard the cries of our dieing childeren and women? Now you say you help us ?? I tell you what is going on. We the Kurd are one people however we are attacked by our teh Turkish and US forces in Turkey and called like we are animals and have no deserve rights. We are teh Bad people in Turkey. But our same people in Iraq who also was being killed by Saddam the butcher with YOUR Government's help but now who help Bush fight this butcher and bring him down are teh Good Kurds ??? and now your government and britian are trying to make the Iraqi and Iranie and Turk superior rights over us? WE know your game. Divide and Rule. I tell you Mr. Christian, your tricks and devil works not working anymore. For once we all see you as you are, two devils hiding behind Bible and Torah. The same books you have never opened your self and make changes to them as you please. I swear if I am in my country and I see your people US and UK, I fight you too- to the end. I am not afraid of death.
()

NICK CAMERON FROM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA said:
September 11 did change things for my country, and no one denies that. But I think many of the changes that have been made since then have been necessary. I suppose the recent war in Iraq changed things all over that country as well, and we can acknowledge that they have been for the better. For example, the Kurds no longer fear Saddam Hussein or his henchmen. And in fact, the vast majority of Kurds believe that they are better off now than they were at anytime during Saddam's reign. This proves that America helps Muslims, and no amount of rationalization can prove otherwise unless people want to claim that the Kurds are not Muslims.

Nevertheless, the War on Terror, for us, is not primarily about establishing justice for others, although this is a worthy secondary goal. From our POV, the War on Terror is first and foremost a struggle to secure safety and justice for Americans. It is only logical, since well-ordered nation-states must act in the interests of their own populaces before all else. And if people in Muslim countries don't like it, then they need to appoint competent leaders to secure their own interests. Otherwise, they should not complain to us.

That being said, there is a way to bring justice for the Iraqi people. It is through Christian love that all people can conquer the inequities of Man. But that is for another discussion.
()

PIA ESPMARK FROM STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN said:
Our country is a very peaceful nation and I do not want any part of this madness. I also am very angry at the Americans for doing all this murder and killing of innocent men, women and children and their media portrays these murders as teh work of MAcho US military people who killed "Insurgents" in Iraq and Afghanistan. But independent news from all over the world tells a different story. The pictures of dead children, women and old people cut into two, these simply can not be "Insurgents". What a pregnant woman a 4 year old girl shot 27 times by US machine guns, this americans call Insurgents? terrorists? What makes me madder more is that not only the US medi abut EVEN the US Church supports this massacre ? How can you Americans do this. I do not understand. Even the Church? I see clips of news reports on how US church fund and support thsi masscre of Palestinins and Afghans and Iraquis. How can they? and they say they are God's Institutions? I think there are some but very few good Americans with some shame and sense. i think they have no voice or power. I think America has been shaking the hornet's nest of every country for a very long time. This is not the America of Abraham Lincoln. This America has ben hijacked by Israel and Multiglobal corporations. We are all doomed.
()

JEFFEREY O'NEIL FROM NEW JERSEY, USA said:
I don't know much about politics or any of the stuff going about in the world today because simply it was never interesting. But i like what this guy wrote I think I understand. You see a few weeks ago we found out that our neighbor, a doctor and who is a pretty nice guy and also an Arab was arrested and dragged off by the FBI. Mom said that he was probably a terrorist. I know this guy and his family and his kids. No way this could be true because they are very decent people. I mean his kids don't party with us and all but I have known them for my whole 18 years of life and I do not understand how one moment my parent think they are like family and next they tell me not to talk to their kids because they might be the bad guys with teh WMDs and all. So I have started looking up things and news a bit and just looking at the facts and our history, I hate to tell you this man, but we, we the US are the Evil Empire. Just like in Star Wars we have become this huge big Death Star Empire that wants to control everything. And just like the Evil Magician in Lord of the Rings, man our president is that evil guy. Then I went on vacation to London last year and I saw stuff I had never seen before on our TV. These pics of kids and babies blown up by US bombs in little pieces with bits of their head and bodies missing in the Palestinian refugee camps killed by Israelis. And then I also saw what we did to those Afghan kids. Man there were body parts all over. Sick but we did it. I think we are making a pretty big big mistake. I can't understand just how by any reasoning can we claim, we are the good guys and they the bad. I think we gave weapons of WMD to Israeli Jewish people and they are now the big bad gangsta in the Middle East nighborhood, with a lots of guns, and he is throwing his weight around. Taking whatever he feels like. Knocking over anyone he feels like. Man Israel is an evil gangsta and we made them, and we are making things worst. When can I vote Bush outa office?
()

ABDUL AZEEZ FROM USA said:
Shut up. The Super power has every right to defend herself. To protect herself, she will do everything she can including destroying all other nations. They will use F-16 to kill 8 months old terrorist. They have every right to do whatever they want. We should not ask why?

Strongest nation in the middle east has every right to defend herself. They can use their might against un-armed civilians. We shouldn't ask why?.

You have no right to ask anything or say anything. If you dare then you will be labelled as TERRORIST. Beware.

This is what freedom of speech and this is democrocy that we want to establish around the world.

We are crying about bringing peace everywhere. Sadly this is how we want to achieve PIECE.

()