Home / Why Do So Many Christians Support The Iraq War?

Why Do So Many Christians Support The Iraq War?

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Why do so many Christians support the Iraq War?

What I'm about to write is going to be a somewhat touchy subject, at least to some people. But it is also something that has confused me for a quite a while.

It all comes down to this question: Why are many Christians so supportive of the war in Iraq? We can break this question into four parts. Why do so many Christians: 1) believe the precepts for the war are justified, 2) simplify the issue into a good vs. evil dichotomy, 3) support a policy that encourages death and destruction rather than life and peace, and 4) support a policy that makes Iraq a life-threatening place for a Christian to live?

Many Christians are adamant in their support of the war, in spite of the long established facts that the American people were simply lied to in going over there. But I feel like Christian support on this first point has more to do with ignorance than ideology — willful or not.

Many people are not aware of the fact that Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda had no link whatsoever. The evidence that supported the Bush administration's run-up to war has long since been proven faulty — and in fact was proven faulty before we ever went to war. The Bush administration failed to listen to evidence contrary to their aims, instead favoring evidence already tilted toward going to war. The Bush administration lied by presenting one side of the picture, misleading America into a war which will scar us for decades to come. Even in 2008, many are ignorant of these facts, and Christians who support the war are not excluded.

The evidence contrary to the Bush administration’s goals clearly showed Iraq was not a threat to our national security. I'm not going to go into the details of this evidence; whole books have been written about that. However, it is our duty as American citizens to take up the mantle of responsibility. It is our duty to be knowledgeable about what is going on, and to hold our government accountable. As a Christian, I inwardly cringe whenever I hear my pastor give a diatribe about supporting the war and its precepts. Support our troops, yes. Support the war, no.

If one supports the war, one is also inadvertently supporting the lies that made it possible. It's ironic that Christians, among the strongest supporters of the war, have supported an administration of liars.

My second point had to do with the danger of making everything a dichotomy between good and evil. Iraq is an extremely complicated issue — the search for truth goes deeper than what we're told from the pulpit. It's not like we're bringing light to the barbarous Middle East, an all too simple dichotomy that is simply dangerous. In fact, we've done the opposite. What few Christians and Jews were living in Iraq at the time fled for their lives because of the American invasion. Iraq is not a safe place for a Christian to live. It's an obvious irony of the war — by hoping to bring peace and democracy, we have brought sectarian violence.

Many people are also not aware of the fact that over a million have died in Iraq as a result of the American occupation, which is surprising. Once, questioning one of my Christian friends' support of the war, my friend asserted that Saddam had killed over a million. But Saddam killed maybe a thousand. I'm not even sure it was that many, but I don't really feel like searching for the exact number. In any case, it was a lot less than what we've done (both directly and indirectly) in a little over five years.

These numbers are staggering, and it seems to me that a Christian supporter of the war would find it difficult to justify them. Christians, in theory at least, should be the first to bring happiness and help to a world that needs it. Why would Christians support a war that has done just the opposite? War also just seems like a bad thing to attach the Christian name to. As Ron Paul said, "Going to war in Iraq seems to be against everything I was ever taught as a Christian."

The Iraq war will be an issue conservative Christians look back on a generation from now and say, "What were we thinking? Why didn't we stand against it?" Civil rights and slavery have a similar story. Although many Christians individually helped with the Underground Railroad and were actually the majority in doing so, at the institutional level, many Christian churches stood against these things.

Christian support for Iraq makes no sense to me. In fact, it stands against everything Christians are supposed to stand for. Many people are dead, and more are dying. With each passing month, I become more convinced that we can make very little positive impact there.

Yes, I understand Saddam was an evil man. But so are many other world leaders. Ultimately, Iraq was a decision made without much forethought or evidence. And that goes against pretty much all of the Book of Proverbs. No matter how far a man has gone down the wrong road, he must turn back.

I know that not all Christians support the Iraq war. I am one of them. It is time we made plans to withdraw, which both candidates most likely will do, at least in the next four years, despite all the rhetoric. It is hard to imagine the next president getting reelected if he has not gotten us out of there.

Christians have a moral responsibility not to encourage wanton death and destruction. The Iraq war is unjustified, has cost too many lives, was poorly planned and executed, and ultimately, we will lose.

It is okay to be against that, regardless of religion.

Powered by

About Kyle West

  • Jordan Richardson

    To answer your question: It happens because many American Christians tend to put their country first and their religious beliefs second. Christians in other parts of the world have a greater tendency to condemn the Iraq War.

  • Perhaps some Christians believe that setting people free and giving them a chance not to be oppressed and persecuted by dictators is part of Christian charity.

    Think about it. 150 years ago the abolitionists in America were mostly highly religious Christians, many of them Quakers. They risked their lives and ultimately launched a war to free the slaves from the oppressive rule of southern slave masters. Most would consider that a very christian act.

    How is it less Christian to want to free people ruled by dictators who can kill or torture them at whim and who have committed genocide and mass murder?

    It’s a very strange form of Christianity which is willing to stand by and be silent and take no action while others are murdered and exploited.

    The question should be how can any Christian NOT support the Iraq war?

  • Pablo


    Pardon me while I gag.

  • Dave, in which case, can we expect to see these Christian armies turning up in places like Burma, Zimbabwe, Somalia and all the other countries where the regimes are far worse than Saddam Hussein’s was? I very much doubt it. The second invasion of Iraq was a poorly thought out, cynical and opportunist war that has created more problems than it has solved.

  • Les Slater

    “But Saddam killed maybe a thousand. I’m not even sure it was that many…”

    It won’t convince many people, of any faith, or no faith, by coming up with such outrageous distortions of history. The Ba’thist regime of Iraq, including all the years led by Saddam Hussein, should rightly go down in history as a thuggish blight on humanity.

  • Always the blinkered literalist, Chris. Sarcasm just flies by on both sides leaving you staring stolidly ahead.

    That said, I challenge you to show more deaths in any of the nations you mention than were caused gratuitously under Saddam.


  • Dave, to pull off sarcasm you need a reputation as a funny guy, not a wonker…

  • Condor

    Hmmmm, bash away at will at the religiousity, but faith is something else altogether.

    I would have to surmise that most people, both in and out of religiousity, in and out of an organized church, throughout history and even today are really (and on both sides of a war) are in effect very CONCERNED ABOUT THE SONS AND DAUGHTERS IN HARMS WAY. I don’t think faith based Christianity supports war, but they understand government and the demands placed on the troops, which leads them to support the ability to either get it over with, or dominate the operations and bring the troops home.

    If you have ever studied ancient texts you will find that thoughout the body of philosophy, there is a general thread that if you have government you have to expect certain demands by that government.

    Think of it as a tax… your children are in effect the taxes being levied by the government. Call it a volunteer force if you wish. But if no volunteers were available, the draft would ensure that the ranks were populated.

    As laid out by the constitution, the government is assigned to protect us. Which, through war or deterrance it is in fact accomplished.

    Iraq is just another place where war is currently be waged. If you don’t have children, and you might, you will understand the concern and fear parents have for their children, especially when they are sent far from home to fight in hellish place under hellish conditions in circumstances that some or all of the people here and in theator do not understand.

    Perhaps the comments by some are harkening back to early memories of “turn the other cheek” and that Christians are to be looked upon as some namby-pamby soft fleshed, quivering wussy society. My history studies have revealed that those who go forward with faith, do so with a purpose that is strong and vigilant in its execution.

    I suppose that the general thought is that Christians (let’s say faith based) are viewed as a people who prefer to be beat up, bullied, go into the fetal position at the slightest provocation etc…. you know, turn the other cheek and all of that.

    I would contend that the general consesus within the Christian faith is that the context in which that thought was rendered, was directed to other “brothers” only. Should turn the other cheek? If you want to get your ass kicked that would sound tactical advice. But who wants to get their asses kicked? It is a painful lesson/experience to receive a sound uncomprimising thrashing.

    It’s “hollywood” to get your ass thoroughly beaten only then to rise up bloody and torn down and only then take command of the fight.

  • Faith is a condition of complete gullibility in which the afflicted are able to persuade themselves that any half baked concept is a plausible belief system, despite the lack of any supporting evidence or the considerable evidence in support of alternative explanations. In the majority of cases a cure still proves elusive…

    Examples include con trick victims or marks, religious believers and our own Dave Nalle.

  • Carmen

    Kyle, before you publish anymore posts like this one, please take the time to study beyond college text books and Blogs. For example, if you want to understand Christian thought, you will need to become thoroughly familiar with the Bible (both Old and New Testaments). Consider, for example, that Jesus said he did not come to bring peace to the world. Jesus also said he did come to open the prison doors and set the captives free. Who were the prisoners Jesus was talking about? The prophet Isaiah also spoke of setting captives free. Who were these captives? What Bible did Jesus read? The reason you are confused about Christian thought is because you haven’t done your homework. Suppose you wanted to write a history of the American civil war. You would need to study primary texts as well as secondary sources, because that’s what “professional writers” and historians get paid to do. Understanding Christian thought requires the same level of dedication and discipline.

    As for the Iraq war and your claim that it was initiated on the basis of faulty intelligence, have you considered that the people who produced that intelligence were Clinton appointees and the entrenched bureaucrats who served under them. Why didn’t President Bush replace these people who had failed to predict and prevent 9/11? I know CFR scholars will disagree with me, but three of the best books written about 9/11 were all written by investigative reporter Peter Lance: A Thousand Years for Revenge, Cover Up, Triple Cross. Lance, BTW, believes Bush should have been impeached over 9/11, but he does expose an Iraq-al Qaeda connection that existed during the Clinton administration, and in that sense he is no admirer of Clinton or Bush Sr. either since the intelligence rap spans all three administrations.

    It has been said there is no such thing as a dumb question, but what is dumb is not allowing an honest question to take you on a journey of rigourous learning.

  • Faith is a condition of complete gullibility in which the afflicted are able to persuade themselves that any half baked concept is a plausible belief system, despite the lack of any supporting evidence or the considerable evidence in support of alternative explanations.

    Rather like the enduring faith that ever more powerful and wide-ranging bureaucracies will bring about anything other than the enslavement and eventual impoverishment of once free peoples.


  • Condor

    “Faith is a condition of complete gullibility” – Rose

    Are you including faith in yourself?

  • Tony

    The thing you’re missing here Kyle, is that at the foundation of Christianity is the ideal that everyone who doesn’t “accept” Jesus as their savior is condemned to hell. That includes, Jews, Muslims, Athiests, ect…

    Now if you feel like an entire nation of people is going to hell that you probably have no problem killing them yourself and speeding up the process. I think that’s the fine print under that “Thou Shall Not Kill” Commandement that God gave to…..well the Jews, wasn’t it?

    Thou Shall Not Kill….unless those who are in the sight lines are of an improper faith. Kind of like that whole Crusades thing.

    The real question we should be asking is why so many “good” Christians support dumping American money, that could be spent on “good American Christians” who are suffering and homeless, on a country of Jesus hating infidels.

    Now that’s where the real irony lies.

  • Tony

    Just a note on the “wide-ranging bureaucracies.”

    Have you not paid attention to the Bush presidency or the things McCain has purposed? The Government bailing out banks, buying into banks, buying up mortgages, creating no Child Left Behind, the Dept. of Homeland Security, the list goes on…..these are all bureaucracies. George Bush has ruled over a regime of massive spending and massive government expanision. The only difference between himself and the dems. is that he borrowed the money from China instead of raising taxes here at home, contributing greatly to the problems we are facing now.

    The Republicans are not even a semblence of the former supply side, Regeanomic republicans. That is why the entire financial community has turned away from McCain.

  • Kyle

    Hey guys, some good thoughts here. It’s pretty exciting to get so much feedback, especially since this is only my second article! So, thanks for that.

    You guys might be surprised by this, but I’m actually a Southern Baptist with a pretty good knowledge of the Bible. I was saved as a Freshman in high school.

    I think the fact that many American Christians support the Iraq War is due to ignorance, not faith. Many are just not aware of simple facts, and as such, can’t form informed opinions. I have faith in God, yet weighing the evidence, I see Iraq as pretty unjustified for the reasons listed in my article. We were deceived into going there, by both our government and the media. Even worse, over a million are dead due to us, a far worse evil than Saddam, and he was pretty evil.

    However, I also think you can’t take Old Testament wars of the Israelites vs. Canannites or whoever else they were fighting to justify wars today. The contexts are WAY different, one of which is God is telling them to go to war, and God really doesn’t tell us to go to war today. At least as far as any of us knows.

    I believe by looking at Paul and Jesus in the Bible, that they would be against theocracy. Any time a theocracy has existed in human history, it’s been pretty much bad news.

    I know I really haven’t addressed everything brought up but that would be pretty impossible. Thanks again for the thoughts.

  • bliffle

    Just like uninhibited free markets (which soon become controlled by the winners).

    Those two choices are opposite faces of the same coin.

    Doesn’t it seem possible to come up with a scheme that is better than each?

  • Lee Richards

    GWB is a christian.
    GWB believes his christian god wanted him to invade Iraq.
    GWB is either correct in his belief, or full of it.

    Christians who support GWB and his war on such a basis are either correct, or full of it.

    Christians who support war to spread the faith or suppress alternative systems of belief and culture are exactly like the radical fundamentalists of other faiths who believe and act the same way. Both favor force to control the lives and consciences of others.

    War is man’s worst disease, and supporting an optional war is like putting anthrax in the water supply.

    War is justified for self-defense, and the defense of helpless innocents, under the rule of law. To claim God is on our side in this war, or that Jesus would be right there in Baghdad swinging his sword of righteouness is ignorance, bad theology, and hellish Christianinty.

  • Doug Hunter

    “Many are just not aware of simple facts, and as such, can’t form informed opinions.”

    With your 1000 deaths comment in regards to Saddam you show you are just like them… or a liar. So do you want to be considered ignorant or a liar?

  • Lee, it’s hard to go wrong if we just start out assuming that Christians are ‘full of it’ as you say.


  • Ms. Know

    For whatever reasons the socialist illuminati want us to believe we shouldn’t be at war, the fact remains that we are. I believe the Christians are praying for the safety and victory of our troops who are over there serving for you and I.

  • Kyle

    I admit my ignorance about the number of deaths. I just found several sites that point to around 600,000 deaths under Saddam, since he began to rule in 1979.

    The invasion, however, has caused over a million deaths, mostly through the sectarian violence it caused. I still think invading Iraq was the greater evil.

  • Pablo

    I too think the invasion of Iraq was the greatest evil. It is also difficult not to also draw the same conclusion about its admirers and defenders.

    On the home front I also think that the Homeland Security/Patriot Act/Police State mentality and legislation is equally as evil, again as are its admirers and defenders.

    I not being a Christian do not believe in the Devil. I do know evil when I see it however. Those that endorse torture, kill wontonly, kidnap (rendition), are in my book evil, and should be resisted and condemned.

  • Clavos

    kill wontonly…

    Wontons should only be killed for soup.

  • Pablo

    Once in a blue moon you are almost cute Clavy, good thing for me im straight.

  • Doug Hunter

    “I too think the invasion of Iraq was the greatest evil.”

    Why? Google Saddam torture videos on the internet and see what real evil is. Holding down people and cutting out their tongues, throwing people off buildings, execution by dynamite, beheadings, amputations, having friends and family break each others limbs, iron maidens, electroshock torture, rapes, chemical warfare, etc. All this stuff was reasonably commonplace, documented, and sanctioned by government officials under Hussein.

    I am embarassed about the failures of US intelligence in the runup to war, the unneccessary torture and killing that has been documented by US forces, and often the cowboy attitude our president has had toward this very serious issue. I am glad that we have people who are critical of out motives, means, and method. I’m glad we feel bad about what happened at Abu Graib.

    It’s great we do all that, I want us to be held to a higher standard. But… that doesn’t mean we’re more evil or even close to as bad as the thugs who ran Iraq.

    I sincerely hope that is rhetoric getting the better of you rather than your true feelings. If not, I highly advise you seek out a Republican or someone with a different viewpoint in real life and have a conversation with them. I can’t imagine what it must be like to think that half the country or so supported a greater evil than the Hussein regime, that most of us are monsters on the inside.

  • moon

    I see, Doug, you gringos don’t do torture.


    Pull the other one.

    I find it absolutely astonishing even on this gringo site that someone has the baldfaced nerve to mention torture and not own up to his own country practsing it even as I type this post!

  • jamminsue

    You say: “How is it less Christian to want to free people ruled by dictators who can kill or torture them at whim and who have committed genocide and mass murder? It’s a very strange form of Christianity which is willing to stand by and be silent and take no action while others are murdered and exploited. The question should be how can any Christian NOT support the Iraq war?”

    Response: This is not the first time I have said this. When countries have a despot, it is the responsibility of the people within to change their government; it does not work (as we are now painfully aware) when others try to do it for them. It is no different than reforming a drunk. Unhealthy behavioral issues can only be changed from within. The only time it is OK to go into a country mistreating it’s citizens is when there’s genocide. There was genocide going on in Iraq by Saddam long, long before we invaded, and surprise, no one cared. As no one cared when the genocide was occurring, that reason is negated. Once that issue is negated, then there is no moral reason to go in. Further, genocide was not GWB’s excuse. As many national leaders told GWB, it was a no win situation based on bankrupt ideas.
    I believe the Christians that are supporting the war are those with blinkers that follow their chosen leader (in this case GWB and Chaney). It allows them to: on one side say life is sacred so abortion is murder but it’s okay to have guns without trigger guards, etc so kids getto find out the hard way howto handle a gun. It’s okay to kill “those people,” whomever the “demonized du jour” happens to be. Keeping the fear focused in the desired place is one way to divert attention from the things that really count, which GWB did quite well, as our current financial situation attests.

  • jamminsue

    Carmen: You say “As for the Iraq war and your claim that it was initiated on the basis of faulty intelligence, have you considered that the people who produced that intelligence were Clinton appointees and the entrenched bureaucrats who served under them.”
    Two wrongs do not make a right. This is a red herring.

  • Pablo

    Doug RE post 25

    “Why? Google Saddam torture videos on the internet and see what real evil is. Holding down people and cutting out their tongues, throwing people off buildings, execution by dynamite, beheadings, amputations, having friends and family break each others limbs, iron maidens, electroshock torture, rapes, chemical warfare, etc. All this stuff was reasonably commonplace, documented, and sanctioned by government officials under Hussein.”

    First of all lest you forget Saddam was one of our boys for decades. He obviously did not pay someone enough, and thus incurred the wrath of the ruling Oil-igarchy here in the good ole u s of a.

    The reasons it was of the greatest evil are as follows.

    1. First the killing, maiming, and destruction of human beings in a war that was never legally declared, thus UNLAWFUL.

    2. It has ruined what little prestige and respect that my nation had prior to its attack on Iraq.

    3. It has never been formally acknowledged that this war was fought for Oil, with the only right wing exception to this being Mrs. Palin’s acknowledgment that it was about Oil. The bullshit about Jeffersonian Democracy being complete and utter bullshit from the get go.

    4. the evil of spending 3 trillion dollars killing people, whilst bankrupting the USA, and guaranteeing that we and our children and grandchildren will be paying for this monstrosity for decades.

    If you really want to fight evil Doug, assuming your an american too, you don’t need to go overseas to do it. We have quite enough monsters of our own in power, in case you hadn’t noticed.

  • John

    “I can’t imagine what it must be like to think that half the country or so supported a greater evil than the Hussein regime, that most of us are monsters on the inside”

    Actually, many in that half were supporting the claim that Iraq had WMD’s and was about to attack the US, which was a lie.

    The evil was lying to the American people.

    And unfortunately, many Christians are “christian” in name only.

    How does a Christian follow Jesus’ teaching?

    “Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

    Jesus replied. “If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.”

    “Which ones?” the man inquired. Jesus replied, “‘Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony,”

    — Matthew 19:16-18

    Taking inventory here, some “christians” don’t get a passing grade.

  • To continue the unstated part of #29:

    #5: It was done by the US and anything the US does is inherently evil.


  • John

    “#5: It was done by the US and anything the US does is inherently evil’

    Only in Dave’s fevered mind.

  • Clavos

    You don’t think the USA is inherently evil, John?

    At least 80% of the rest of the world does. They can’t all be wrong.

    We’re imperialists, warmongers, despoilers of the environment, racists, and bullies to countries like Venezuela and Iran.

    Evil doesn’t begin to describe us.

  • John

    “You don’t think the USA is inherently evil, John?”

    You got it wrong.

    Not the USA, just the rotten politicians who lie to the American people.

  • Cannonshop

    #30 It ain’t just Christians, John, it’s most PEOPLE don’t get a passing grade. Particularly on the False witness part, but also on the stealing, and in rare cases, the Adultery. Only really SICK folk do the Murder bit, but it’s rather interesting how many will tend to stand by while it’s done in front of them, then tell the cops they didn’t see anything for fear of having to interrupt their pathetic existence to testify in court.

    But False witness? that one’s POPULAR. Everything from your neighbourhood gossip on up the chain through the media into the halls of power-giving false testimonial, lying about what you did or what you saw, these are things people do-and the motive? most often, I believe, (honestly) is the desire to be “liked”.

    People will say or do things to be ‘liked’ that bend the mind, John, including identifying themselves as Christians, or Religious when really they’re just self-righteous or selfish.

    The really GOOD ones get to go to Washington D.C. and draw a paycheque for lying, stealing, and bearing false witness.

  • marlowe

    Hey, if they’re not Christian we need not worry about incurring the wrath of God do we? Because according to the fundamentalists God ONLY loves Christians anyway, right? Not to mention they’re all of Brown skin over there. So they lose out twice.

    The level of ignorance Christians have of their own religion, not to mention their stunted spirituality is stunning beyond all measure…


  • Baronius

    Kyle, I won’t try to speak for all Christians, but I always felt that the first Gulf War was justified, and the second was simply a continuation of the first. Also, you should probably check your figures. The death toll under Saddam was much higher, and the death toll during the current war is much lower.

    Marlowe and Kyle, where do you guys hang out? I’ve never heard a sermon in support of the war, and I’ve never met a Christian who thought that God loved him more than a non-Christian. You guys must lead interesting lives.

  • Kyle

    Yes, the death toll under Saddam is a lot higher than I said in the article, but I just found the correct figure yesterday. I should have taken the time to do the research before posting it. However, the American invasion has resulted in about twice as many deaths as Saddam, and in a shorter amount of time to boot.

    I’ve never actually heard a sermon in favor of the war, but I’m sure there have been many. However, I’ve heard pastors encourage their congregations to support the war, mine included.

  • moon

    And more to the point:

    1. Christians, schmistians–just another synonym for gringos.

    2. There is not a single person anywhere in the Gulf region that doesn’t believe that Iraquis were MUCH better off under Saddam Hussein. Gringos have the gall to act as if they did folks a favor offing more than a million of them just to fill the pockets of Dick Cheney and his compinches.

  • Tony

    Honestly, this whole Christian argument that it was our job to take out the big bad evil Saddam is just a reflection of the ignorance of the American People towards the actions of the country which they populate.

    The United States attempted to populate the entire expanse of South America with evil dictators that murdered their people but were allies to the U.S.

    Ronald Regean himself supported Saddam in the Iraq Iran war (he of the party that the U.S. installed in Iraq), arming him to the teeth with the theory that his brand of socialism was better than Iran’s fundimentalism. If he wouldn’t have invaded Kuwait and moved a little two close to our brothers in arms, the Saudis, we would still be friends with him.

    People, remember Suharto, the Shah, Pinochet, Noriega, just to same a select few? We constantly support dictators. If you think we went into Iraq just to free an oppressed people from a bad man you’re completely ignorant to reality.

  • Baronius

    So, you’ve never heard a defense of the war from the pulpit? You gave the opposite impression in your article. Maybe you didn’t mean to, but you did. You give people like Christopher and Jordan the wrong impression of American Christians.

    Saddam’s death toll is much higher than your article or your comment. If you consider the wars he got into against Iran and Kuwait, he’s easily pushing a million dead. He tortured thousands as part of his national policy. (By contrast, Americans have tortured maybe six Iraqis, in violation of national policy.)

    On the other hand, the death toll in the Iraq War is closer to 100,000. See the IraqBodyCount site, for example. And remember, this is the tally caused by American, British, Italian, Polish, and Tongan troops, as well as the Iraqi troops, and the tally of al-Qaeda, Baathist, Iranian, and warlords’ victims.

  • troll

    (imo now that things have ‘quieted down’ in Iraq we need Roberts’ third cluster study to get a better picture of casualties

    do the actual numbers matter – ?

    fuck yeah

    we ought to get a clear picture of what we wrought)

  • moon

    This is the single most cynically deluded statement I have yet to read on this cynical, deluded website:

    “By contrast, Americans have tortured maybe six Iraqis, in violation of national policy.”


    Oh well, I guess white folks only committed genocide against 11 of my Native American ancestors, too!

    Torture, as the recently revealed White House memos revealed, IS national policy.

  • Baronius

    The Most Cynically Deluded Statement? Me?

    Oh, there are so many people I’d like to thank… My parents, for always believing in me… my high school drama teacher, Mr. McOwen… But above all, Dick Cheney, for teaching me that you don’t have to be outrageous to set some people off. You just have to speak the truth: the rage comes inside the listener. Mr. Vice President, this one is for you!

  • moon

    We will not, snif snif, be hearing anymore from Baronius, as he was just blasted into purgatory by the 12 gauge his hunting partner so tenderly placed next to his temple.

    Apparently, Mr. Vice President, it WAS for Baronius–not you.



  • Elijah


    God Bless!!!!!!

  • Curtis

    There are so many things wrong with this article…

    I’ll try to briefly hit the highest points. The basis of this article derailed in the frist 15 seconds. Christianity does not support the war. Christianity is for the prolongation of life. Christians are for the freedom of religion. Those are 2 different entities. One is always left to interpretation to the other.

    Pro-freedom governments (not just Bush – ever hear of Great Britian, Italy and the dozens of other countries with militaries that were there?) enacted a war on terrorism not just for WMD’s and not just to get Saddam – a known genicidal terrorist.

    This article was certainly written by one with his hean in a microsope who has learned a lot from entertainment based media outlets who are paid to say things that keep peoples attention as opposed to the whole truth.

  • pablo


    For the vast majority of Christian history not only has Christianity supported countless wars, but torture, burning at the stake, and countless other forms of human abuse and crime. If I were a Christian which thank GOD I am not, I would spend the rest of my life in penitence for the sins of my faith, instead of trying to force down my faith on the rest of the un-believers, of which thank GOD I am one.

  • Jet

    Curtis-FACT-more men have died in the name of Jesus Christ-and religious genocide than from any other source, you only have to look back at the Crusades to see that.

    The battle cry of “Only those who believe as me shall reap the glory of heaven” “Only those who are born again in Jesus’ holy name can go to heaven” has caused more conflict, more hatred, more prejudice that any other down through history.

    For a religion that professes love and “Judge not lest you be judged yourself” and “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”, it sure has inspired the most grievous excuses to hate someone.

    You are a fool to follow its teachings, and then reinterpret them to suit your own ends, whether they conflict or not.

  • Clavos

    Curtis-FACT-more men have died in the name of Jesus Christ-and religious genocide than from any other source, you only have to look back at the Crusades to see that.

    Neither Stalin, Hitler nor Pol Pot (to name just the notable twentieth century mass murderers) killed for religious reasons. Each, by himself, killed more than the Crusades and Inquisition put together.

    Stalin: 5 to 7 Million.

    Hitler: 6 Million (Holocaust), and up to 40 Million across Europe as a result of WW II.

    Pol Pot: 2 Million.

    None of the mass murders above were undertaken in the name of religion. In fact, only Hitler was not an atheist in this group.

    For the record: I am not a Christian, nor do I belong to any other religious group or church.

  • Clavos

    Forgot this link, which says, in part:

    Crusades (1095-1291)

    * Estimated totals:
    o Wertham: 1,000,000
    o Charles Mackay, Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841): 2,000,000 Europeans killed. [http://www.bootlegbooks.com/NonFiction/Mackay/PopDelusions/chap09.html]
    o Aletheia, The Rationalist’s Manual: 5,000,000

  • Jet

    Clavos; Hitler didn’t kill 6 MILLION jews because of their non-christian religion??????? What the fuck have you been smoking?!?

  • Doug Hunter

    Don’t forget to throw Mao in there, can’t forget the Chinese and another score for an atheist.

    I also get sick of the that old demonstrably false claim about christianity (although not being one myself). It’s just simply not true.

  • Clavos

    Read your history, Jet.

    He killed them because, in his view, they were an inferior race. Religion had nothing to do with it.

  • Jet

    HE KILLED THEM BECAUSE THEY WERE JEWS YOU IDIOT. Why do you think they were branded with a yellow star of David on their clothes?

    Judism is not a race-it’s a religion.

    Good God you can not be that ignorant!

  • Jet

    There are black jews, there are white jews, there are asian jews, there are new jews, there are old jews, there are gay jews and according to Ruvy there are even dumb jews.

    Jewish is not a race-it’s a religion. When Hitler’s brown shirts spent all of crystal naght painting JUDE on shop windows, that wasn’t a racial slur it was a religious slur.

    At the time of the holocaust if you stood a jew up with five germans you couldn’t tell which one was jewish unless he told you. There was no obvious or unobvious difference that would put them into the catagory of a separate race.

    Jesus Hosanna Christ-no one is that misinformed!!! except maybe you?

  • Clavos


    I’ll ignore your obvious lack of courtesy. I know you’re under a lot of stress because of your various ailments, and will make allowance for that.

    The point is not whether I know whether Jewish is a race or a religion; the point is what Hitler thought he was doing. Read his own words, Jet, it was all about race:

    “If I can send the flower of the German nation into the hell of war without the smallest pity for the spilling of precious German blood, then surely I have the right to remove millions of an inferior race that breeds like vermin …”

    Adolf Hitler

  • Jet

    You’re right Clavos, It’s just a coincodence that they were all Jews he killed… what are the odds?

  • Clavos

    Non sequitur, jet.

  • Jet

    As for your “Courtesy” and your “How DARE you speak me in such a tone” (:^P~~~~~~~~~`

  • Jet, Wake up!!

    Get out of that medicine induced grouchiness of yours and pay attention.

    The Austrian Germans who came up with the concept of “Aryan Race” as the chosen “clean” race of mankind, also came up with the concept of the “gegenrasse”, the Jews who were the vermin of the earth who had to be exterminated. These were also the assholes who followed Madame Blavatsky and the Thule Society. (go ahead and blow a cork or two, Heloïse)

    The definitions used and the terms used in “Mein Kampf” were Hitler’s, an Austrian German heavily into this racial shit. He didn’t give a damn what the Columbus Ohio Chamber of Commerce thought about these things. He defined them in a way that made sense to the “völkisch” Germans in Central Europe.


    So stop trying to super-impose your definitions of race and nationality onto the ideology and religious ideas of the Austro-German racists who developed Naziism.

  • Clavos

    If you’re interested in learning more about it, Jet, here’s an excellent article from the Beeb about Nazi racism. It says, in part:

    ‘Gypsies’ were admittedly not persecuted with same intensity or in the same systematic fashion as were the Jews, but they were also shot and deported in huge numbers. Almost 20,000 died in Auschwitz alone. Millions of Eastern Europeans, who were seen by the Nazis as Slavic ‘sub-humans’, also died as a consequence of brutal occupation of their home countries. Many were deported to Germany as ‘foreign labourers’, or were ruthlessly forced from their homelands in the second half of the war as a consequence of the ‘scorched earth’ tactics of the German army.

    The genocide and mass murder perpetrated by the ‘Third Reich’ and its allies – maintained until the last days of the war – should always be seen in the context of the Nazis’ racist policies.

    Hitler didn’t just kill Jews; he also tried to exterminate Gypsies, homosexuals, and anyone who did not fit into his idea of the perfect race.

  • Jet

    Oh great, now I have to figure out who’s making less sense; Clavos or Ruvy… oy vay