Fair enough, Brother. I have not yet stated what my geo-political-military doctrine is! I am (possibly the only) member of the Crypto-Libertarian-Messianic-Party. (Crypto-Libertarian: Basically a libertarian, but nobody know what the ____ I am talking about!)

Be warned: Attempting to make sense out of my political and military philosophy usually causes a full-on helmet fire!

As stated earlier, I believe that we should apply the doctrines given to Moshe on Sinai for self-defense personally and nationally. If someone breaks into your house at night, you may use deadly force to defend yourself, your family and your possessions. It would be sinful to mount a counterattack that goes and kills all of the bad guy's family, livestock and burns his house to the ground.

I feel that the same self-defense principle can be applied to nation-states on the off chance that they are seeking to behave in a manner that pleases YHWH.

How would this principle be applied in 1937-1941?

1) FDR's military build up should have had a much more defensive complexion than it did. (More P-40's, PBY's and PT boats. No B-17's or battleships)

2) If General and Madame Chang want to hire gringo's as 'consultants' (like the AVG), let them! (Do not spend our tax dollars in a half-hearted defense of some other country.)

3) If the oil-fields in the Dutch East Indies are being threatened, then Shell Oil can hire 'consultants' to protect them. (Do not spend our tax dollars nor send some draftee from Iowa to die for them.)

4) America was (at that time) a nation of well-armed individuals. Had the Axis attempted to invade, the Germans would not have made it past 57th Street and the Imperial Japanese Army would not have gotten past Burbank. (How do we know this? This was one reason why Switzerland never attacked, even when she was surrounded by Fascist and Occupied countries.)

What I am trying to say is that "You can defend and protect yourself and your property, but you cannot invade/bomb other countries"

Getting back to the doctrine of self-defense, on a personal level: Torah allows for the use of deadly force against a robber in your house at night. This is undeniable. Yeshua, on the other hand is always on about 'mercy' and 'compassion'. Bearing in mind that hypothetical questions only give you hypothetical answers: If I caught a bad guy stealing my television, and my family was in no danger, I would like to think that I would just run him off, rather than end his life, even though my state's laws and Torah allow for the use of deadly force. (I might 'accidently' put a bullet hole in the television, but that would be more of an editorial comment than anything else. ;-) That is what I would want my Savior to see me doing.

If I saw this same bad guy then attempting to break in to my neighbor's house, I still do not think the best thing to do would be to shoot him. My neighbor would not want someone shot and killed in his house just because he was trying to steal a VCR. That would be too great a burden for my neighbor. (I might 'accidently' put a bullet hole in the neighbor's INCREDIBLY LOUD SWIMMING POOL PUMP THAT RUNS ALL NIGHT, but that too, would be more of an editorial comment than anything else.)

Back to geo-politics: Our two longest wars (WW2 and Iraq/Afghanistan) could have been avoided if the OSS and CIA could have paid a well placed colonel to put a knife between Adolf and Sadamm's ribs early on. I even think that I could stand before my Creator and not be condemned for an act such as that. I hope that General Tibbets and his grandson, Colonel Paul W. Tibbets IV have asked forgiveness for the killings of civilians they committed in Japan and Iraq.

These are only my opinions, and are worth exactly what you just paid for them: NOTHING!
(and I am likely to amend them at anytime!)

It would be fun if we could have a YY meet up and kick around these ideas.

CLiMP , I love it!

Speechless again...

its a CofE school - Church of England - Anglican - Protestant :) Nice and wet. lol

From CNN:



What you guys think?

From BBC:



Later in the article it says:


Here we have Hamas firing "rocket-propelled grenades" towards followers of a "radical" Islamist. This article is written in such a way that it diverts a person's attention away from Hamas and towards those inside the mosque who are linked to al-Qaeda. It tries to make Hamas look peaceful, as if their governance is legitimate. Let's hope the world take notice that Islam is not peaceful and still not be peaceful even if they gained world dominance. Let's hope the world also take notice of what this group implied when they said Hamas was "not being Islamist enough," which basically means that for one to be a good Muslim, a real Islamic follower, then one needs to follow the example of al-Qaeda terrorists."

From CNN:

It's a pity that Australian society is quickly becoming influenced by Humanism because the reporters seemed to be more concerned about him having more than one wife rather than him claiming benefits illegally, though they did eventually get around to that point. I wish they had the balls to investigate Islam, because it's the root of that man's life, which teaches him to to lie in order to gain benefits and also to become aggressive when questioned.

I wonder how many Muslims in the UK claim benefits because they're too lazy to work and provide for their huge families?

Hey, the fourth one in line is a dude!

From CNN:

From BBC:

Shalom,

Actually she is a mother of two who simply said that she is a model because that's what models do... drink beer. Sigh! Anyway, this incident is now amplified internationally to the extent that it is becoming an embarrassment in a plural society such as Malaysia, and yet the ruling party has to be seen as supporting Islam as the national religion. In a Catch 22 situation they do what governments do... follow the people and the money. So the Malaysian government has now -- wait for it -- empowered all mosque officials to perform citizens arrests of people violating the alcohol law. This may eventually be extended to other syariah matters and perhaps that's when the mass migration starts. Imagine if Spain allows priests, deacons, and other clergy to take matters into their own hands and act on behalf of the Catholic Church! Oh, wait a minute... that had already happened. If I recall, it was named The Spanish Inquisition even though almost all Catholic countries practised it! Well, there you have it, folks... you know where we are headed!

From CNN:



For background, again from CNN:

Shabbat Shalom,

Another wonderful milestone in the fight against a tactic. Obama is still ignorant or belligerent about the facts. That will be end of him and his ilk.

From BBC News:



And boys, I give you the "Religion of Peace!"

Arutz Sheva Posts Censored "Fitna" Movie Explaining Islam http://www.israelnationa...m/News/News.aspx/125728#

From BBC:

No. Cave envy. :-)

HAHA I could make 99 Islam themed chara's LOL - Starting with, BOMB BOY!

Sabra could kick his butt any day of the week.

(except Saturday)

I can only imagine the remake of Hollywood films, they'll rewrite some of the classic phrases, we'll end up seeing phrases like "I'll be-head you!"

Or what about: Pedo Pan and Al-Buraq, the Flying Jackass!

From CNN:



From Wiki, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Allen_Muhammad:


and

Associated Press on Yahoo!:



So, the CIA realise that the Arabs are feeling uneasy about having to possibly spy in mosques but yet they still want to employ them. So let's say an American-Arab supports Islam being established through terror and then he hears along the grapevine about a few ships containing nukes heading for US cities. What will he do? What call will he make? Do you think he'll let it slide and not bother to report his top-secret information or do you think he'll inform his bosses in order to stop them? I think he'll let it slide, while at the same time moving far inland.

Just a few days after the Fort Hood shooting the CIA are keen to enlist American Arabs!

The real point of concern is that "One third of Protestant pastors don't consider Islam 'dangerous'"!