I agree with Bush Sr. Bush Jr invaded Iraq thinking:
Iraq was helping terror groups responsible for attacking Americans
Iraq's dictatorship had to be removed
Iraq had weapons of mass destruction
Ultimately, these reasons weren't that great. The war was a mistake, and the only good we got out of it was the removal of a dictator who was really bringing stability to the region.
However, I'll say that when the invasion happened, a lot of Iraqi civilians were happy to hear that Saddam would be removed. They, like Bush and like most people, didn't realize that removing Saddam would make things worse than they already were.
Ask them now and they wished he was still ruling.
I understand that now this is the case, but back then people thought otherwise.
✠✙ What once was old doth fade away/But Former Glory stays the same ✙✠ •••Unity•••Duty•••DESTINY••• ***EST. 2006*** • 9/11/01 • BCC: 2010-2014 • EX-TER-MIN-ATE! –Dalek
*Looks at a map of South America and Africa and Asia and the Middle East*
I'm not seeing any regimes that support us except for Saudi Arabia, which doesn't really support us but they like our oil money. Oh! But I am seeing Iran, China, North Korea, Cuba, Nicaragua...
Of the regimes we've toppled, none of them were democratically-elected. These include Taliban-controlled Afghanistan and Iraq, the most prominent regimes we've toppled.
South america is mostly dominated by America, we just got rid of some leaders there. Africa we tried but we don't care about Africans. Asia and Middle east were working on.
We don't really have any influence over South America. I wish we did, because most Latin American countries are either violent anarchies or have very low quality of living, but as it is we don't.
The reason we didn't care as much about Africa is because they didn't possess a direct threat to the US. The reason we attempted to make South America align with US interests is because at the time a lot of communist regimes backed by the USSR were emerging down there -- in some cases, even being provided with weapons by the USSR to strike against America. While similar regimes came about in Africa and we did try to stop them, they were not as high-priority as in South America.
I don't think we're actively working to change any regimes in Asia. With the naval force we have, we could easily overtake Asia or force a regime change if we wanted to.
✠✙ What once was old doth fade away/But Former Glory stays the same ✙✠ •••Unity•••Duty•••DESTINY••• ***EST. 2006*** • 9/11/01 • BCC: 2010-2014 • EX-TER-MIN-ATE! –Dalek
It's not a maybe for me. I know that I'm descended from nobility/royalty on both sides.
Well LA TI DA. although I probably got some to, its just not official.
I think the whole point of nobility is that it's official...
✠✙ What once was old doth fade away/But Former Glory stays the same ✙✠ •••Unity•••Duty•••DESTINY••• ***EST. 2006*** • 9/11/01 • BCC: 2010-2014 • EX-TER-MIN-ATE! –Dalek
Jesus also didn't tell us about the Internet. In worship he does tell us what to use, what not to use is everything else that's gotten into churches, again its not a heresy but a error. But not use them than. Why don't orthodox use instruments?
I finally pulled up a verse in Colossians that'll end this: Colossians 3:16.
"Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord."
Anyway, most of them don't use instruments simply as choice. I don't think they care one way or another.
Thank you. There is obviously nothing wrong with singing, as this verse shows, and the fact that Jesus and the Apostles sang a hymn the night of the last supper, and Paul and Silas sang hymns in the jail and Philippi, and in Ephesians 5:19, which is very similar to the verse in Colossians.
Now, neither verse mentions musical instruments, but since we can clearly sing, what's wrong with instruments?
South america is mostly dominated by America, we just got rid of some leaders there. Africa we tried but we don't care about Africans. Asia and Middle east were working on.
We don't really have any influence over South America. I wish we did, because most Latin American countries are either violent anarchies or have very low quality of living, but as it is we don't.
The reason we didn't care as much about Africa is because they didn't possess a direct threat to the US. The reason we attempted to make South America align with US interests is because at the time a lot of communist regimes backed by the USSR were emerging down there -- in some cases, even being provided with weapons by the USSR to strike against America. While similar regimes came about in Africa and we did try to stop them, they were not as high-priority as in South America.
I don't think we're actively working to change any regimes in Asia. With the naval force we have, we could easily overtake Asia or force a regime change if we wanted to.
Me personally -- I am opposed to US intervention. Like it or not -- other countries have sovereighnty.
I mean, Venezuela might be experiencing a famine -- but the government is literally dysfunctional, and is only concerned with the issue of whether or not Maduro finishes his term, an annoying tug-of-war which has left the government doing nothing for its people.
Mexico is doing the best it can considering it is faced with not only gang violence: but also with a broken economy brought on by trade of cheap corn from the US, which ran Mexico's corn farmers out of business just in time for the US to suddenly switch to trading corn oil with Mexico, instead of corn. Thusly: the price of corn has gone up to absurd levels.
Cuba at the moment is an oppressive regime. However -- Diplomacy with the US will probably change the country for the better (I wouldn't call that intervention).
I'm... PRETTY sure Argentina is decent
I mean -- the best thing to do with these countries is to just talk to them, and give them politics lessons most of them are either suffering from dysfunctional government, a brutalized economy, or an overly-functional government.
Jesus also didn't tell us about the Internet. In worship he does tell us what to use, what not to use is everything else that's gotten into churches, again its not a heresy but a error. But not use them than. Why don't orthodox use instruments?
Well gee, how do you think people would react 2000 years ago if Jesus told them that 2000 years from then, they'd be allowed to use the internet in worship? The Bible doesn't tell us how to worship, it only tells us what to worship. There is no orthodox law or code we need to follow now -- The whole point of the crucifixion was to redeem mankind and to make God more easily approachable.
what were told to worship with is Fine, we don't add to what were told to do.
I once went to an event where several Christian music bands from various genres, including Skillet, performed. I think that's the kind of party z-whales had in mind.
Jesus also didn't tell us about the Internet. In worship he does tell us what to use, what not to use is everything else that's gotten into churches, again its not a heresy but a error. But not use them than. Why don't orthodox use instruments?
I finally pulled up a verse in Colossians that'll end this: Colossians 3:16.
"Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord."
Anyway, most of them don't use instruments simply as choice. I don't think they care one way or another.
But if it says that than why don't you use them? Also The Psalms aren't all instruments and used in they way many think.
South america is mostly dominated by America, we just got rid of some leaders there. Africa we tried but we don't care about Africans. Asia and Middle east were working on.
We don't really have any influence over South America. I wish we did, because most Latin American countries are either violent anarchies or have very low quality of living, but as it is we don't.
The reason we didn't care as much about Africa is because they didn't possess a direct threat to the US. The reason we attempted to make South America align with US interests is because at the time a lot of communist regimes backed by the USSR were emerging down there -- in some cases, even being provided with weapons by the USSR to strike against America. While similar regimes came about in Africa and we did try to stop them, they were not as high-priority as in South America.
I don't think we're actively working to change any regimes in Asia. With the naval force we have, we could easily overtake Asia or force a regime change if we wanted to.
Calm down, dude, he didn't say his were better than yours. Are you looking for a fight?
✠✙ What once was old doth fade away/But Former Glory stays the same ✙✠ •••Unity•••Duty•••DESTINY••• ***EST. 2006*** • 9/11/01 • BCC: 2010-2014 • EX-TER-MIN-ATE! –Dalek
I finally pulled up a verse in Colossians that'll end this: Colossians 3:16.
"Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord."
Anyway, most of them don't use instruments simply as choice. I don't think they care one way or another.
But if it says that than why don't you use them? Also The Psalms aren't all instruments and used in they way many think.
The Orthodox churches do liturgical services, so we actually are doing spiritual songs. Mine, the Coptic church, uses cymbals in addition to that.
I never said Psalms were instruments.
✠✙ What once was old doth fade away/But Former Glory stays the same ✙✠ •••Unity•••Duty•••DESTINY••• ***EST. 2006*** • 9/11/01 • BCC: 2010-2014 • EX-TER-MIN-ATE! –Dalek
