You sure do throw around could be dead a lot. Pity you haven't sacrificed yourself yet.

Nor have you Steve so what's the point?

As for these "Peacemakers" I have to ask them, did they do their job? I mean did they live up to their name? Did they make any peace out there?

I'm all for them trying to go out there and do "non-violence" in a violent area. I actually have more respect for these peace guys because they have the guts to go over there and try to pull the same stuff they do here unlike many of our "peacemaker" friends. But to go over there, get captured, and then become rescued and balme it all on the troops and the president? Come on now.

Granted, it's difficult do be a peacemaker when your fellow men are making war all around you.
And, granted, most great peacemakers end up like Fox. Christ and Gandhi, to mention two, were also killed.
But war does not make peace, either, unless it is the peace of the graveyard. People who hate each other never live together in peace.
America has four choices in the Middle East.
1) Pull out and live with the threat of terrorist attacks forever.
2) Maintain a military presence in the Middle East forever, or at least until the US runs out of money and volunteers.
3) Genocide.
4) Make peace.

If there is a fifth choice, do tell.

Mark, so true. It is strange how history can repeat itself. Our generation looks back at 1936 and wonder how hitler was not stopped. How could the chamberleins, appeasers and peacenicks not have realized the danger and evil that hitler represented. Now we know, because those chamberleins, appeasers and peaceniks exist today. Thank God we also have our Winston Churchill in the form of President George W. Bush.

The military never makes peace. The politicians do.

I find that those who casually label others (fool, for example) tend to over-simplify themselves and the world around them. I doubt you can back up your claim that the Christian Peacekeepers (sans quotes) actually caused more war. However, if you can, I'd like to see it.

Lastly, I believe Steve's point above is pretty clear, if one is not defensive. If you advocate the actions in Iraq and you are of age and able-bodied, then put yourself in a position to actually risk something for it's success. Typing on a blog and degrading those with whom you disagree is not risking anything.

God sent heroes to rescue these morons.

To make peace: Option #5. Topple the Middle East dictators and convert the people to Christianity. Anything short of that will just result in endless war.

Lastly, I believe Steve's point above is pretty clear, if one is not defensive. If you advocate the actions in Iraq and you are of age and able-bodied, then put yourself in a position to actually risk something for it's success. Typing on a blog and degrading those with whom you disagree is not risking anything.

Ah Dorita, nice to meet ya. I don't think I've replied to any of your comments yet so here goes.

In case you didn't realize it, this agrument has been around for quite some time. We've heard it every time we've mentioned fighting and have responded in kind every time. Let me give you the nice answer. (Since I'm sure others might jump on you, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt.) Steve knows this answer already so that's why I asked him his point.

First off, many of us posting here have servered or are serving. Some are beyond service age or in my case not physically able to do so. (I didn't pass the physical requirements) Does that make our comments and opinions any less substansive? No, neither does you not going over to Iraq or to a protest or anything like that prevent you from commenting on them either.

It's like saying you can't comment on politicians unless you are or were one. Or not being able to comment on the police or local crime rates unless you were/are a cop or criminal. No, it's a straw man and hence why I assumed Steve didn't mean that. Steve is a regular here so I know he must have meant something other than this tired argument that doesn't hold water.

You can support the war in so many ways it's not even funny. In fact you couldn't even have a military without those who weren't serving in it. Just like you can disagree with the war without having to go over there and try to stop it, or run for office.

The military never makes peace. The politicians do.

I'll agree with you there. It's not the military's job to make peace, it's to win battles and wars. Their simple mandate? To kill people and break things. That's all it's there for. A lasting peace takes lots of things, but just standing around and saying, "I want to be your friend" won't work either. Tom is proof of that, he went over there and offered no resistance. They killed him anyway.

Steve,

As the grandson, son and nephew of warriors who have fought and bled for this nation, and as a former servicemember myself, my conscience is clear...

Hick,

You have noble sentiments, but they are not grounded in reality.

The first thing to remember is that peace is not the mere absence of war - it is a sense of security that war is not likely. By this definition, there hasn't been peace in the world since 1914.

The next thing to realise is that wars only start when both sides think they can win - and they go on until at least one side is convinced that victory is impossible. You cannot make peace until at least one side admits that victory is unattainable. If you try to make peace absent such a thing, then all you are really doing is constructing a truce, which will be broken at a later date.

We are at war - and the war will go on until we or the enemy are convinced that victory is impossible. You can say "make peace" all you want, but the two sides can't make peace, yet - you see, their goals are irreconcilable. Our goal is a world of freedom - their goal is a world of their brand of Islam...one goal or the other will be met, but both cannot be, and there can be no compromise between the two goals.

We will keep fighting this war until the enemy realises that he cannot win - and then there will be peace...and the only peace acceptable to us: one entirely on our terms.

James,

By my count, the "peacemakers" of the 20th century set the stage for at least 150 million deaths...my job, as I see it, is to ensure that the 21st century doesn't have such a calamity.

"You have heard it said, "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." "But I say to you, do not resist him who is evil, but whoever slaps you on the right cheek turn to him the other also." Matthew 5:38

"You have heard it said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy".
But I say unto you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you in order that you may be sons
of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil
and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous.
For if you love those who love you , what reward have you? Do not the tax gatherers do the same? And if you greet your brothers only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?" Matthew 5:43-48

In the Book "Getting to Yes", a successful negotiations requires that each side know what they are willing to give up and where they draw the line. If the terrorist's bottom line is the nonarab-world's total annihilation, the peacemaker is like the Egyptian slave that becomes the mortar in the building of the pyramids - insignificant and dangerous. There can be no negotiations with people/animals that want all Christians and Jews to die a wretched death.
Watching the movie "Independence Day" this week is a good analogy of peacmaking. The peaceniks were standing on top of the skyscraper with signs of peace with the aliens. They were the first to be obliterated. The war ended when the USA destroyed in totality the enemy of the world. (By the way, this is the only time Holywood gets it right.)

Looks like we are going to have to Censure the military that rescued them

As efforts were made to open negotiations, the SAS and MI6 tried to get a lead on the kidnappers by studying hostage videos released to Arab TV stations, while eavesdropping teams from the Intelligence Corps attempted to intercept mobile phone calls.

Acting on this, the SAS was able to launch a snatch raid on Wednesday night to seize two of the kidnappers or their associates. It seems that the prisoners were "persuaded" to give up information on the whereabouts of the hostages. This might have been done with the offer of a financial inducement or the use of some of the more extreme interrogation techniques criticised by human rights groups.

I reccommend the firing squad for taking away those poor kidnappers rights

Gozer wins for best post and coherent argument.
Steve and Dorita remind me so much of the ungrateful among us, who we must protect from those who would kill all of us.

Slaw,

Nearly every day I pray that the hearts of our enemies be opened to love and peace. I want this war to be over - but my knowledge tells me that they won't quit until they are forced to do so.

If I remember correctly, the Jesuits did study a while back and could not find one single day in recorded history where the world was "at peace". Could be wrong, just something I remember.

I thought it was funny the way these "peacemakers" attacked their rescuers. I'd take em back, tie em up again, and leave.

Mark,

Why did you quit? You didn't rejoin when our country was viciously attacked by a brutal and evil ideology? War was declared on our nation and though you have the necessary skills and will to defend it you do not offer up yourself as sacrifice.
May I ask when and where you served? Were you in a combat position? Ever choose which of the soldiers under your command would be dying and which would be going home to see their children and wives? Which parents would cry on monday and which would be relieved after a phone call? Saying things like "for only a few thousand" denegrates that all of the soldiers are people, and don't deserve to die unless the failure to do so would kill our citizens. I just think you talk of people laying down their lives in a typical christian way, laying aside that life is the most precious thing we have, and the only thing we have.

Mark, your prayers need to be backed up by action, otherwise they are hypocritical and insincere.

If I pray for my garden to grow, then burn it to the ground and sow the soil with salt, are my prayers sincere?

When you pray for your enemies, and then do your best to blow them apart - is that really a sincere prayer?

The true prayer for your enemies, "father, forgive them," is followed by a selfless sacrifice to accomplish that prayer. By loving our enemies, and dying to save them, we imitate Christ.

"Blessed are the peacemakers, they shall be called sons of God."

The Son of God died to save his enemies. That is how he makes peace - through forgiveness and mercy shown to those who don't deserve either.

God bless, and peace...

Amen

Steve,

May I ask where you have protested? May I ask what sacrifices you have made to keep the evil war machine in check??? Have you laid down in front of tanks?? Since your so quick to demand the resumes of others, I'd love to hear yours.

It doesn't matter what kind of job he held in the military, if he was in the military he was serving his country. Plenty of military personnel die in peace time as well, it's a dangerous job. I for one thank all veterans for their service, regardless of what their assignment was. They are true heroes, always have been and always will be.

I haven't made any sacrifices, I'm not the one advocating anything. Mark said it would be good to sacrific "a few thousand" in order to prevent a possible loss of life, something I think is disgusting. That's all I'm saying Ken.

Hick, one thing tho about Jesus. He specifically told his followers not to save him from the Romans that eventually led Him to the cross. He expected this.

However, did the Christian peacemakers specifically tell their friends and families, and the military, that they do not want to be rescued if they get kidnapped by terrorists? A request specifically outlined to prevent possible bloodshed, other than own, to their terrorist kidnappers/friends and U.S. soldiers/enemies who would in fact risk their lives to try and save them? Did these Christian peacemakers tell their friends and families not to pay ransom as well? Did they NOT want to be rescued in the first place? How much did they pray while captured that they'll get out somehow?

Honestly, really. Let's not get into the comparison of Jesus and Gandhi. It's apparent that these Christian peacemakers wanted to be rescued or at least get out of their predictment that they have gotten themselves in the first place. Utter sheer stupidity. Make a will next time so that US soldiers won't waste their time, the necks and their lives in rescuing foolhardy and very stupid "peacemakers" who are intent on going to Iraq.

"Mr Kember: 'I am delighted to be free and reunited with my family' " - obviously glad that he was out of that scary predictament.

Kember says no thanks to rescuers - US soldiers.

Maybe it's time for the US Forces start billing ungrateful hostages for the cost incurred in rescuing them. I'm serious.

mcconnell, it is my understanding that the peacekeepers specifically did not want anyone to risk his/her life to rescue them. I'll track that down and find a link if you wish, but I might not check back here for a couple of days.

Your attitude reminds me of how so many, including the President, resented anyone in Iraq who did not thank them for what they chose to do in Iraq.

Are you all simply angry that you didn't get a thank you? I am fairly certain that the soldiers who found and untied the peacemakers got a thank you from them. That the group as a whole didn't thank the US government seems to be the most troubling point.

Anyone want to wager how long it will be before Cindy Sheehan enters stage left (of course) to meet and greet the ungrateful "Christian Peacemakers?" After all, once you've had fifteen minutes of fame, it's difficult to watch the spotlight pan over to the next participant...

I find it hard to believe that these ungrateful wretches won't hold themselves accountable for their singular act of stupidity by inserting themselves into a war zone to purposefully be caught up in the drama.

I suspect their usefullness to the antique media has peaked, now that they are no longer a cause celebre. The media will move on to the next pawn, and the right-thinking among us will be subjected to yet another frivolous and pointless display of "dissent" against this "unjust and illegal" war...