ISIS/Daesh's actions are terrible. The situation in the Middle East is complicated. I don't believe dropping bombs in Syria will change hearts and minds; stop terrorism or make people safer; lead to a lasting peace or create stable countries. Past evidence shows the exact opposite.
Opposing a "bomb now, think later" strategy in Syria does not a "terrorist sympathiser" make. (Morgan over at Morgan's Milieu unpacks this more here). This disrespectful remark and refusal to apologise reduces discussion to the level of "that's you, that is". All you needed was a "Your mum ..." joke to seal the deal. Newman and Baddiel doing "History Today" circa 1990.
The claims that there are 70,000 troops willing to fight ISIS/Daesh on the ground can probably be filed alongside "There are weapons of mass destruction" and "It'll be all over by Christmas". There weren't. It wasn't. Besides, I thought the UK was broke. There's no money for the NHS, welfare, education or ... But we've got money for bombs?!
There are other reasons I disagree with dropping bombs as well. In the words of Joe H, one of Rev T's friends:
"In complex times such as this we need to develop robust and imaginative diplomatic, economic and international solutions to what we all agree to be incredibly painful and challenging times. As such then we need to be a people of extravagant love, unbounded imagination and fearless creativity. We need to foster this, not only within ourselves, but in our children and future generations. Dropping bombs on other countries where their own future generations are killed creates the fear and hatred we all so desperately want to eradicate.
As Christians we follow the One who is called the Prince of Peace. At this time of Advent we are reminded that at the birth of Jesus some of the first words spoken were, ‘Peace on earth’. Indeed, at the resurrection of Jesus some of his first words to his disciples were, ‘Peace be with you.’ We believe then, that peace cannot be achieved through war but, following the example of Jesus, in radical enemy love and subversive acts of nonviolence; not fight or flight, not inaction, but, as Martin Luther King Jr said, through nonviolent actions that strip the oppressor of their power".
I don't believe the third or fourth criteria for a just war have been met. I don't believe bombing will make things better or that we've tried everything. We've not made a concerted effort to cut off their money supply or asked any ackward questions about where some of their funds come from. Please note, if you've stumbled across this post and you're military, I do not hold you responsible for this situation in any way. Once the orders are given, they have to be carried out. That's how it works. I hope if you've read this far, whatever you take away from this post, you take that. This situation is completely the responsibility of politicians.
As Christians we follow the One who is called the Prince of Peace. At this time of Advent we are reminded that at the birth of Jesus some of the first words spoken were, ‘Peace on earth’. Indeed, at the resurrection of Jesus some of his first words to his disciples were, ‘Peace be with you.’ We believe then, that peace cannot be achieved through war but, following the example of Jesus, in radical enemy love and subversive acts of nonviolence; not fight or flight, not inaction, but, as Martin Luther King Jr said, through nonviolent actions that strip the oppressor of their power".
There is a Facebook petition you can sign if you oppose bombing Syria and you're a Christian attending a Baptist Church.
Let me know what you think about this issue the comments. I appreciate not everyone reading this agrees with me. Many think the four just war criteria have been met and that bombing is the right thing to do:
- Is a legitimate authority taking the decision?.
- Is there a just cause for entering war?
- Does war offer the prospect of a better state of affairs for the oppressed?
- Is it a last resort?
I don't believe the third or fourth criteria for a just war have been met. I don't believe bombing will make things better or that we've tried everything. We've not made a concerted effort to cut off their money supply or asked any ackward questions about where some of their funds come from. Please note, if you've stumbled across this post and you're military, I do not hold you responsible for this situation in any way. Once the orders are given, they have to be carried out. That's how it works. I hope if you've read this far, whatever you take away from this post, you take that. This situation is completely the responsibility of politicians.
But, hopefully we can have a better standard of discussion than the one set by Cameron with no trolling. Thank you for reading and have a great week.
That's what scares me, the "weapons of mass destruction" thing - like you said, there weren't any. Yes it is complicated and everyone has their opinion. They're entitled to it. I'd be happy to listen to someone's reasonable arguments for this action but I'm afraid that nothing is going to make me think that bombing another middle-eastern country is a good idea.
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing this (and for the mention!).
xx
I'd be more convinced if there was an organised, united opposition and there was a plan for afterwards. But there isn't so all I can see the bombing creating is another failed state and more refugees that no one's (shamefully) willing to take in. Thanks for commenting
DeleteThe turnaround in his stance has worried me, from the I won't bomb, to we must bomb and a complete shift in direction. I don't understand politics (nor do I pretend to) but I don't see this ending well.
ReplyDeleteWell, it didn't end well the other times we tried it so why would this one be different. Thank you for hosting :)
Delete