Thursday, May 29, 2008

Marines Distributing Coins for Christ in Iraq

If you read the linked story you'll learn that this practice is causing unrest among the Iraqis. Of course it is! The US Marines should not be acting as christian missionaries (or any type of religious missionaries, for that matter). How could anyone think that this is going to work? And who is paying for the coins, I wonder? I bet it is us. I bet tax dollars are being used to create these monstrosities.



Our Illustrious Fucker of a President tells us this is not Christians vs. Muslims. That this is not a crusade. How the hell are the Muslims supposed to figure that out(if it IS true)!

What more can we do to put ourselves in a bad light with the rest of the world, especially those very different than ourselves.

And this leads me to a question. Could it be our "Christian" heritage(not to be confused with the much bandied about Christian Nation)which makes us seem so imperialistic? I realize other peoples of other faiths have had imperialistic episodes, but Christians seem to have a real problem with this.

coreydbarbarian said...

i'm guessing these coins were provided by someone's church back home - prolly evangelical.

of course, if you want coins distributed for a christian organization by the u.s. government, have you heard about the boy scout coins?

and bawdy, i think you're on to something. of course, the roman empire was pretty imperialistic by itself, then it merged with the catholic church...and ever since, they've been the dominant religion, so they've had ample opportunity to imperialize over the past 2000 years or so.

csm said...

Boy scout coins, huh? Had to search them out. Here is the link if interested. As most of you know, I don't like that the Boy Scouts exclude atheists and homosexuals, but still get government support and cash. I didn't see anything that shows the US gov distributing them, but it sure wouldn't surprise me to find out that they do.

coreydbarbarian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
coreydbarbarian said...

2nd verse, same as the 1st...

i've had some difficulty with a disappearing address bar, so posting links was tough. so,

try this.

maybe that'll work.

csm said...

Thanks, Corey, you've ruined a night's sleep for me.


coreydbarbarian said...

uhm, csm... that just sounds wrong.


as an organization, i'd be alright with the scouts if they could treat gays with respect.

but this crap with the coins, that makes me angry. even if the scouts started treating gays right, it'd be, well, crap.

sorry about your sleep, csm. i know how much you need your beauty rest. ;D

csm said...

Well, it wasn't meant as a command, if yanowutimean. I'd wouldn't be as hostile toward the BSA if they'd just stop it with taking government money. Go ahead, discriminate against atheists and gays, but no money from Uncle Sam then.

Anonymous said...

This sounds like a rationale approach. Get these jihadist converted to Christianity and we can solve this killing problem. First rule of a democracy is freedom of speech. No time like the present to learn this basic law of human rights.

Ceroill said...

Here's an update on the situation:

coreydbarbarian said...

"...First rule of a democracy is freedom of speech..."

-- tell that to socrates, anony-mouse.

Anony Mouse said...

Socrates is dead so i doubt he is listening. But i have posted for his review. If it somehow makes me a braver poster I'll add a moniker.

Anony Mouse said...

Bravery? Don't know how a moniker makes you brave, especially when anyone can steal it the way you went about it.

coreydbarbarian said...

anony mouse numero uno,

socrates was put to death in a democracy, for little more than practicing freedom of speech. that might be part of the reason we live in a democratic republic, not a democracy.

2 tell ya the truth, your whole 1st post was sheer nonsense.


That is why he/she(just covering all the bases)posts as anonymous.

coreydbarbarian said...

here's an update on the story:
sounds like more than a few coins, now.

Anony Mouse said...

With the moniker I agree but you have others here who do not. Somehow adding a ridiculous moniker like barbarian or CSM makes one more accountable.
As for Iraq, I'm not sure why some philosopher who died 2,500 years is integral for freedom of speech in Iraq. Many more instance of individuals killed for freedom of speech in the last recent years. Are you trying to imply that freedom of speech is not a right of all human beings? Do you even have a point? And as for democracy and republic the terms are used interchangeably now days. Don't be a nit picker. But since you do; going back to Aristotle we would actually be a democratic-republic. In addition a representative democracy is a republic.

I thought your whole post was just plain irrelevant and off the mark. So much for opinion CB.


We are a Republic of Free States.

Anonymous usage is a bad thing because of the coward connotation and the fact two can use it at the same time. Any ol' name can hide an identity, but anonymous is annoying.

coreydbarbarian said...

not to mention respectability. if you want us to take your comments seriously, then join the discussion as an equal.

pick a name, stick with it, and build a reputation on the blog.

if you can't understand why exchanging names (even silly ones) is integral to establishing and maintaining mutual respect, i really can't help you.

do i even have a point? sure.
my point is that posts like this "This sounds like a rationale approach. Get these jihadist converted to Christianity and we can solve this killing problem. First rule of a democracy is freedom of speech. No time like the present to learn this basic law of human rights." are sheer nonsense.

you confuse average iraqi citizens for jihadists, consider christian conversion of iraqis as a viable goal of the u.s., implying that it is their religion that makes them upset (as opposed to the u.s. invasion and subsequent occupation), assert the first amendment as the cornerstone of democracy, and even as the cornerstone of human rights.

each assertion and/or implication is so profoundly off-base and wrong-headed, i can't bring myself to even pretend it is a serious post.

csm said...

And it makes sense when you pick a moniker to use the Blogger tools to get a password so that others cannot co-opt it.

Anony Mouse said...

Well Coreydbarbarian you miss the point so I'll slow it down for you. Barbarians are not typically known for their quick wittedness. First, the average Iraqi is not killing Americans and we are all well aware of that, however the jihadists are. They refer to this as jihad because it IS a religious war to them. Their killing is hardly confined to Iraq or Americans. What ever turns them from their stupid killings is welcome in my book. Maybe they get a coin and become a Christian who knows.

Second, the conversion you refer to is my point on freedom of speech. Any hopes of turning this medieval culture into a present day democracy will ride on freedom to speak without fear of beheading. Outrage over a stupid coin with Christ on it is sheer nonsense and medieval stupidity. Will they continue to execute atheist and christians when we leave? Will the empowered continue to run their rape rooms and continue to treat women as property? If that is nonsense then welcome to the land of nonsense.

You guys find a moniker to be important and I respect that. I do not find them to be of any use nor are they a mark of respectability especially when barbarian is in the root.

Lou said...

Never confuse a theocracy with a democracy. Democracy in Iraq will in no way resemble that of the US. But if a coin can stop the violence we should dump them by the cargo plane loads.


An agreement between Iran and the U.S. will stop the violence. Even though many parts of each country are denying talks are taking place and both governments take pot shots at the other; talks are happening(though at a slower pace lately).

coreydbarbarian said...

lou said: "...if a coin can stop the violence..."

good luck with that. this coin seems more likely to incite violence in the region.

i agree with your post though. (theocracy is not democracy, and an iraqi democracy will look different than a u.s. democracy).

i'm starting to believe, however, that we can't spread democracy by anything more than example.

and bawdy, you might call me a dreamer (why not, everyone else does?), but it felt like iran was "with" us going into afghanistan, and we (read: dubya & co.) squandered it. i often wonder which mistakes will have the most resounding effects in the future. gotta think this might be in bush's top five somewhere...



You are 100% correct, we need to TRY to spread democracy to the world by example. Will the world become totally democratic? Probably not, Russia seems to like having a strong hand controlling the country; historically they seem to like security over freedom; this stems from their geographic location(have you ever played Risk and tried to defend Asia). Of course, we need to keep our own democratic house neat an clean before we can hold ourselves up as a paragon of democracy.

You are also correct in your "Iran was with us in the beginning" statement. They had their reasons; they wanted Sadaam out of Iraq as much or more than we did. Bush did their dirty work and Iran pulled many strings to get us to do it too. Much of the so-called "faulty intelligence" was provided by Iran.

I personally think we need to talk to Iran and recognize the fact they are here to stay, a regional power. This crap coming from the McCain camp about Obama wanting to talk to the Iranians is extremely short-sighted. Besides we ARE talking to Iran. Actually everybody over there is talking to each other. Israel with Fatah. Israel with the Syrians through Turkey. U.S. with Saudia Arabia about Iran. Egypt with Hamas. Turkey with Iran about the Kurds. On and on. As long as there is talking peace has a chance. One more advantage to talking with your "enemy" is that you can acquire intelligence on them; that is pretty hard to do if you aren't getting into the opposition's country. The enemy you know is easier to deal with than the enemy you don't. And actually, I think in a decade or two we might even be on pretty good terms with Iran, especially if the Shia and the Sunnis could bury the hatchet(there is that ol' bugaboo religion again).

As far as being in Muff's top five it can be consolidated into one fuck-up category, using a sledgehammer for diplomacy all over this world!