Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

war vs. peace

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Michael,

Have you ever read Ramsey Clark's book " The Fire This Time " about the gulf war.

We, the US killed thousands upon thoudands of civilians knowingly. Many died

after that war due to lack of medical supplies and clean water. Is this

justified? Shall we go get the N. Korean leader next? and then Indonesia's

corrupt leader? How about the dictator in Myanmar. He makes Sadaam look almost

saintly. Iraq was a progressive third world country with modern facilities

before we went in to the first Gulf War. Even a vast number of rural areas had

indoor plumbing and electricty. You won't find this in many other third world

countries with brutal dictatorships. We don't care much about those though

because they don't have the natural resources we want. I don't like Sadaam

either. The fact that he didn't choose exile means he didn't care enough about

protecting his people. So I know he lacks compassion. But lets be real.

The current administration could care less about the Iraqi people. Oil is the

game. I respectfully disagree with you about this war, Michael. Pegasus

 

-

frandoch

Saturday, March 22, 2003 4:22 AM

[CrystalHW] Re: Universal Haven OUR LOVED ONES

 

 

Hi there,

 

Please read this right through.

 

Love and Light

 

Michael.

 

The Second Gulf War

 

The UK is involved in the invasion of Iraq. There have been very powerful

arguments put forward against this war - from the UN, from Europe, from

France, Germany, Russia, China to name but a few. It has divided this

nation, right down to individual families, and as always in war, it will be

the innocent on both sides who pay the price.

 

This post will probably make me very unpopular with some of you, but there

has been so much misinformation put out by governments, and by sections of

the media, that when I read some of the posts on this and other forums, I

feel that some balance might help.

 

First some background about me. I hate war. I think it is obscene. There

is no glory in it - except the glory of those who fight it.

 

I was a child during the Second World War. I lost family or friends in that

war, in the Korean War and in the Northern Ireland 'war'. As a child I lived

in Portsmouth, the premier naval port, which suffered dreadful bombing. I

spent many cold, dark, wet nights huddled in a tin shelter covered with earth

and grass, as bombs rained down around us. Nearby houses were destroyed.

Large parts of the city were reduced to rubble. Many thousands died.

 

I also served in the military. I was lucky. The day before I was due to go

and fight in the Suez War, it was called off. But I was involved in some

difficult and frightening situations.

 

The reason for telling you this is that I want you to accept that I know war.

I've been there. That's why I hate it. That's why I know that it's

unnecessary, if only we could accept that we are all one; that what we do to

others we do to ourselves. But we're not there, yet. But I have faith that

we are getting there.

 

With a heavy heart, I want to explain to you why I believe that we must deal

with the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, and why I believe that military

action is the only way.

 

We have been misled by our leaders. The case put forward in support of this

war doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

 

The UN Weapons Inspectors were achieving some cooperation from Iraq, so why

not give them more time. Iraq is the size of France - four times the size

of this country. There were 100 Inspectors. 6000 litres of anthrax and 8000

litres of nerve gas could be stored in an average house - or split up into

small batches and spread around the country. His missiles could be hidden in

a small warehouse, or in underground facilities, of which there are many,

many we don't know about. There is a lot of evidence that he has been

exporting his weapons to friendly Arab states.

 

Saddam has been refusing to obey UN Resolutions for 12 years. (I know he's

not the only one; can we leave that argument for another post?) When pushed

to the brink, he always allows something to discovered, something he had

'forgotten'. He is a master of brinkmanship. He is not a rational man. He

gassed 5000 of his own people in one day in the north. He has drained the

marshes in the south, which were essential for the Marsh Arabs to survive.

He has butchered tens of thousands of his own people. He has butchered

members of his own family who dared to question him. He denies having Scud

missiles, and yet was firing them overnight towards our military bases in

Kuwait.

 

He is quite capable of carrying out chemical and biological attacks on his

own people, and blaming us. He will probably release vast quantities of crude

oil into the Gulf as he did in the last Gulf War, if he can, destroying not

only marine life, but also the land of nations around the Gulf, causing

starvation amongst their peoples. Saddam Hussein has no concern for human

life. His sole interest is his survival and power. If he has to die, he

will take as many with him as he possibly can.

 

I could go on and on about this man and what he has done to his people and to

Iran, and to Kuwait, but I want to keep this as short as possible. The

arguments can go back and forth. There is no black and white here, just a

range of greys.

 

So let me put, what I believe, is the reason why have to take military action

against this evil man. Left to his own devices, whatever measures we take to

contain him, there is a wealth of evidence that within two years, he will

have nuclear weapons, and the means to deliver them.

 

His first target will probably be Israel. If he fires a nuclear weapon at

Israel, Israel will probably fire ten back. We will be in a nuclear war.

Some say that a 'limited' nuclear war may be what this planet needs to wake

it up to the horror of these weapons. That the last time anything like this

happened was in 1945 when two atomic bombs were dropped on Japan, causing

horrific devastation and death; that the effects of those bombs is still

being felt in the children and grandchildren of the survivors. There is some

justification for this point of view. But there is no such thing as a

limited nuclear war. And those atomic bombs were mere firecrackers compared

to the nuclear weapons of today. The only thing limited about a nuclear war

is that it will be limited to this planet.

 

When the nuclear power station in Chernobyl, Russia, exploded some years ago,

a cloud of radioactive dust blew across Europe and the UK. There is still

farmland in this country that cannot be farmed for decades, even centuries,

because of contamination. And remember that the air circulates around the

planet in about 48 hours.

 

Yes, we've been misled, and yes, war is horrible, but I sincerely believe

that it is necessary; that unless we deal with this situation now, we will

have to deal with an infinitely worse one in a few years' time. The UN has

proved itself unwilling to enforce its mandates. It's no good threatening to

take action unless you are prepared to carry it out. I know that this war is

a response to Sept 11, and that the case put forward to justify it is

questionable, but there is a growing 'alliance of the willing', nations who

are prepared to draw the line and say 'so far, no further'. We face difficult

times, when terrorism will have terrifying weapons at its disposal. Unless

free nations are prepared to stand up and be counted, to protect that

freedom, then I believe that we risk wiping humanity from the face of this

planet, which would probably be a good thing from the planet's point of view.

 

But I also know that there is a wave of spiritual awakening spreading across

our beautiful planet. And I am proud of those children who are prepared to

defy us, and walk out of schools and colleges in protest at the stupidity of

their elders. They are the future, and I have high hopes of them. But in the

meantime, I believe that we, their elders, have got to start putting right

some of our mistakes, at whatever cost.

 

I am very sad that innocent people on both sides will die; that families on

both sides will grieve.

 

My heartfelt sympathy and love goes out to all the wives and families of

those who are, at this moment, risking their lives to protect us, I pray they

return safely. I shall have a light in my window.

 

Love and Light (sadly no laughter)

 

Michael.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Pegasus

 

Thank you for your reply.

 

> Have you ever read Ramsey Clark's book " The Fire This Time " about

the gulf war.

 

No. I will look for it.

 

> We, the US killed thousands upon thoudands of civilians knowingly.

Many died after that war due to lack of medical supplies and clean

water. Is this justified?

 

No, it is not justified.

 

>Shall we go get the N. Korean leader next?

 

We may have to. The countries in that region are running very scared

of N Korea, especially Japan. N Korea has been 'testing' cruise

missiles (Chinese)across the Sea of Japan, towards Japan , and N

Korea has nuclear weapons, and the means of delivery. It has been

suggested that N Korea is upping the ante so as to get massive aid

from the US. I hope that's the reason.

 

> Iraq was a progressive third world country with modern facilities

before we went in to the first Gulf War. Even a vast number of rural

areas had indoor plumbing and electricty. You won't find this in many

other third world countries with brutal dictatorships. We don't care

much about those though because they don't have the natural resources

we want.

 

True.

 

> The current administration could care less about the Iraqi people.

Oil is the game.

 

You may very well be right. I hope you're wrong. If the leaders of

the Alliance of the Willing walk away and leave Iraq after this war

then they deserve all they get. Unfortunately, as ever, it will be

the innocent who will pay for that betrayal. But if, as I hope, they

honour their word, then perhaps, just perhaps, we may actually be

moving forwards at last. I pray we are.

 

>I respectfully disagree with you about this war,

 

Thank you for your 'respectfully'. You have the absolute right to

disagree with me.

 

May I pose a gentle question? In all the opposition to my sadly held

view, from various groups and forums and people I talk to, no-one has

ever offered a viable alternative. It's fine to say I'm wrong -

but it would be constructive to end that criticism with a statement

of how it should be. If you have an alternative to deal with the

problems we face, please tell me. I would welcome it, and I would

post it everywhere.

 

Michael.

 

, " Peg R "

<pegsram@n...> wrote:

> Michael,

> Have you ever read Ramsey Clark's book " The Fire This Time " about

the gulf war. We, the US killed thousands upon thoudands of civilians

knowingly. Many died after that war due to lack of medical supplies

and clean water. Is this justified? Shall we go get the N. Korean

leader next? and then Indonesia's corrupt leader? How about the

dictator in Myanmar. He makes Sadaam look almost saintly. Iraq was a

progressive third world country with modern facilities before we went

in to the first Gulf War. Even a vast number of rural areas had

indoor plumbing and electricty. You won't find this in many other

third world countries with brutal dictatorships. We don't care much

about those though because they don't have the natural resources we

want. I don't like Sadaam either. The fact that he didn't choose

exile means he didn't care enough about protecting his people. So I

know he lacks compassion. But lets be real.

> The current administration could care less about the Iraqi people.

Oil is the game. I respectfully disagree with you about this war,

Michael. Pegasus

>

> -

> frandoch@a...

>

> Saturday, March 22, 2003 4:22 AM

> [CrystalHW] Re: Universal Haven OUR LOVED ONES

>

>

> Hi there,

>

> Please read this right through.

>

> Love and Light

>

> Michael.

>

> The Second Gulf War

>

> The UK is involved in the invasion of Iraq. There have been very

powerful

> arguments put forward against this war - from the UN, from

Europe, from

> France, Germany, Russia, China to name but a few. It has divided

this

> nation, right down to individual families, and as always in war,

it will be

> the innocent on both sides who pay the price.

>

> This post will probably make me very unpopular with some of you,

but there

> has been so much misinformation put out by governments, and by

sections of

> the media, that when I read some of the posts on this and other

forums, I

> feel that some balance might help.

>

> First some background about me. I hate war. I think it is

obscene. There

> is no glory in it - except the glory of those who fight it.

>

> I was a child during the Second World War. I lost family or

friends in that

> war, in the Korean War and in the Northern Ireland 'war'. As a

child I lived

> in Portsmouth, the premier naval port, which suffered dreadful

bombing. I

> spent many cold, dark, wet nights huddled in a tin shelter

covered with earth

> and grass, as bombs rained down around us. Nearby houses were

destroyed.

> Large parts of the city were reduced to rubble. Many thousands

died.

>

> I also served in the military. I was lucky. The day before I was

due to go

> and fight in the Suez War, it was called off. But I was involved

in some

> difficult and frightening situations.

>

> The reason for telling you this is that I want you to accept that

I know war.

> I've been there. That's why I hate it. That's why I know that

it's

> unnecessary, if only we could accept that we are all one; that

what we do to

> others we do to ourselves. But we're not there, yet. But I have

faith that

> we are getting there.

>

> With a heavy heart, I want to explain to you why I believe that

we must deal

> with the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, and why I believe that

military

> action is the only way.

>

> We have been misled by our leaders. The case put forward in

support of this

> war doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

>

> The UN Weapons Inspectors were achieving some cooperation from

Iraq, so why

> not give them more time. Iraq is the size of France - four

times the size

> of this country. There were 100 Inspectors. 6000 litres of

anthrax and 8000

> litres of nerve gas could be stored in an average house - or

split up into

> small batches and spread around the country. His missiles could

be hidden in

> a small warehouse, or in underground facilities, of which there

are many,

> many we don't know about. There is a lot of evidence that he has

been

> exporting his weapons to friendly Arab states.

>

> Saddam has been refusing to obey UN Resolutions for 12 years. (I

know he's

> not the only one; can we leave that argument for another post?)

When pushed

> to the brink, he always allows something to discovered, something

he had

> 'forgotten'. He is a master of brinkmanship. He is not a

rational man. He

> gassed 5000 of his own people in one day in the north. He has

drained the

> marshes in the south, which were essential for the Marsh Arabs to

survive.

> He has butchered tens of thousands of his own people. He has

butchered

> members of his own family who dared to question him. He denies

having Scud

> missiles, and yet was firing them overnight towards our military

bases in

> Kuwait.

>

> He is quite capable of carrying out chemical and biological

attacks on his

> own people, and blaming us. He will probably release vast

quantities of crude

> oil into the Gulf as he did in the last Gulf War, if he can,

destroying not

> only marine life, but also the land of nations around the Gulf,

causing

> starvation amongst their peoples. Saddam Hussein has no concern

for human

> life. His sole interest is his survival and power. If he has to

die, he

> will take as many with him as he possibly can.

>

> I could go on and on about this man and what he has done to his

people and to

> Iran, and to Kuwait, but I want to keep this as short as

possible. The

> arguments can go back and forth. There is no black and white

here, just a

> range of greys.

>

> So let me put, what I believe, is the reason why have to take

military action

> against this evil man. Left to his own devices, whatever

measures we take to

> contain him, there is a wealth of evidence that within two years,

he will

> have nuclear weapons, and the means to deliver them.

>

> His first target will probably be Israel. If he fires a nuclear

weapon at

> Israel, Israel will probably fire ten back. We will be in a

nuclear war.

> Some say that a 'limited' nuclear war may be what this planet

needs to wake

> it up to the horror of these weapons. That the last time anything

like this

> happened was in 1945 when two atomic bombs were dropped on Japan,

causing

> horrific devastation and death; that the effects of those bombs

is still

> being felt in the children and grandchildren of the survivors.

There is some

> justification for this point of view. But there is no such thing

as a

> limited nuclear war. And those atomic bombs were mere

firecrackers compared

> to the nuclear weapons of today. The only thing limited about a

nuclear war

> is that it will be limited to this planet.

>

> When the nuclear power station in Chernobyl, Russia, exploded

some years ago,

> a cloud of radioactive dust blew across Europe and the UK. There

is still

> farmland in this country that cannot be farmed for decades, even

centuries,

> because of contamination. And remember that the air circulates

around the

> planet in about 48 hours.

>

> Yes, we've been misled, and yes, war is horrible, but I sincerely

believe

> that it is necessary; that unless we deal with this situation

now, we will

> have to deal with an infinitely worse one in a few years' time.

The UN has

> proved itself unwilling to enforce its mandates. It's no good

threatening to

> take action unless you are prepared to carry it out. I know that

this war is

> a response to Sept 11, and that the case put forward to justify

it is

> questionable, but there is a growing 'alliance of the willing',

nations who

> are prepared to draw the line and say 'so far, no further'. We

face difficult

> times, when terrorism will have terrifying weapons at its

disposal. Unless

> free nations are prepared to stand up and be counted, to protect

that

> freedom, then I believe that we risk wiping humanity from the

face of this

> planet, which would probably be a good thing from the planet's

point of view.

>

> But I also know that there is a wave of spiritual awakening

spreading across

> our beautiful planet. And I am proud of those children who are

prepared to

> defy us, and walk out of schools and colleges in protest at the

stupidity of

> their elders. They are the future, and I have high hopes of

them. But in the

> meantime, I believe that we, their elders, have got to start

putting right

> some of our mistakes, at whatever cost.

>

> I am very sad that innocent people on both sides will die; that

families on

> both sides will grieve.

>

> My heartfelt sympathy and love goes out to all the wives and

families of

> those who are, at this moment, risking their lives to protect us,

I pray they

> return safely. I shall have a light in my window.

>

> Love and Light (sadly no laughter)

>

> Michael.

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

In a message dated 3/23/03 2:17:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, frandoch

writes:

 

<<

May I pose a gentle question? In all the opposition to my sadly held

view, from various groups and forums and people I talk to, no-one has

ever offered a viable alternative. It's fine to say I'm wrong -

but it would be constructive to end that criticism with a statement

of how it should be. If you have an alternative to deal with the

problems we face, please tell me. I would welcome it, and I would

post it everywhere.

 

Michael.

 

>>

Dear Michael,

 

Once again many words of wisdom flow from your keyboard. Are you related to

me and my husband?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Michael said:

May I pose a gentle question? In all the opposition to my sadly held

view, from various groups and forums and people I talk to, no-one has

ever offered a viable alternative.

 

 

One suggestion is not to attack unless attacked. There is also the approach

taken by Gandhi and Martin Luther King. The US is the wealthiest, most powerful

nation. What if we had set the precedent of compassion and forgiveness instead

of premptive strike? What if we had agreed to put Osama bin Laden on trial in an

international court of law instead of seeking him down to kill him? I wish the

American government had looked at more options in both the 911 scenario and this

war. I wish the people in government trusted more in the Universe. This morning

on the NY times website I saw a photo of a toddler with the side of her face

burned from the coalition's bombing. She will be scarred for the rest of her

life. How can we justify this?? Thanks for letting me voice my feelings. Pegasus

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Micheal,

You wrote:

I was a child during the Second World War. I lost family or friends in

that

> war, in the Korean War and in the Northern Ireland 'war'. As a child I lived

> in Portsmouth, the premier naval port, which suffered dreadful bombing. I

> spent many cold, dark, wet nights huddled in a tin shelter covered with

earth

> and grass, as bombs rained down around us. Nearby houses were destroyed.

> Large parts of the city were reduced to rubble. Many thousands died.

Now the same thing is happening in Iraq.They are faced all these disasters

in their own land.We must be sorry for them too as well as your countries'

children.

You wrote:

> Saddam has been refusing to obey UN Resolutions for 12 years. (I know he's

> not the only one; can we leave that argument for another post?)

Why do we leave that argument.That is the case.There are many countries

including US and Israel at the top of the list.How and why can a person in

your level treat differently .Besides,

who do you think have the invoices of the weapons(if still there are

any;until now,Iraq did not use any nuclear weapon) which are sold to Iraq to

use against Iran ,who do you think sold all weapons to El Kaide and Afhgan

people to fight against Russia. Who do you think made meetings with the

participation of Oil companies,International Banking Leaders and army

officers in Washington,DC. six months before now about the distribution of

oil revenues.Do you know the partners or bigger shareholders of the

companies which are selected to build for war and rebuild after war.

 

Can you tell me that if someone from a far country comes to your house and

tells you " from now on i will administer you.I will put the rules for thirty

years to bring democracy to your household.These are the articles of the

Capitulation you will accept.After now i will do the harvest in your garden

and give you what i decide. " He will bring his family flag and will put it in

front of your house. "

Can you tell me now what US and UK are doing in other's land.Why UK dealt

with Suez Channel and before India.What is US doing now in Afhganistan.These

are all for national resources.So called powerful countries are trying to

get national resources of other countries who are gifted by God for some

period.

You wrote: He is quite capable of carrying out chemical and biological

attacks on his

> own people, and blaming us. He will probably release vast quantities of

crude

> oil into the Gulf as he did in the last Gulf War, if he can, destroying not

> only marine life, but also the land of nations around the Gulf, causing

> starvation amongst their peoples.

If this happens,who do you think is the guilty. Who forces it.

You wrote: Saddam Hussein has no concern for human

life.

Do US and UK have any concern for Irak people's life.Do you know how many

were killed in 1991.

 

You wrote: I could go on and on about this man and what he has done to his

people

Dear Micheal,maybe in near future we will see what US made its people .

You wrote: there is a wealth of evidence that within two years, he will

have nuclear weapons, and the means to deliver them.

Who do you think will sell those weapons.Why those nations are not offended

to produce and sell these chemical and biological weapons as well as nuclear

ones.

You wrote: I know that this war is

> a response to Sept 11,

Do you really believe in that.Everyone knows that US has only 50 years oil

deposit.Iraq is the second biggest oil producer (first is Saudi

Arabia).Everybody easily say nowadays that after Iraq's invasion US will

direct to Iran.I myself read in one speech of an American congressman who

was though against war talking about Saudi government as " puppet

government " .Whose puppet.If Saudis know it ,will they like it.

Please keep in mind that oil market began to turn to Euro instead of US

dollar which effects US trade who have a large dollar emission.

 

You wrote: But I also know that there is a wave of spiritual awakening

spreading across

> our beautiful planet.

I believe in that.

And I am proud of those children .

I am proud of children too.However as far as there will be adults who

prepare school books with putting seeds of hostile ideas against

races,nations,religious the world peace will come very slowly.

You wrote: My heartfelt sympathy and love goes out to all the wives and

families of

> those who are, at this moment, risking their lives to protect us, I pray

they

> return safely. I shall have a light in my window.

I have a light in my window too.For all who has to fight just for they are

young and has to obey leaders decisions and who are trying to stay alive

under bombs defending their lands and families.

 

Finally,i want to say that we reiki people are supposed to reach a point

which is love and respect to all creatures.From the beginning of all these

war scenerios for some years,i hoped God will prevent it.I know,now ,wars

are also a part of the plan which is the highest good of all.

 

May love and peace prevail.

Lale

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

says it all .....I wholeheartedly agree with you ..and our British govt should

know better too ....Fiona x

 

 

www.redvelvetuk.com

www.redvelvetuk@...

womens menstrual well-being, Pleasure Puss cloth pads, Mooncup, and other

related goodies

-

Peg R

Sunday, March 23, 2003 6:49 PM

Re: [CrystalHW] war vs. peace

 

 

Michael said:

May I pose a gentle question? In all the opposition to my sadly held

view, from various groups and forums and people I talk to, no-one has

ever offered a viable alternative.

 

 

One suggestion is not to attack unless attacked. There is also the

approach taken by Gandhi and Martin Luther King. The US is the wealthiest, most

powerful nation. What if we had set the precedent of compassion and forgiveness

instead of premptive strike? What if we had agreed to put Osama bin Laden on

trial in an international court of law instead of seeking him down to kill him?

I wish the American government had looked at more options in both the 911

scenario and this war. I wish the people in government trusted more in the

Universe. This morning on the NY times website I saw a photo of a toddler with

the side of her face burned from the coalition's bombing. She will be scarred

for the rest of her life. How can we justify this?? Thanks for letting me voice

my feelings. Pegasus

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...