Some thoughts on London
The terrorist attacks in London have once again opened up the world’s eyes to Islamic extremists and what they are capable of. If the Muslim religion wants to be taken seriously as a religion that cherishes peace and love as well as its claims as being a respectable culture, it should act quickly to denounce the actions of the extremists.
As I have been reading through numerous blogs the last few days, I have read countless different opinions on the attacks in the UK. I find it quite aggravating when people try and blame Bush and Blair for their lack of readiness. National security is quite important in both countries I am sure, but it is impossible to be ready for anything and everything, especially when you are dealing with cowards. In “civilized” warfare (if there is such a thing) you know who you are fighting against - you know who the civilians are and you know who the soldiers are. There is a code of honor that is followed (which is what made Abu Ghraib such an embarrassment - US soldiers do not act that way) on both sides. In the age of terror things are different. Terrorists are merely cowards that take advantage of the civility of the military and pray on the innocent. Military you can anticipate - you at least know what they won’t do, terrorists are much harder to predict. Our governments do their best to prevent the unthinkable from happening, but in the end, they are not perfect and can’t prevent everything from happening. London’s many security cameras proved to not be effective in prevention, hopefully they will at least help in finding out who made the attacks. Blaming the government for the attacks is silly and will not go anywhere. The governments will always try to do their best to protect their people, but cannot be blamed when cowards sneak through. The terrorists are to blame, pure and simple - don’t look any farther than them.
Others have said that globalization (particularly US based) is the real cause because extremists hate what the US has “done” to their society and therefore act out in violence. I think this is a very naive view that doesn’t really understand why terrorists do what they do. It is not the Muslim culture does not want or can’t handle democracy; there are numerous examples to the contrary. Democracy is not forced and yet it spreads – maybe because it is a good thing? Some suggest that all the bad things in US society have infested Muslim culture and that is what terrorists are acting out against. Well that is just ridiculous for a number of reasons. For one, Muslims (of course not all) do a very fine job of living “up” to their fallen status without the help of outside influence. Secondly, with democracy comes choice, individuals and societies have choices to make when freedom is available, with that freedom comes bad choices. The US is not to blame for their bad choices; they (as well as us) are responsible for their (our) own actions. Thirdly, there are other examples of globalization in Muslim countries, including democracy, that haven’t been greatly effected by US culture.
It comes down to this: Muslim extremists hate the West, hate democracy, hate freedom, and hate Christianity. Either of these “reasons” can be cited for any number of attacks. There is no other way to rationalize it. They are evil, plain and simple. Trying to rationalize their actions is fruitless and embarrassing. Muslims need to band together and tell the world they don’t condone these actions. They need to encourage the spread of democracy as well as oust the terrorists around them. If they don’t it is going to be hard for the world (as it already is for some) to separate the extremists from the “normals”.
I think this has turned into somewhat of a ramble and a digression. Terrorists are still at large as evidenced by the attack in London. Hopefully people will realize that Bush and Blair (and others) are doing the right thing in their war on terror. Peace can only come when the cowards have been stamped out.
May God bless the families and friends of those lost in London and may Christians spread compassion and love even while standing up for their convictions and may He be glorified in the pursuit of justice.
Saw your Blog on BlogExplosion. Loved your article. Ty for saying what needed to be said. Take care and God Bless.
Hi, thanks for your comment on my blog! Spoken like a true patriotic American I would have to say
To say that the world is fallen and use that as an excuse makes me sad. The road to peace is sometimes paved in war but what if the same energy put into war is used to negotiate peace? Could not war be prevented in most cases?
I guess what distubs me is the cycle of violence. People attack the West, the West fights back with violence and calls it a “war on terror.” Why do you think people are attacking the West in the first place…my wager is because the West responds to everything with violence, often leaving the rest of the world with no other choice. Countries in the Middle East don’t have the firepower to have a fair go with the USA so they don’t really have any other options that I can see except terrorism.
Anyway, just some thoughts. We’ll have to talk some politics when you get back to school!
“It comes down to this: Muslim extremists hate the West, hate democracy, hate freedom, and hate Christianity.”
If they do, it’s not because they are any more evil than you or any other non-terrorist. At least, that’s the understanding about the human condition that I glean from our Christian Bible. Romans 3.
Because the moment you accuse anyone else of any degree of malice and cowardice, you only have to look in a mirror to understand what those words really mean. Romans 2.
Sure, neither you or I are bomb lighting terrorists - but what we do have in common with them are similar, malignant heart conditions. Mark 7.
“They are evil, plain and simple. Trying to rationalize their actions is fruitless and embarrassing. Muslims need to band together and tell the world they don’t condone these actions. They need to encourage the spread of democracy as well as oust the terrorists around them. If they don’t it is going to be hard for the world (as it already is for some) to separate the extremists from the “normals”.
Honestly, I really don’t care how many Muslims band together to denounce this act. It may provide for some short-term behavior modification, but hell has a soft-spot for the “well-behaved”.
And to be honest chum, I’m sincerely confused by Christians who react with such self-righteous bravado whenever human evil bursts open like this. Can we be serious about condemning people outright as “evil cowards who deserve swift retaliation” when we take into account how much grace has been lavished on us, and how much more mercy awaits the repentant? In other words, do you consider such atrocities the root of the problem, or something that’s ultimately a symptom of something much bigger, sinister (pride in lies)? Matt, the answer becomes really clear through the lenses of the gospel (which is holy from the west, democracy, freedom, and even Christians - because it’s ultimately for the glory of Christ).
Imo, it makes no difference in the end if Muslims, you, or anyone else cherishes so-called peace and love. Because this life is ultimately not about saving this life. Mark 9. The Kingdom of God can be nowhere to be found even in places where terrorism doesn’t exist. Because aside from the King, Jesus Christ, we all end up with absolutely nothing to show for anything, and hell will be the world’s reward if the only thing we can get sanctimonious about is national security and individual safety.
-j
Thanks for the comments and some discussion!
Jackie, to me, it is less being patriotic than it is having a desire to see justice and freedom for all. In this case that means standing up for what the US has done and is trying to do.
“To say that the world is fallen and use that as an excuse makes me sad. The road to peace is sometimes paved in war but what if the same energy put into war is used to negotiate peace? Could not war be prevented in most cases?” Saying the world is fallen is not an excuse, it is the way it is and sometimes the only way to can explain the way some people act. There are always “what ifs” that can be pondered, but they really don’t get us very far. Yes it would be better of we spend our time and money trying to negotiate peace, that is often what does happen (and still happens), but unfortunately terrorists aren’t looking for peace, peace is not their goal.
“People attack the West, the West fights back with violence and calls it a “war on terror.” Why do you think people are attacking the West in the first place…my wager is because the West responds to everything with violence, often leaving the rest of the world with no other choice.” I completely disagree with this. Terrorists are choosing to fight regardless of what the West has done. It is a war on terror because it is against those that only care for themselves and no one else. The west would not attack if there was nothing to fight. Peace should be sought, but Terrorists care not and would attack even if we were pacifists so unfortunately pacifisim isn’t really an option if we want to prevent the loss of innocent lives.
““It comes down to this: Muslim extremists hate the West, hate democracy, hate freedom, and hate Christianity.”
If they do, it’s not because they are any more evil than you or any other non-terrorist. At least, that’s the understanding about the human condition that I glean from our Christian Bible. Romans 3.” I agree.
“Because the moment you accuse anyone else of any degree of malice and cowardice, you only have to look in a mirror to understand what those words really mean. Romans 2.” I agree, that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be pointed out in both instances.
“Honestly, I really don’t care how many Muslims band together to denounce this act. It may provide for some short-term behavior modification, but hell has a soft-spot for the “well-behaved”.” Let me clarify a little bit: my point here is just that if the Muslim people want to be respected on the world front they should distance themselves from terrorists as much as possible.
“I’m sincerely confused by Christians who react with such self-righteous bravado whenever human evil bursts open like this. Can we be serious about condemning people outright as “evil cowards who deserve swift retaliation” when we take into account how much grace has been lavished on us, and how much more mercy awaits the repentant?” I completely agree. I think sin has to be recognized for what it is in both the “seer” and the “seen”. I think one reason many jump up with such “bravado” in situations like this because it is so visible and brings home the human condition in all of us. We realize that “I don’t want to look like that.” That can lead to self-righteous behavior because most can say “I’m not like that.” But what Christians need to realize is that we all are like that (meaning we are sinful) and that sin must be repented for and the grace of Christ must be thanked for crying on our knees. Violence lie this should never be celebrated just because we can say we are not like them. Violence like this needs to be lamented and used to look for the seeds of malice in our own hearts.
“In other words, do you consider such atrocities the root of the problem, or something that’s ultimately a symptom of something much bigger, sinister (pride in lies)?” The root of the problem is definitely not in the atrocities themselves but in what lies in the hearts of all - sin. In that sense the fight to end terror is like putting a band on a gaping head wound. BUT that bandaid can at least help prevent the loss of innocents (at least innocent in the sense that they don’t go out and kill people).
“Imo, it makes no difference in the end if Muslims, you, or anyone else cherishes so-called peace and love. Because this life is ultimately not about saving this life.” But just because this life is not ultimately about saving this life doesn’t mean at all that we shouldn’t seek after peace and love. How else could we make disciples?
“The Kingdom of God can be nowhere to be found even in places where terrorism doesn’t exist.” What? Come on man, the Kingdom of God is everywhere to be seen, including places where terrorism exists.
“Because aside from the King, Jesus Christ, we all end up with absolutely nothing to show for anything, and hell will be the world’s reward if the only thing we can get sanctimonious about is national security and individual safety.” And this is one of the reasons I don’t often like to talk about politics too often - people get really emotionally involved with it and that makes it appear to be more important that it ultimately is.
That all being said, I think terrorism should be destroyed wherever it is. Nothing good comes from it and people are better off (and more likely to hear the Gospel, eh?) without it. Thanks for your comments Jae, I always look forward to hearing your well thought out words (even if I disagree sometimes
).
Shalom
It seems the first reaction I heard from Muslim leaders to their followers was something along the
lines of a warning to run inside and hide from potential backlash. Does that mean that all
Muslims in the UK approved of the London blasts? If they didn’t, they should have been the most
vocal people out there condemning these acts of terrorism, but they are not. In the US, the Patriot Act has
allows federal agents to breathe down the necks of these Islamist extremists, when these guys start
giving hate speeches in their mosques, rallying their followers to kill people, American law
enforcement can swoop in on it to make arrests
In the UK the policy has remained liberal. These kooky mullahs call for death and destruction in their
mosques, and even in the open press. the Brits are going to have to consider implementing a Patriot
Act, or some similar legislation to protect their people from these terrorists. As for terror in
general, I don’t think industrialized nations such as the US and the UK will be as tolerant as the
Israeli’s have been. If these thugs started blowing themselves up on NY’s 7 train, it wouldn’t take
long for Americans to rise up and pack every Muslim (good or bad) into a cattle car off tothe hottest,
most godforsaken stretch of earth we could think of.
Much like the expulsion of Japanese Americans during WWII
Hi Matt…”The differences is that the spread of democracy and freedom would allow people to reject anything the USA sends. In your example the people that Iraq are taking over don’t have the freedom to choose what they can or cannot do. Democracy is not something that can be forced, it seems to spread on its own. The US just helps make it possible for it to spread, but democracy can be rejected. After riding Iraq of Saddam, its people had the choice in how it was lead. If they had wanted to they could have gone back to being a dictatorship.
And if you still think Iraq was ever about getting more resources, you are still missing the point.
Dictatorships and tyrany spread by force, democracy spreads because of freedom.”
In response to your commment: Do you think that invading Iraq is not forcing democracy upon them? What about Vietnam, what about Korea? I don’t really see the connection between war and not forcing democracy upon people! Do you really think the Iraqi people are going to have the choice about how to govern their country. You have a LOT more faith in Bush than most of the world.
As for the war being about resources, I don’t really think we know the true motives. That the USA wanted control of an established, huge oil supply seems the most reasonable to me. The USA sucks up so many resources that it all makes sense…at least in my head.
It’s hard to believe that some people actually believe this is about oil. Perhaps a good question
along that line would be, did we attack Saddam because he was a fanatic with means, i.e. vast oil
supplys to fund a nuclear of biological weapons program. At first they had hoped that the oil could pay
for some of the rebuilding and costs but turned out to be unrealistic. It should be apparent to the dumbest
person on earth that paying for oil is infinetly cheaper than a conquest for oil. Tin foil hat futures
inched up a point on that post
“Do you think that invading Iraq is not forcing democracy upon them?” Democracy is not something can be forced, that is a contradiction. The invasion of Iraq is “forcing” freedom (which is also a contradiction in terms). The people of Iraq get to choose, because of that “forced” freedom, what kind of government they want - even if that means the rejection of democracy.
“Do you really think the Iraqi people are going to have the choice about how to govern their country.” Yes I do.
“You have a LOT more faith in Bush than most of the world.” You are probably right, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it is misplaced faith.
“As for the war being about resources, I don’t really think we know the true motives.” Conspiracy theories don’t usually amount to much. If it had been about oil, we would have seen some benefit by now.
And while maybe not being quite as blunt as Tony (
), I would agree that buying oil is much cheaper than the cost of the Iraq war.