In other words, Associated Press is reporting that Allied forces in Afghanistan are killing more civilians than the Taliban did.
If recent weeks are anything to go by, it looks like violence could escalate far beyond the record levels it hit last year. In January and February, the number of American troop fatalities increased threefold compared with the same period in 2008. Meanwhile, according to the Associated Press, foreign soldiers were responsible for more civilian deaths in those first two months than the insurgents.
What?
Is violence really the best option, or have we not yet learned that Pax Romana is not really peace?
Posts
1 comment:
It bothers me too. But this is what I struggle with:
I would much rather officially declare myself a pacifist if it didn't seem as though in the Bible, God really has been okay with bloody war.
Can pacifism and the Bible be reconciled?
Or is God only okay with certain kinds of war? I think that's where most Christians stand.
But how the heck does one determine whether their cause for mass slaughter is God-ordained or not?
I loved the picture you put up on your blog months ago - "Who Would Jesus Bomb?"
But I must admit I've been made to feel pretty stupid for having the hope that Jesus wouldn't actually bomb anyone.
Ick. Even posting this comment makes me feel vulnerable to a slew of criticism. Oh well.
ACTUALLY, I guess a better thing to struggle with, as a closet pacifist, is not "should governments make wars" but rather "what can I do to reduce the physical, emotional and spiritual violence in the sphere of my influence today?"
And now I am rambling. But this issue is kinda dear to my heart.
Post a Comment