Keep on meandering further away from the original point I made so you feel justified in your indignation.
Moronic
Prayer doesn't equal ROE or Orders
There you go, with another strawman argument. Nowhere in the opening post or in any of my posts did I ever say or even imply that Hegseth’s statements established new “rules of engagement”.
The OP offered the opinion that Hegseth’s comments were unChristian and also in conflict with “The Law of Armed Conflict”. I linked the CNN article stating that it would be a war crime, if his advice was followed with a change in rules of engagement (there’s no evidence that it has been).
I said that his statements were “fundamentally immoral”, juvenile (like he playing a video game), that he has made similarly stupid and unacceptable remarks before, that they reek of Christian Nationalism, and further that he was probably ineffective at altering the rules of engagement as practiced by the troops, hence my statement about the “eye rolls” he elicited both from generals and from the rank-and-file troops.
I defined what “no quarter” means and suggested that if you take him at his word, the ROE would be modified to his liking. But that his efforts would be unlawful orders that no General would have his troops follow.
So... stop with the dishonest bullshit. Though that seems to be your trademark, as a card-carrying asshole.
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
There you go, with another strawman argument. Nowhere in the opening post or in any of my posts did I ever say or even imply that Hegseth’s statements established new “rules of engagement”.
How are you unable to remember the hot garbage that you post on here? You cherry picked where I said our ROE doesn't include executing enemies that have surrendered and then proceeded to argue the point, implying that he was giving illegal orders and that he believed our ROE supported that notion.
I don't believe for a moment that our ROE includes killing enemies who have surrendered.
Hegseth disagrees, though, if you take him at his word. During a March 13, 2026, briefing on the Iran war, Hegseth said, "We will keep pressing, keep pushing, keep advancing, no quarter, no mercy for our enemies".
The phrase "no quarter" is widely understood to mean refusing to take prisoners and/or killing surrendering combatants, acts that are illegal under the Geneva Convention and U.S. Army laws-of-war.
Maybe he doesn't understand the meaning of the words he chooses to spew, or maybe he was drunk again.
I am sure that no General will have troops under his command follow such a blatantly unlawful order.
But why did the Secretary of War, in plain language, say precisely that our Rules of Engagement should include executing troops who have surrendered instead of holding them as prisoners?
Did he lie? Was he drunk? Does he now know what the words he chose actually mean?
Hope is not optimism, which expects things to turn out well, but something rooted in the conviction that there is good worth working for. - Seamus Heaney, Irish poet and likely Hoosier basketball fan.
POTFB
@hhlurker Probably, but why continue to argue the point?
Hope is not optimism, which expects things to turn out well, but something rooted in the conviction that there is good worth working for. - Seamus Heaney, Irish poet and likely Hoosier basketball fan.
POTFB
Seems like you want it both ways by invoking Christian values regarding mercy into your justification for why Hegseth’s words should have been revised.First, I'm a Christian. I believe in Jesus's divinity.
I'm happy that "...one nation under God," "God bless America," "God bless our troops," "In God we trust," etc., are an important part of our American tradition, and frequently uttered in public. However, the relatively recent shift by some political/government leaders to the specificity of Jesus Christ in public prayer and public statements strikes me as inappropriate. Millions of Americans, myself included, embrace Christian beliefs, values and tradition. Millions don't.
I'm pretty sure there are people of a non-Christian faith (or no faith) who will read this, and it would be particularly beneficial to have your perspective.
Next, Pete Hegseth read a prayer yesterday that he said was first given by a military chaplain to the troops who captured Maduro. Here's the prayer:
"Let every round find its mark against the enemies of righteousness and our great nation. Give them ["them" presumably refers to our troops] wisdom in every decision, endurance for the trial ahead, unbreakable unity, and overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy.”
The Law of Armed Conflict has standards that do, in fact, reflect mercy. For examples, soldiers don't harm enemies who have surrendered. Soldiers don't kill or torture anyone in their custody. That's a crime under both international and domestic law. Soldiers collect and care for the wounded, whether friend or foe.
Back to Christianity. What does Jesus say about mercy? A lot. "Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy." "Go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice. For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” "Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful." "For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy."
Seems that Hegseth's prayer, no matter where or when it's uttered, would benefit from revisions.
I know that these are topics that elicit emotions, and the thread will inevitably move to a debate about the establishment clause, but please try to be civil in your replies.
But that’s ok. I think what you’ll find is that the mercy rules you cite re international law developed out of a Christian tradition. So yeah, Christian morality (specifically regarding mercy) is baked in.
The tension between Christianity and armed soldiers rules of fighting is tough to parse. I’m not sure they can be squared at all. Jesus wasn’t really the warrior type.
I forgot to ask you Brad, yesterday. Why do you find it hard to parse soldiers and Christianity? Do you think Christians shouldn't be able to defend themselves at all?
First, I'm a Christian. I believe in Jesus's divinity.
I'm happy that "...one nation under God," "God bless America," "God bless our troops," "In God we trust," etc., are an important part of our American tradition, and frequently uttered in public. However, the relatively recent shift by some political/government leaders to the specificity of Jesus Christ in public prayer and public statements strikes me as inappropriate. Millions of Americans, myself included, embrace Christian beliefs, values and tradition. Millions don't.
I'm pretty sure there are people of a non-Christian faith (or no faith) who will read this, and it would be particularly beneficial to have your perspective.
Next, Pete Hegseth read a prayer yesterday that he said was first given by a military chaplain to the troops who captured Maduro. Here's the prayer:
"Let every round find its mark against the enemies of righteousness and our great nation. Give them ["them" presumably refers to our troops] wisdom in every decision, endurance for the trial ahead, unbreakable unity, and overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy.”
The Law of Armed Conflict has standards that do, in fact, reflect mercy. For examples, soldiers don't harm enemies who have surrendered. Soldiers don't kill or torture anyone in their custody. That's a crime under both international and domestic law. Soldiers collect and care for the wounded, whether friend or foe.
Back to Christianity. What does Jesus say about mercy? A lot. "Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy." "Go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice. For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” "Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful." "For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy."
Seems that Hegseth's prayer, no matter where or when it's uttered, would benefit from revisions.
I know that these are topics that elicit emotions, and the thread will inevitably move to a debate about the establishment clause, but please try to be civil in your replies.
Read the Book of Revelation....
Then get back to us......
@hurryinghoosiers I wouldn't call Hegseth's religiosity "fake." He and his family have reportedly been active members of a church for several years.
I think an important point is that many Christian churches seemingly place an emphasis on the Old Testament, which actually contains a fair amount of violence and violent imagery. Some books of the Old Testament seemingly promote brutal aggression, which is reflective of the time, place and culture of when/where they were written. The message of Jesus, as set forth in the gospels of the New Testament, is in many respects quite different and doesn't at all comport with Hegseth's "no quarter, no mercy" philosophy. In fact, Jesus unequivocally rejected that approach.
Maybe you're right and he's going to a church that doesn't care about moral character and just goes over the old testament. But there are many reasons people go to church other than being true believers themselves. #1 likely being pressure from a spouse or family member or simply just tradition and now their social groups are at the church.
Whatever the case may be, he is proving that going to church doesn't make someone a moral person.
Bwahahaha!
Extreme low-IQ fractured Fairy Tale....
I think you have to do a lot of back bending to turn the Gospels into something that is consistent with war. The Jesus I read about, doesn't seem too interested in the affairs of men, and thinks the end of the world is nigh, so tells everyone to give away their possessions, follow him, and swim out past the breakers and watch the world die.Seems like you want it both ways by invoking Christian values regarding mercy into your justification for why Hegseth’s words should have been revised.First, I'm a Christian. I believe in Jesus's divinity.
I'm happy that "...one nation under God," "God bless America," "God bless our troops," "In God we trust," etc., are an important part of our American tradition, and frequently uttered in public. However, the relatively recent shift by some political/government leaders to the specificity of Jesus Christ in public prayer and public statements strikes me as inappropriate. Millions of Americans, myself included, embrace Christian beliefs, values and tradition. Millions don't.
I'm pretty sure there are people of a non-Christian faith (or no faith) who will read this, and it would be particularly beneficial to have your perspective.
Next, Pete Hegseth read a prayer yesterday that he said was first given by a military chaplain to the troops who captured Maduro. Here's the prayer:
"Let every round find its mark against the enemies of righteousness and our great nation. Give them ["them" presumably refers to our troops] wisdom in every decision, endurance for the trial ahead, unbreakable unity, and overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy.”
The Law of Armed Conflict has standards that do, in fact, reflect mercy. For examples, soldiers don't harm enemies who have surrendered. Soldiers don't kill or torture anyone in their custody. That's a crime under both international and domestic law. Soldiers collect and care for the wounded, whether friend or foe.
Back to Christianity. What does Jesus say about mercy? A lot. "Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy." "Go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice. For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” "Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful." "For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy."
Seems that Hegseth's prayer, no matter where or when it's uttered, would benefit from revisions.
I know that these are topics that elicit emotions, and the thread will inevitably move to a debate about the establishment clause, but please try to be civil in your replies.
But that’s ok. I think what you’ll find is that the mercy rules you cite re international law developed out of a Christian tradition. So yeah, Christian morality (specifically regarding mercy) is baked in.
The tension between Christianity and armed soldiers rules of fighting is tough to parse. I’m not sure they can be squared at all. Jesus wasn’t really the warrior type.
I forgot to ask you Brad, yesterday. Why do you find it hard to parse soldiers and Christianity? Do you think Christians shouldn't be able to defend themselves at all?
So, why don't you interpret the Book of the Apocalypse for us?First, I'm a Christian. I believe in Jesus's divinity.
I'm happy that "...one nation under God," "God bless America," "God bless our troops," "In God we trust," etc., are an important part of our American tradition, and frequently uttered in public. However, the relatively recent shift by some political/government leaders to the specificity of Jesus Christ in public prayer and public statements strikes me as inappropriate. Millions of Americans, myself included, embrace Christian beliefs, values and tradition. Millions don't.
I'm pretty sure there are people of a non-Christian faith (or no faith) who will read this, and it would be particularly beneficial to have your perspective.
Next, Pete Hegseth read a prayer yesterday that he said was first given by a military chaplain to the troops who captured Maduro. Here's the prayer:
"Let every round find its mark against the enemies of righteousness and our great nation. Give them ["them" presumably refers to our troops] wisdom in every decision, endurance for the trial ahead, unbreakable unity, and overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy.”
The Law of Armed Conflict has standards that do, in fact, reflect mercy. For examples, soldiers don't harm enemies who have surrendered. Soldiers don't kill or torture anyone in their custody. That's a crime under both international and domestic law. Soldiers collect and care for the wounded, whether friend or foe.
Back to Christianity. What does Jesus say about mercy? A lot. "Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy." "Go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice. For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” "Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful." "For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy."
Seems that Hegseth's prayer, no matter where or when it's uttered, would benefit from revisions.
I know that these are topics that elicit emotions, and the thread will inevitably move to a debate about the establishment clause, but please try to be civil in your replies.
Read the Book of Revelation....
Then get back to us......
.
“Brothers and sisters, this is our God: Jesus, King of Peace, who rejects war, whom no one can use to justify war,” Leo said. “He does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them, saying: ‘Even though you make many prayers, I will not listen: your hands are full of blood.’”
https://apnews.com/article/vatican-palm-sunday-francis-pope-5749906e8c5d5303b1fb06e33607e062
“Brothers and sisters, this is our God: Jesus, King of Peace, who rejects war, whom no one can use to justify war,” Leo said. “He does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them, saying: ‘Even though you make many prayers, I will not listen: your hands are full of blood.’”
https://apnews.com/article/vatican-palm-sunday-francis-pope-5749906e8c5d5303b1fb06e33607e062
Major gotcha bro. This just in. The Pope does not like violence.
Leo kinda stinks. Not as bad Francis, but not close to as good as Benedict.
Spiritual leaders should preach non violence. That is good. Political leaders have real decisions to make.
In this thread I learned that Christians ought disregard the Old Testament.
That’s the childlike interpretation given to us by Bitch, sorry Butch.
He gave us the astounding revelation that the Bible isn’t always consistent.
40+ different people, over 1600 years and 1500 pages of scripture don’t always align.
We’re lucky to have this genius among us.
Of course MAGA would think morality is overrated. They sold their morals for Trump.
Yea, they should have voted for the moral abortionists.