Our Peace President

[Separatist]

https://www.libertarianinstitute.org/bl ... president/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“In President Obama’s last year in office, the United States dropped 26,171 bombs in seven countries. This estimate is undoubtedly low, considering reliable data is only available for airstrikes in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and Libya, and a single “strike,” according to the Pentagon’s definition, can involve multiple bombs or munitions. In 2016, the United States dropped 3,027 more bombs—and in one more country, Libya—than in 2015.”

–Michael Zenko, Council on Foreign Relations, “How Many Bombs Did the United States Drop in 2016?”

[paulrobots]

And the Nobel peace prize commitee still hasn't apologized.

[Silver]

There is no justice.
There is just us.

[Juliet]

Every body gets how awful our country is except the people in it.

[Silver]

Every body gets how awful our country is except the people in it.

"There are two main reasons for the dilemma we find ourselves in:

1. We are prosperous—the most prosperous nation on earth, and our prosperity has made us comfortable, and in our comfort, we have abrogated our duties to those who promise to do them for us without any serious scrutiny. And as generation to generation pass, we grow more firm in our lack of understanding, and we do not even know the standards to which our officials should be held.

2. The deliberate dumbing down of our education system in an effort to enslave the public through ignorance and prepare them for world government."
http://www.ourrepubliconline.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Fiannan]

[ajax]

From the left wing CounterPunch

He Bombed the Poorest People on Earth
https://www.libertarianinstitute.org/bl ... ple-earth/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One of the persistent strands in American political life is a cultish extremism that approaches fascism. This was given expression and reinforced during the two terms of Barack Obama. “I believe in American exceptionalism with every fibre of my being,” said Obama, who expanded America’s favourite military pastime, bombing, and death squads (“special operations”) as no other president has done since the Cold War.

According to a Council on Foreign Relations survey, in 2016 alone Obama dropped 26,171 bombs. That is 72 bombs every day. He bombed the poorest people on earth, in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan.

Every Tuesday — reported the New York Times — he personally selected those who would be murdered by mostly hellfire missiles fired from drones. Weddings, funerals, shepherds were attacked, along with those attempting to collect the body parts festooning the “terrorist target”. A leading Republican senator, Lindsey Graham, estimated, approvingly, that Obama’s drones killed 4,700 people. “Sometimes you hit innocent people and I hate that,” he said, but we’ve taken out some very senior members of Al Qaeda.”

Like the fascism of the 1930s, big lies are delivered with the precision of a metronome: thanks to an omnipresent media whose description now fits that of the Nuremberg prosecutor: “Before each major aggression, with some few exceptions based on expediency, they initiated a press campaign calculated to weaken their victims and to prepare the German people psychologically … In the propaganda system … it was the daily press and the radio that were the most important weapons.

Take the catastrophe in Libya. In 2011, Obama said Libyan president Muammar Gaddafi was planning “genocide” against his own people. “We knew… that if we waited one more day, Benghazi, a city the size of Charlotte, could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world.”

This was the known lie of Islamist militias facing defeat by Libyan government forces. It became the media story; and Nato – led by Obama and Hillary Clinton – launched 9,700 “strike sorties” against Libya, of which more than a third were aimed at civilian targets. Uranium warheads were used; the cities of Misurata and Sirte were carpet-bombed. The Red Cross identified mass graves, and Unicef reported that “most [of the children killed] were under the age of ten”.

Under Obama, the US has extended secret “special forces” operations to 138 countries, or 70 per cent of the world’s population. The first African-American president launched what amounted to a full-scale invasion of Africa. Reminiscent of the Scramble for Africa in the late 19th century, the US African Command (Africom) has built a network of supplicants among collaborative African regimes eager for American bribes and armaments. Africom’s “soldier to soldier” doctrine embeds US officers at every level of command from general to warrant officer. Only pith helmets are missing.

It is as if Africa’s proud history of liberation, from Patrice Lumumba to Nelson Mandela, is consigned to oblivion by a new master’s black colonial elite whose “historic mission”, warned Frantz Fanon half a century ago, is the promotion of “a capitalism rampant though camouflaged”.

It was Obama who, in 2011, announced what became known as the “pivot to Asia”, in which almost two-thirds of US naval forces would be transferred to the Asia-Pacific to “confront China”, in the words of his Defence Secretary. There was no threat from China; the entire enterprise was unnecessary. It was an extreme provocation to keep the Pentagon and its demented brass happy.

In 2014, the Obama’s administration oversaw and paid for a fascist-led coup in Ukraine against the democratically-elected government, threatening Russia in the western borderland through Hitler invaded the Soviet Union, with a loss of 27 million lives. It was Obama who placed missiles in Eastern Europe aimed at Russia, and it was the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize who increased spending on nuclear warheads to a level higher than that of any administration since the cold war — having promised, in an emotional speech in Prague, to “help rid the world of nuclear weapons”.

Read the entire scathing article here.

[eddie]

He is the erstwhile anti-war candidate, now engaged in more theaters of war than his predecessor. He is the commander-in-chief who pulled more than a hundred thousand U.S. troops out of harm's way in Iraq, but also began a slow trickle back in. He recoiled against full-scale, conventional war, while embracing the brave new world of drone attacks. He has championed diplomacy on climate change, nuclear proliferation and has torn down walls to Cuba and Myanmar, but failed repeatedly to broker a lasting pause to more than six years of slaughter in Syria.

Kathleen Hennessy

[ajax]

Is Trump Getting Ready for War in the South China Sea?
http://www.targetliberty.com/2017/01/is ... china.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here is the Washington Post trying to figure out the comments coming out of the Trump Administration:

Was this a prelude to a major escalation in the South China Sea, or is the Trump administration foreign policy team having trouble articulating itself?

On Monday, new White House spokesman Sean Spicer said the United States would prevent China from taking over territory in international waters in the South China Sea.

His comments were widely interpreted as doubling down on remarks by Trump’s nominee for secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, on Jan. 11 that the United States would not allow China access to islands it has built in the South China Sea, and upon which it has installed weapons systems and built military-length airstrips.

“The U.S. is going to make sure that we protect our interests there,” Spicer said when asked if President Trump agreed with his nominee.

“It’s a question of if those islands are in fact in international waters and not part of China proper, then yeah, we’re going to make sure that we defend international territories from being taken over by one country.”

Experts had initially thought Tillerson might have misspoken, but Spicer's remarks appeared to raise the likelihood that the administration was indeed considering blocking China's access to its new islands in the Spratlys...

Mira Rapp-Hooper, a South China Sea expert at the Center for a New American Security, called the threats to bar China's access in the South China Sea “incredible” and told Reuters it had no basis in international law.

“A blockade — which is what would be required to actually bar access — is an act of war,” she added...

There is confusion in foreign policy circles.

Bonnie Glaser, a senior adviser for Asia at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, was quoted as saying last week that she had heard from some members of the Trump transition team that Tillerson “misspoke” during five hours of Senate testimony, but on Monday she told Reuters that Spicer’s remarks were “worrisome” and more evidence of “confusing and conflicting messages.”

As Chinese media have pointed out, Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan and Malaysia also control islands in the disputed waters of the South China Sea, yet the United States is not demanding they leave the area...

Yet there is another possibility: that Tillerson and Spicer are in fact indirectly referring to concerns about Scarborough Shoal, a partly submerged chain of reefs and rocks close to the Philippines that China seized in 2012.

Sen. John McCain is among those who have warned that China was planning to build a military base on Scarborough Shoal, to form a triangular network when combined with existing bases in the Spratly and the Paracel islands.

The Obama administration, Hayton pointed out, was reported to have told China in 2016 it was prepared to physically deter any attempts to build on the shoal, and had deployed ships and aircraft to the area to back up that threat.

An attempt to stop China building a new island on Scarborough Shoal would imply greater continuity with policy under Obama, and be less confrontational than preventing China’s navy from getting access to existing islands. Indeed, Beijing knows that any attempt to build a new island on the Shoal would be provocative in itself.

“Tillerson may therefore have been simply stating that he wants this strategy to continue — stopping any island-building on Scarborough Shoal by denying construction vessels access to it,” Hayton wrote.

[ajax]

Pentagon: US affirms 'unshakeable commitment' to NATO
http://www.dw.com/en/pentagon-us-affirm ... a-37246362" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ajax]

China Deploys ICBM System "In Response To Trump's Provocative Remarks"
http://www.targetliberty.com/2017/01/om ... em-in.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Beijing has reportedly deployed an advanced Dongfeng-41 ICBM system in Heilongjiang Province, which borders with Russia.

According to China's nationalist Global Times tabloid, "the Chinese military intentionally revealed the Dongfeng-41 and connected it with the inauguration of US President Donald Trump. They think this is Beijing's response to Trump's provocative remarks on China."

The Dongfeng-41 is a nuclear solid-fuel road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missile. With a range of 15,000 kilometers and a payload of 10-12 nuclear warheads, it can target anywhere in the world and is widely considered one of the most advanced intercontinental ballistic missiles.

[ajax]

Trump's 31 Airstrikes - A Taste Of Things To Come?
http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/fe ... s-to-come/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Over the weekend, President Trump indicated that he would continue in his predecessor's foreign policy. The US conducted some 31 airstrikes in Syria and Iraq and two drone strikes in Yemen. Will we achieve different results doing the same thing over and over? More in today's Liberty Report:

[Silver]

We are a warlike people, easily distracted from our assignment of preparing for the coming of the Lord. When enemies rise up, we commit vast resources to the fabrication of gods of stone and steel—ships, planes, missiles, fortifications—and depend on them for protection and deliverance. When threatened, we become antienemy instead of pro-kingdom of God; we train a man in the art of war and call him a patriot, thus, in the manner of Satan’s counterfeit of true patriotism, perverting the Savior’s teaching:

“Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

“That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven.” (Matt. 5:44–45.)

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/06/the- ... p?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[eddie]

Latter-day Saints in the military do not need to feel torn between their country and their God. In the Church, “we believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law” (Articles of Faith 1:12). Military service shows dedication to this principle.

If Latter-day Saints are called upon to go into battle, they can look to the example of Captain Moroni, the great military leader in the Book of Mormon. Although he was a mighty warrior, he “did not delight in bloodshed” (Alma 48:11). He was “firm in the faith of Christ,” and his only reason for fighting was to “defend his people, his rights, and his country, and his religion” (Alma 48:13). If Latter-day Saints must go to war, they should go in a spirit of truth and righteousness, with a desire to do good. They should go with love in their hearts for all God’s children, including those on the opposing side. Then, if they are required to shed another’s blood, their action will not be counted as a sin.

[ajax]

Trump Goes Total Hillary on Syrian "Safe Zones"
http://www.targetliberty.com/2017/01/tr ... -safe.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ajax]

Trump Proposal For Syria "Safe Zones" To Escalate US Military Involvement In The Region
http://www.targetliberty.com/2017/01/tr ... es-to.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ajax]

Donald Trump and Saudi King Salman agree safe zones plans in Syria and Yemen
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 53341.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Isn't this the type of nonsense policy the Trump fanboys were criticizing Clinton over as possible precursors to WWIII? How to do without boots on the ground? And safe zones of necessity equals no-fly zones.

[ajax]

Donald Trump: Child Killer
https://www.libertarianinstitute.org/20 ... ld-killer/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Just like Obama. And in this case has killed the 8-year-old daughter of AQAP propagandist, and assassinated American citizen, Anwar Awlaki, whose 16 year old son Abdulrahman was also murdered by Obama.

Antiwar.com’s Jason Ditz has the story here.

[ajax]

Trump's Insane National Security Adviser Warns Iran
http://www.targetliberty.com/2017/02/tr ... viser.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

President Donald Trump's national security adviser, Michael Flynn, just said the United States was officially putting Iran on notice over its "destabilizing activity" after it test-fired a ballistic missile over the weekend, reports Reuters.

"As of today, we are officially putting Iran on notice," Flynn told a White House briefing, without explaining exactly what that meant.

Flynn told reporters that the Trump administration "condemns such actions by Iran that undermine security, prosperity and stability throughout and beyond the Middle East that puts American lives at risk."

Flynn said the ballistic missile launch on Sunday was in defiance of a U.N. Security Council resolution that called on Iran not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons.

Ballistic missiles can vary widely in range and use, and are often divided into categories based on range. There is no indication that the missile Iran test-fired has any intercontinental capability.

UPDATE

Daniel McAdams writes:

Over the weekend Iran tested a medium-range ballistic missile which Flynn claims violates the P5+1 negotiated and UN-backed Iran nuclear deal. UN Security Council Resolution 2231 "calls on" Iran to not undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons, but this section has been interpreted as a request rather than a prohibition. There are no specific provisions in the nuclear deal that explicitly prevent Iran from testing a missile.

In fact, Iran has tested several ballistic missiles since the nuclear agreement was signed but this time the US reaction is far different. Iran has been "emboldened," said General Flynn, by an Obama Administration that was "weak and ineffective" in its dealings with Iran. He went on to lament that Iran has not been "thankful to the United States for these agreements."

Flynn's subordinates have long complained of his aggressive style, including a demand after the 2012 Benghazi attack on a CIA facility that analysts find some link to Iran. This pressure to "stove-pipe" intelligence to suit a pre-determined policy is eerily reminiscent of the methods used to push the 2003 Iraq war. He was fired from his previous job as Defense Intelligence Agency chief for, reportedly, his extremely hostile views toward Iran.

Adding together President Trump's call to the Saudi king, where they discussed Iran's "destabilizing" actions, and a pre-emptive war authorization bill languishing in the US House, the current danger of a US strike on Iran is just an accident -- or a false flag -- away.

[ajax]

U.S. military probing more possible civilian deaths in Yemen raid
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN15G5RX" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(Reuters) - The U.S. military said on Wednesday it was looking into whether more civilians were killed in a raid on al Qaeda in Yemen on the weekend, in the first operation authorized by President Donald Trump as commander in chief.

U.S. Navy SEAL William “Ryan” Owens was killed in the raid on a branch of al Qaeda, also known as AQAP, in al Bayda province, which the Pentagon said also killed 14 militants. However, medics at the scene said about 30 people, including 10 women and children, were killed.

U.S. Central Command said in a statement that an investigating team had "concluded regrettably that civilian non-combatants were likely killed" during Sunday's raid. It said children may have been among the casualties.

Central Command said its assessment "seeks to determine if there were any still-undetected civilian casualties in the ferocious firefight."

U.S. military officials told Reuters that Trump approved his first covert counterterrorism operation without sufficient intelligence, ground support or adequate backup preparations.

As a result, three officials said, the attacking SEAL team found itself dropping onto a reinforced al Qaeda base defended by landmines, snipers, and a larger than expected contingent of heavily armed Islamist extremists.

The Pentagon directed queries about the officials' characterization of the raid to U.S. Central Command, which pointed only to its statement on Wednesday.

"CENTCOM asks for operations we believe have a good chance for success and when we ask for authorization we certainly believe there is a chance of successful operations based on our planning," CENTCOM spokesman Colonel John Thomas said.

"Any operation where you are going to put operators on the ground has inherent risks," he said.

The U.S. officials said the extremists’ base had been identified as a target before the Obama administration left office on Jan. 20, but then-President Barack Obama held off approving a raid ahead of his departure.

A White House official said the operation was thoroughly vetted by the previous administration and that the previous defense secretary had signed off on it in January. The raid was delayed for operational reasons, the White House official said.

The military officials who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity said "a brutal firefight" killed Owens and at least 15 Yemeni women and children. One of the dead was the 8-year-old daughter of Anwar al-Awlaki, a militant killed by a 2011 U.S. drone strike.

Some of the women were firing at the U.S. force, Pentagon spokesman Captain Jeff Davis told reporters.

The American elite forces did not seize any militants or take any prisoners offsite, but White House spokesman Sean Spicer said on Wednesday the raid yielded benefits.

"Knowing that we killed an estimated 14 AQAP members and that we gathered an unbelievable amount of intelligence that will prevent the potential deaths or attacks on American soil – is something that I think most service members understand, that that’s why they joined the service,” Spicer said.

A senior leader in Yemen's al Qaeda branch, Abdulraoof al-Dhahab, and other militants were killed in the gunbattle, al Qaeda said.

One of the three U.S. officials said on-the-ground surveillance of the compound was “minimal, at best.”

“The decision was made ... to leave it to the incoming administration, partly in the hope that more and better intelligence could be collected,” that official said.

As Sunday's firefight intensified, the raiders called in Marine helicopter gunships and Harrier jump jets, and then two MV-22 Osprey vertical takeoff and landing aircraft to extract the SEALs.

One of the two suffered engine failure, two of the officials said, and hit the ground so hard that two crew members were injured, and one of the Marine jets had to launch a precision-guided bomb to destroy it.

Trump traveled to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware on Wednesday in an unexpected visit to meet the family of Owens, who had been a chief special warfare operator.

[simpleton]

Latter-day Saints in the military do not need to feel torn between their country and their God. In the Church, “we believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law” (Articles of Faith 1:12). Military service shows dedication to this principle.

If Latter-day Saints are called upon to go into battle, they can look to the example of Captain Moroni, the great military leader in the Book of Mormon. Although he was a mighty warrior, he “did not delight in bloodshed” (Alma 48:11). He was “firm in the faith of Christ,” and his only reason for fighting was to “defend his people, his rights, and his country, and his religion” (Alma 48:13). If Latter-day Saints must go to war, they should go in a spirit of truth and righteousness, with a desire to do good. They should go with love in their hearts for all God’s children, including those on the opposing side. Then, if they are required to shed another’s blood, their action will not be counted as a sin.

Dont even compare the above to what the United States is doing over seas ...

Moroni fought in "Defense" of freedom , not for other peoples possessions, nor did he desire to force other countrys to hand over their oil and other natural resources...
The so called "fighting for freedom" on foreign soil is the biggest lie most faithful lds soldiers carry about in their minds ... actually not just the soldiers minds but most Americans..
I have some relatives that went over to Afganistan and Iraq and returned with a bloodlust that was chilling... and for what? .. to protect the oil industry ... freedom and be d**d

I say send the leaders over there to physically lead those battles and wars they so love to wage like George Washington and Moroni did, then we shall see how their taste for blood is, not being behind the protection of the Pentagon and other safe places....
I do believe being subject to the powers that be until He comes whos right it is to reign. But absolutely not to the point of killing others against my conscious for so-called BS freedom in foreign lands ...
Dont tell me these are righteous wars commanded by God for freedom ....

As far as i am concerned innocent blood is upon our hands in all the wars of late and that is besides the murdering our own offspring...

[Vision]

Latter-day Saints in the military do not need to feel torn between their country and their God. In the Church, “we believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law” (Articles of Faith 1:12). Military service shows dedication to this principle.

If Latter-day Saints are called upon to go into battle, they can look to the example of Captain Moroni, the great military leader in the Book of Mormon. Although he was a mighty warrior, he “did not delight in bloodshed” (Alma 48:11). He was “firm in the faith of Christ,” and his only reason for fighting was to “defend his people, his rights, and his country, and his religion” (Alma 48:13). If Latter-day Saints must go to war, they should go in a spirit of truth and righteousness, with a desire to do good. They should go with love in their hearts for all God’s children, including those on the opposing side. Then, if they are required to shed another’s blood, their action will not be counted as a sin.

Eddie how sad for you that you missed the most important message of the BOM.

3rd Nephi 6:14 And thus there became a great inequality in all the land, insomuch that the church began to be broken up; yea, insomuch that in the thirtieth year the church was broken up in all the land save it were among a few of the Lamanites who were converted unto the true faith; and they would not depart from it, for they were firm, and steadfast, and immovable, willing with all diligence to keep the commandments of the Lord.

That verse cross references back to the Anti Nephi Lehi's. So if you want to be counted as being converted to the "true faith" you better drop your weapons of war

[eddie]

Latter-day Saints in the military do not need to feel torn between their country and their God. In the Church, “we believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law” (Articles of Faith 1:12). Military service shows dedication to this principle.

If Latter-day Saints are called upon to go into battle, they can look to the example of Captain Moroni, the great military leader in the Book of Mormon. Although he was a mighty warrior, he “did not delight in bloodshed” (Alma 48:11). He was “firm in the faith of Christ,” and his only reason for fighting was to “defend his people, his rights, and his country, and his religion” (Alma 48:13). If Latter-day Saints must go to war, they should go in a spirit of truth and righteousness, with a desire to do good. They should go with love in their hearts for all God’s children, including those on the opposing side. Then, if they are required to shed another’s blood, their action will not be counted as a sin.

Eddie how sad for you that you missed the most important message of the BOM.

3rd Nephi 6:14 And thus there became a great inequality in all the land, insomuch that the church began to be broken up; yea, insomuch that in the thirtieth year the church was broken up in all the land save it were among a few of the Lamanites who were converted unto the true faith; and they would not depart from it, for they were firm, and steadfast, and immovable, willing with all diligence to keep the commandments of the Lord.

That verse cross references back to the Anti Nephi Lehi's. So if you want to be counted as being converted to the "true faith" you better drop your weapons of war

Vision, how sad that you think I would rely on your word for the correct answer, ironic that your forum name is vision! :))

[eddie]

Latter-day Saints in the military do not need to feel torn between their country and their God. In the Church, “we believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law” (Articles of Faith 1:12). Military service shows dedication to this principle.

If Latter-day Saints are called upon to go into battle, they can look to the example of Captain Moroni, the great military leader in the Book of Mormon. Although he was a mighty warrior, he “did not delight in bloodshed” (Alma 48:11). He was “firm in the faith of Christ,” and his only reason for fighting was to “defend his people, his rights, and his country, and his religion” (Alma 48:13). If Latter-day Saints must go to war, they should go in a spirit of truth and righteousness, with a desire to do good. They should go with love in their hearts for all God’s children, including those on the opposing side. Then, if they are required to shed another’s blood, their action will not be counted as a sin.

Dont even compare the above to what the United States is doing over seas ...

Moroni fought in "Defense" of freedom , not for other peoples possessions, nor did he desire to force other countrys to hand over their oil and other natural resources...
The so called "fighting for freedom" on foreign soil is the biggest lie most faithful lds soldiers carry about in their minds ... actually not just the soldiers minds but most Americans..
I have some relatives that went over to Afganistan and Iraq and returned with a bloodlust that was chilling... and for what? .. to protect the oil industry ... freedom and be d**d

I say send the leaders over there to physically lead those battles and wars they so love to wage like George Washington and Moroni did, then we shall see how their taste for blood is, not being behind the protection of the Pentagon and other safe places....
I do believe being subject to the powers that be until He comes whos right it is to reign. But absolutely not to the point of killing others against my conscious for so-called BS freedom in foreign lands ...
Dont tell me these are righteous wars commanded by God for freedom ....



As far as i am concerned innocent blood is upon our hands in all the wars of late and that is besides the murdering our own offspring...

I would assume you have never fought for our Country? We wouldn't have the Constitution if those men had acted like cowards.
I feel reasonably sure you would have sat on the sidelines and protested the fight. I don't like war, its a terrible thing but in some cases necessary. These wars without victory confuse me also, but we live in the best place in the world and it came at the price of bloodshed, I am thankful to the veterans who fight for their country, the Viet Nam soldiers were treated horribly when they came home, that is shameful!

[simpleton]

Latter-day Saints in the military do not need to feel torn between their country and their God. In the Church, “we believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law” (Articles of Faith 1:12). Military service shows dedication to this principle.

If Latter-day Saints are called upon to go into battle, they can look to the example of Captain Moroni, the great military leader in the Book of Mormon. Although he was a mighty warrior, he “did not delight in bloodshed” (Alma 48:11). He was “firm in the faith of Christ,” and his only reason for fighting was to “defend his people, his rights, and his country, and his religion” (Alma 48:13). If Latter-day Saints must go to war, they should go in a spirit of truth and righteousness, with a desire to do good. They should go with love in their hearts for all God’s children, including those on the opposing side. Then, if they are required to shed another’s blood, their action will not be counted as a sin.

Dont even compare the above to what the United States is doing over seas ...

Moroni fought in "Defense" of freedom , not for other peoples possessions, nor did he desire to force other countrys to hand over their oil and other natural resources...
The so called "fighting for freedom" on foreign soil is the biggest lie most faithful lds soldiers carry about in their minds ... actually not just the soldiers minds but most Americans..
I have some relatives that went over to Afganistan and Iraq and returned with a bloodlust that was chilling... and for what? .. to protect the oil industry ... freedom and be d**d

I say send the leaders over there to physically lead those battles and wars they so love to wage like George Washington and Moroni did, then we shall see how their taste for blood is, not being behind the protection of the Pentagon and other safe places....
I do believe being subject to the powers that be until He comes whos right it is to reign. But absolutely not to the point of killing others against my conscious for so-called BS freedom in foreign lands ...
Dont tell me these are righteous wars commanded by God for freedom ....



As far as i am concerned innocent blood is upon our hands in all the wars of late and that is besides the murdering our own offspring...

I would assume you have never fought for our Country? We wouldn't have the Constitution if those men had acted like cowards.
I feel reasonably sure you would have sat on the sidelines and protested the fight. I don't like war, its a terrible thing but in some cases necessary. These wars without victory confuse me also, but we live in the best place in the world and it came at the price of bloodshed, I am thankful to the veterans who fight for their country, the Viet Nam soldiers were treated horribly when they came home, that is shameful!

Maybe we are on separate pages...
but yes I have never "fought" for my country , at the same time do not compare the revolutionary war of defense for liberty inside our borders to waging wars overseas for oil, and other Sovereign nations resources. War is and has been mostly for the big corporations and bankers, (i believe anyways ) war is also a racket , as financing is provided for both sides by the bankers,and huge profits are made...
If you read and study the book of Mormon in regards to the justification of war it was only in defense, not offense, and the minute they went to war on the offense for vengeance they lost their power. (Nephites)
How I personally feel is I would rather lose my life than to take someone else's , the thought of taking anyone's life makes me shudder...
You mention the word coward, well we shall see if and when the time comes to the actual defense of our country's freedom , but, I can tell you this , I shall never fight in any if these wars started by these war mongers in foreign nations by lies and deceit, saying for freedom but we all know it is all lies or at least we should know.

As far as war without victory there is nothing confusing about it if you take into consideration the corruption at the top of our government, (among other places). The Vietnam and Korean War were both easy to win but the corrupt powers that be had other plans. Besides the fact that they were not justified wars. I agree with the founding Fathers, stay out of foreign entanglements.
But I suppose we must fulfill prophecy: " The United States will spend her means warring in foreign nations then the nations of the earth will get together and say come let us go up and divide the land of America, then the sons of liberty will swear by the blood of their forefathers that the land will not be divided... "
Then will our country will go through it last greatest peril....