The growing mess that is Iraq

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Vatican's approval of Iraq strikes a rare exception to peace policy

By Jean-Louis De La Vaissiere August 13, 2014 12:13 AM
Vatican City (AFP) - Fearing a genocide of Christians, the Vatican has given its approval to US military air strikes in Iraq -- a rare exception to its policy of peaceful conflict resolution.

Related Stories
The Holy See's ambassador to the United Nations, Silvano Tomasi, this weekend supported US air strikes aimed at halting the advance of Sunni Islamic State (IS) militants, calling for "intervention now, before it is too late".

"Military action might be necessary," he said.

While the Vatican vocally disapproved of the US-led campaign in Iraq in 2003 and the 2013 plan for air strikes on Syria -- fearing both might make the situations worse for Christians on the ground -- fears of ethnic cleansing by Islamists has forced a policy change.

Tomasi's appeal follows warnings from Church leaders in Iraq that the persecution is becoming a genocide, with urgent help needed to protect Christians and Yezidis in the north of the country, where tens of thousands have been forced to flee for their lives.

Military support was needed "to stop the wolf getting to the flock to kill, eat, destroy", Rabban al-Qas, the Chaldean bishop of Amadiyah, told Vatican radio.



Pope Sends Envoy To Iraq To Help Ousted Christians Play Video

Tomasi insisted "those supplying arms and funds to the fundamentalists, (and) the countries tacitly supporting them, must be revealed", while Qas pointed the finger at Saudi Arabia.

Others, like the Iraq-based leader of the Chaldean Catholic Church, Louis Sako, called for wider intervention, saying the US strikes offer little hope the jihadists would be defeated.

"The position of the American President Obama only to give military assistance to protect Arbil is disappointing," said Sako, who has been trying to persuade his flock to resist attempts to drive them out of Iraq, and turn down offers of humanitarian visas to Europe.

- 'What could be worse?' -

The Vatican had been criticised for being slow to react, with Pope Francis limiting himself to calls for a peaceful resolution, expressing on Sunday his "dismay and disbelief" over the violence and calling for an "effective political solution".



View gallery

An Iraqi Christian girl, who fled with her family the violence in Iraq's largest Christian town …
The Vatican's Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue on Tuesday called for Muslim leaders to denounce the brutality of IS militants, saying there was no possible justification for their "unspeakable crimes".

The council said Islamic State militants were guilty of the "heinous practice of decapitation, crucifixion and stringing up bodies in public places", insisting that "no reason, certainly not religion, could justify such barbarism".

Religious watchers said Tomasi's support for air strikes did not mean a change in Vatican policy on war spearheaded by a bellicose Francis.

"There has been no change in thinking. The Vatican's take is that the reality now is apocalyptic and there is no alternative," said Vatican expert John Allen, who writes for the Boston Globe.

"They believed overthrowing Saddam Hussein in 2003 or Bashar al-Assad in 2013 would make things worse for Christians. In 2014, what could be worse for them than the Islamic State's victory?" he said.

The Catholic Church's catechism defines the concept of a "just war", which includes the prevention of genocide among other war crimes.

For Sandro Magister, who writes for La Stampa's Vatican Insider, the crisis should have elicited a stronger stance from the pope on Iraq.

"His timid response has been very surprising. He talks about the persecution of Christians in Iraq as if it was some sort of natural disaster, without singling out those responsible," he said.
 
Essentially america is fulfilling their rhetoric of the rise of ISIS being the result of ‘sectarianism’ – now merely taking guard of their interests with the ability to make things work their way as the middle east rages on fire with sectarian strife. A sectarian war between Shia and Sunni Muslims has long been the agenda for the Western-Zionist alliance, as well as various tyrannical regimes in the region who are ironically allies of the West, namely Saudi Arabia.

http://www.digital-resistance.com/middle-east/real-reason-west-now-getting-involved-iraq/
 
It's totally horrific. Grotesque. I think our government is nearly unified that we have to do something about this one. That we have to help. I hate war. I hate it. I hate it. But they have to do something to defend and help the people there from the barbarism that's going on there right now. I don't think there is any diplomatic solution to solving this.

http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/world/story/1.2744266
 
Could this solving this situation unify the world powers...? It's of Biblical proportions, happening in Nineveh. Kind of eye opening.

I don't understand it well...but it just crossed my mind that ISIS could make allies out of foes in ME countries in order to stop ISIS. (even in Canada, interesting to read that McKay was talking about finding whatever diplomatic chanels there are with Iran which we ended in 2012). And even Russia and the US have a common enemy with this because Russia supports Assad, the US is against Assad but needs to stop ISIS who they helped arm to defeat Assad? They are a threat to the Saudis too...who have shown a bit of frustration with the US recently. Whoa. What a complex world.
 
Last edited:
I hope the solution brings lasting peace and an end to extremeism because of cooperation between religious moderates of all stripes who have a common interest in stopping it.
 
Could this solving this situation unify the world powers...? It's of Biblical proportions, happening in Nineveh. Kind of eye opening.

I don't understand it well...but it just crossed my mind that ISIS could make allies out of foes in ME countries in order to stop ISIS. (even in Canada, interesting to read that McKay was talking about finding whatever diplomatic chanels there are with Iran which we ended in 2012). And even Russia and the US have a common enemy with this because Russia supports Assad, the US is against Assad but needs to stop ISIS who they helped arm to defeat Assad? They are a threat to the Saudis too...who have shown a bit of frustration with the US recently. Whoa. What a complex world.

Sorry. It was Liberal MP John McKay not Peter MCKay who said they need to find diplomatic channels in Iran. That threw me off for a minute. I had feint hope that this was a turning point in world relations in some kind of bizarre twist.
 
Last edited:
These guys are monstrous. What is their aim exactly? It's a cancer:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/21/world/meast/isis-iraq-syria-beat-lister/index.html?c=&page=3

This article does mention unlikely allies coming together to defeat them. They have to be stopped. I just hope that whatever efforts the contries enter into they don't end up creating more extremists by arming new folks to destroy the previous faction then having an even worse problem to contend with.
 
I don't think there is any diplomatic solution to solving this.


Then I would argue that you don't have a Christian imagination.

If there is ever a situation where violence is the only solution, then Jesus' dream of the Kindom is for naught.
 
"We don't negotiate with terrorists!" exclaimed Maggie Thatcher.

But eventually the British government did negotiate with the IRA, and this brought about a lasting peace.

ISIS, as reprehensible as their methods are, are nevertheless an idealist organization with lofty goals. I think negotiating with them, as well as with Al Queda and other similar terrorist organizations, is the way to go. Most terrorist organizations are not sadists who commit terror for the sake of terror, but have lofty goals. Using terror, to them, is the only way to realize their goals.

I may be simplistic, but I think one should simply respectfully approach them and ask: "How can we help you realize your goals in a peaceful manner?"
 
Then I would argue that you don't have a Christian imagination.

If there is ever a situation where violence is the only solution, then Jesus' dream of the Kindom is for naught.
well, thank you very much.
I don't want war anywhere Bette! I don't know if it's possible to
negotiate diplomatically with armed terrorists with no central governance to negotiate with, who want to die for whatever their cause is, who are slaughtering hundreds of innocent people, who have no recognition of borders, who are recruited from different countries, who are beheading people including journalists trying to report the problems, who have captured neutral humanitarian and medical aid workers...who took over an air base in Libya ? with heavy weapons (which was later bombed to deal with that threat)...who are hell bent on distraction to anyone who is not part of their extreme ideology....how
do you even show love to an enemy who does these savage things and doesn't care if they die for their 'cause', in fact, wants to? Give them cookies? What do you suggest? The people there whose loved ones are being killed want it to stop now - and so would anyone. They don't want to be held up with red tape diplomacy while more people die. Do you have any good ideas because I'd welcome hearing them instead of being told I have no Christian imagination. I sincerely would.
 
Last edited:
The best hope for changing this long term is for moderate Muslims to really join efforts to end Islamic fundementalism - to educate youth, including girls, well. But that takes time and this is a crisis now.
 
We can prevent more murderous psychopathy by not arming rebels in the future who just grow more menacing.

2 million refugees have fled Syria. 200, 000 (more?) Syrians have been killed. Some who escaped to Iraq are coming back to Syria, which shows how bad things are getting in Iraq. I don't think most of us can fathom how bad things are. If there was ever a time for Christian imagination it would've been long before things got this far but the Christian imagination forgot about Syria in large part? I have no idea what should be done. Of course I'd prefer there to be a peaceful solution. Does anyone have one? I don't want more war!!!
 
Last edited:
Hermann? How can we help them achieve their goals?! I don't think so. Did you read about the ISIS rebel from Australia who posted a photo of himself with his two young sons, little kids, holding up a severed head?! These are not rational people. Assad is probably more rational, Gaddaffi was probably more rational - than these savage wild cards. It's probably the developed world's fault for arming these guys to take on Assad instead of diplomacy long beforehand but nobody stopped it. Now it's spreading.
 
Then I would argue that you don't have a Christian imagination.

If there is ever a situation where violence is the only solution, then Jesus' dream of the Kindom is for naught.

This comment is bothering me - I don't think it was fair of you to say that then not propose a solution from your imagination (I might have agreed with you if you have a good idea) because I really don't want to see more wars happening. I'd like to know what you and others think are realistic solutions to stopping the violence right now. I agree that long term peaceful solutions for keeping the peace are possible but what about the people dying now? They've been ignored and fleeing Syria for years - normal people who wanted a normal life and didn't ask for any of this- while we looked the other way, now this rebel faction has become more extremist and is spreading across borders and doesn't care if they die for their cause (which I do not understand except they seem to hate everyone). What should be done? What's the Christian thing to do, with this reality, do you think?
 
Last edited:
Hermann? How can we help them achieve their goals?! I don't think so. Did you read about the ISIS rebel from Australia who posted a photo of himself with his two young sons, little kids, holding up a severed head?! These are not rational people. Assad is probably more rational, Gaddaffi was probably more rational - than these savage wild cards. It's probably the developed world's fault for arming these guys to take on Assad instead of diplomacy long beforehand but nobody stopped it. Now it's spreading.

To ask how we can help them achieve their goal is the negotiation opener. Then we discuss and negotiate what might realistically and peacefully be done to achieve their goal, or those parts of their goal that are realistically achievable.

If, for instance, the goal of ISIS is to establish a fundamentalist Islamic state in the desert regions of Iraq and Syria, then the peaceful means toward this "Caliphate" is a referendum, to which both Iraq and Syria would have to agree. If both countries agree, and if the referendum in the area in which ISIS wishes to establish their Caliphate goes through, then nothing more stands in their way. But the way to get there is through negotiations, not violence!

I've heard that the Bedouin tribes of that region support ISIS. The Bedouins, as well as the Kurds, were overlooked when the Ottoman Empire was arbitrarily carved up by England and France in 1920, and the present nation states of the Middle East were established -- without asking the natives! Most troubles in the Middle East go back to this mistake.
 
Back
Top