Britain and Germany both pursued selfish interests in W/W2?? as I see it Germany was way in front in the selfish stakes. It was Germany who brutally conquered adjoining nations for the 'good' of Germany. States can't be held to the same moral standards as individuals?? They can and they must. The German nation butchered inmates of concentration camps then so followed the general German population. Because of fear in some but others 'we are winning the war so what the hell, Hitler (the nation) must be right'. Germany's leaders were butcherous criminals then so became the vast majority of the German people and armed forces.Look at Australia, once a nation with outstanding compassion. Yet under this present greedy lying mean spirited Goverment I think we have/are changing. Again the people following the nation or Government. Now if in both of the examples above the national leaders were decent and honourable then so the peoples to a great degree. Australia never went to war without a declaration of war previously, though it was a close thing regards Vietnam. Now not only have "we" gone to an undeclared war we have invaded another nation, a nation at peace with us also. Note now the Australian people, most now have followed what I see as a corrupt Government and are agreeable to this undeclared war in THEIR name. I mean the South Vietnamese were 'leant-on or ordered to ask for our intervention, NOT SO!! the sovereign people of Iraq. We have slavishly followed America whose aim in the Middle East is to foster democracy, whether they,the Iraq's at present want it or not. Yet this same peace loving, DEMOCRATIC loving! America has fostered many, many insurrections in other lands many in South America. As a result many peoples were/are forced to live under right wing and very brutal dictatorships. Funny country, not ha-ha but queer, America.
I agree with the quote mentioned written by John Stuart Mill and with Owen Harries our foreign policy must be a moral one for the good of other nations and for our good.

As a Christian teacher and writer for 7 years, some people are trying to convince me that George Bush and John Howard are christians and are acting "in God's will" where Iraq is concerned.
As far as I'm concerned these men are not demonstrating the love and compassion of Christ, and the New Testament is clear, that to wage or initiate war is WRONG. The attack on Iraq is not only unlawful by international human rights standards, it's immoral because to create war is to kill, and it is against Christ's teaching and other teachings in the New Testament.

Teresa van Lieshout
Author
Faith and Politics: A Framework for Australian Social and POlitical Life
http://onenationwa.tripod.com/

Teresa,

Do you think that the Rushdie Fatwa has affected the way in which Islam is percieved & in some cases published in print?

Are you as critical of Islam as you are of christianity? or, like most authors Post Rushdie, just scared to death of critising Islam.

Sayeret: You have strayed from the topic but as you ask I think that islam is a bloodthirsty,cruel, pagan religion. Only three islamic or part islamic nations have some freedoms we take for granted in the Christian west. The inhabitants of all the other islamic nations live in squalor and are ruled by intolerant bloody dictators. regards, numbat

Numbat, I was interested as Islam seems to be protected from the criticism levelled by Teresa. A great level of debate here concern how 'morally bereft' the West is, whilst accepting that it's ok to chop someone head off, provided he is Christian Or Jew & if it is Allahs will.
I want to hear the progressive left criticize these monsters, but I won't be holding my breath!

Sayaret,

I am criticising John Howard and George Bush, as humans, and their initiating war. I am not criticising christianity. I love Christ, and so uphold his teachings and the New Testament.

Yes, in my writing I am critical of Islam. Clearly Islam has created nations and cultures that do not proport the love and compassion of Christ. They oppress women, they are too violent, and there is not true freedom. Freedom comes from love, not Bush and Howards way, or from Islam. Jesus Christ, and the prayer and practice of Christians combined, are the only entities that create human freedom.

Teresa,

Are you saying that Jesus would have preferred the murders and genocide going on in Iraq, not to mention Saddam's support of terrorism, to continue, rather than have someone go to war to stop them? Are you saying that there is no Christian obligation to stop these sort of atrocities going on in the world? You obviously think that Jesus would condem men going to war to combat evil and protect the weak? I wouldn't know what Jesus said about war in the Bible, (apart from him saying he was going to return and wage war on the countries of the Earth, not much I believe)but your Jesus doesn't bear much similarity to the one I learned of. I think you're trying to mask your political views behind religious ones.

In relation to Islam, it's really a quite tolerant religion. Throughout history Jewish and Christian communities were generally allowed to thrive under Muslim rulers. It's only since the upsurge in fundamentalist Islam that the problems of following any religious texts to their logical conclusions have become apparent. If you think that the situation would be better off under Christian fundamentalists, think again.

In regards to morality in foreign policy; there is only room for morality insofar as it does not interfere with self interest. There is no such thing as altruism. It simply does not exist. Everything we do, either as an individual or a nation is done first and foremost to produce benefit for ourselves. We give to charity to make ourselves feel better, Teresa follows the word of God to ensure she goes to heaven, Australia intervenes in East Timor so we don't feel we have blood on our hands. Nothing wrong with this and we're lucky that in serving our own interests, it generally benefits others. All take and no give is not in our best interests.

Oh! Cranky PLEASE read about islam, it was founded in bloodshed (YES as had Christianity unfortunately) it has NEVER EVER! allowed other religions freely in its jurisdiction.If and when it has these other believers (or as they say unbelievers)they had/have to pay extra tax and have other restrictions placed on them for their beliefs. It is brutal and it is totally and utterly pagan. Before you get your fingers to your keyboard, or your knickers in a twist, I definately do not nor would not hate moslems. Their leaders and terrorist do appear on my 'don't like' page but that's all.We, Christians, win in the end - I have read the end of the bookRegards, numbat

Cranky,

Islam tolerant? What do you think created the kind of society that existed under Saddam? Islam is tolerant of evil, not good, it allows it to thrive, insidiously. What do you think creates the oppression in the Middle East? It's hundred's of years of Islamic teaching.

Christ's (New Testament) teaching is the only thing that creates human freedom; love, compassion, good-will, prayer, holiness, righteousness.

I'm not hiding my political views behind religious ones; they are one and the same. Political and religious views can exist side by side. I know, I've just written a book about it.

Teresa van Lieshout
http://onenationwa.tripod.com/

Teresa, Saddam was one of the most secular rulers in the Middle East. This oppression you're talking about - this would be the same oppression that the US, Britain,Australia and a number of European and Asian nations are helping to eliminate? By the way, you didn't answer my questions about Christian obligation. I'm not surprised.

Teresa, writing a book on a subject does not make you an expert on that subject, you might be well informed as to your own opinion, but that's it.

Numbat, Jews and Christians were allowed to live in peace under many Muslim rulers. Even if they had to pay extra taxes etc, this is still alot more tolerant than being exterminated which was what happened to Jews and heretic Christians living in Christian Europe. I'm no great fan of Islam (or any religion for that matter) but at least call a spade a spade.

Cranky,

Your not a fan of any religion? Are you an atheist? I'm not taking advice from an atheist, agnostic, or humanist. Secular leaders have been barbaric; stalin, Hitler, Musolini. Saddam was Islamic, was he not? The problem with non-christians, or atheists, is that they don't provide any concrete, foundational solutions. Atheism, agnosticism, and humanism teaching increasingly in Australia over the past 30 years has created most of the social moral problems that our young people and society suffer. So no faith, is no solution.

Or Cranky, is your solution war? That's not a solution because war is killing. It doesn't matter if Saddam was Islamic or secular; he was a murder. But to solve that by further killing (war) is not the solution either, the solution is love. If you want my solution you'll have to read my book, but then again what would I know because I don't know anything, except my own opinion. But what I say is based on the teachings of Jesus Christ, so you decide for yourself. And you're right, he's going to come for a 2nd time to wage war on all those who have rejected him. We are not "God", we aren't to do that. I guess that's his business since he is the master of this universe.

I am sick of George W's freedom on the march as we were with Britain's land of hope of hope and glory - mother of the free. One only has to study Britain and America's roles in the Middle East since WW1. Economic imperialism is the only term for it, as it is now in Iraq. US-Israeli guided democracy is the whole long-term plan projected by the neo-cons for the ME. What some Israelis term a Coca-Democratica. We can only hope and pray for a rejuvenated UN to prevent it happening, with America punished for her pre-emptiveness and relegated to just another nation in a multi-polar powered world.

Bushbred,

I agree. I'm sick of the Bush/Howard war-mongering too. A just, fair, democratic, and strong UN we need. They should reform the UN so that 5 nations don't have VETO, but rather decisions are made by two thirds majority of all member nations, thus making it more democratic.

Hi Teresa,

Saddam is the head of the secular baathist regime.
Got news for you: Hitler was a religious devout Christian!.
Just read any of his speeches on the German government archives website (especially the April, 1922) where he believes he is on a mission from the Lord to fight (any resemblance with modern day leaders?) or the 1937 speech "the smell of Jews can be washed with Baptism water"..I know you guys are in denial but greed & violence are inherent in people, some just like to use the "God excuse".

Ash

Hey Ash,

I'm not in denial mate; I AGREE with you, greed and violence are inherent in people! That's why we need a saviour (christ) because humanity has a 'sinful' nature; a propensity for greed and violence. Hilter was a nut!...not a christian. You can't 'fight' for the Lord with violence (as your right...Hitler did and some modern leaders are trying to do)...You 'fight' for the Lord with LOVE. In fact the word 'fight' is completely wrong, you SERVE the Lord. Love is a decision, it takes determination, discipline, courage. Hitler had a very distorted view of christianity and it's relationship with the Jews, because Jesus was a Jew, therefore God HONOURS Jews. Hitler was just crazy, and very violent.

Teresa,

Well said. I believe there is little focus on what we have in common between the Abrahamic religions even though we have much too much to share.

I was lucky to be a musslim who grew up in a catholic school back in Egypt. I still have great memories of Orthodox christians friends and muslims living together..I believe love and tolerance is the choice of the majority but minority fanatics seems to have the loudest voices..always!.

Ash