Earlier today I was glancing through the newspaper and saw this blurb:
PORT-OF-SPAIN, Trinidad – Defending his brand of world politics, President Barack Obama said Sunday that he “strengthens our hand” by reaching out to enemies of the United States and making sure that the nation is a leader, not a lecturer, of democracy.
Now no one would accuse me of being an Obama fan, and most definitely I don’t like the policies of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez or Cuba’s Fidel Castro. I have spoken out against leftist dictators and power grabbers in the past. Just not my cup of tea.
And I don’t care for Obama’s stances on most issues. I hate it because I really want to like his policies, but cannot really find them compatible with the way I was taught. (My history, economics and government teacher was my favorite, and he influenced me too much it seems!)
That said, I read the above-mentioned paragraph from the article and considered things differently based on a better understanding I have gained in recent months from talking with others outside of the United States. Additionally and more importantly, I have been rereading the Bible and have been reminded time and again of how Jesus lived. It’s not exactly the same as most so-called Christians live today. Let’s see how He told us to treat our enemies.
Matthew 5
43“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
And now see here… this is Joel Rosenberg. A forty-something man who grew up with an Orthodox Jewish father who later accepted Jesus. He considers himself an evangelical Christian and has a strong support of Israel. I keep tabs on his blog and was amazed in early April when I read this concerning North Korea’s plans to test a missile.
The danger, experts say, is that the missile could reach Alaska or Hawaii. It’s not clear if it could reach Seattle, Los Angeles, San Diego or another Pacific coast American city. But the missile’s very existence poses a real threat to U.S. national security. What if it is carrying a nuclear warhead? What if the “test” is actually designed to launch an attack that could blindside us? We shouldn’t be taking any chances. We should take out the missile and its launch pad immediately and send a crystal clear message to Pyongyang — and, by extension, to Tehran and other rogue nations — that serious threats to our security will be dealt with firmly and decisively. Some might say that taking pre-emptive military action against an enemy that endangers you is overreacting. But wouldn’t it have been better if the U.S. had taken decisive pre-emptive action against al Qaeda before 9/11? (emphasis mine)
He wants us to go into another country and take out their missile? Are our troops not already stretched thin enough? Do we really need to start another war? Do we need to be involved in another global police mission? North Korea is a godless, cruel nation, but why this approach? I don’t understand this fear-mongering mentality! Mr. Rosenberg, is not God capable of caring for the world on His own? Does He really need America’s help in policing the world and making sure everyone behaves? Yes, I realize you think this will keep America safe and maybe I am wrong, but still. I am just tired of this hardliner evangelical stance on our enemies. So what’s wrong with talking to them? Read again what Jesus said about our enemies.
“Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. “
So my question is this: are we Americans first or Christ followers? And if you say, “definitely Jesus is first in my life” then prove it! Start loving your enemies and praying for them. Why do sanctions, violence and retaliation have to always be our options? Why this “you’re either with us or against us” approach to our enemies? I don’t see the “let’s bomb ‘em to protect our interests” plan promoted by the One Who came to serve others and redeem mankind. And that includes His enemies.
Let’s seek to imitate our Savior — pursue peace, love and serve others, stand up for the oppressed.
Let your light shine in this world so that others will see your good works and glorify your Father which is in heaven. (see Mt. 5:16)
Are our lights shining? Does the world see the good that we do in the name of Christ or do they say “Oh, those are the Christians! See how tough they are on their enemies?”
Sadly, this is the mentality many of them have. We are not accurately representing our Lord. We call ourselves Christians when we are nothing like Jesus Christ.
By the way, we overcome evil with GOOD! (Romans 12:21)
9 comments
Comments feed for this article
April 24, 2009 at 4:42 am
Mythos
Excellent article Susanne, you’ve made a very good point.
Although I agree with the Love Your Neighbors philosophy promoted by Christ, I also believe in self-preservation…..and not just for America, but all people who wish to be free.
I think the countries of the world who have chosen to embrace freedom should indeed strike first when it comes to countries such as North Korea. Small time (and usually insane) dictators should not be allowed to threaten other nations, suppress-murder-and torture their own people, etc.
The way I see it, your freedom ends at the tip of my nose, and by crossing that line willingly, you not only show disrespect but you accept any and all consequences of your actions.
So with that in mind, if North Korea’s “little dictator” wishes to threaten the U.S., or anyone else, with his missile(s) then he, in my opinion, acknowledges and willingly accepts all retaliatory actions against him. Including a first strike response against his country.
There are however circumstances and countries where I do not believe this approach will work, such as Iran, and thus should not be “left on the table” as it were.
George Bush continually tried to lump Iran together with countries such as North Korea and it just didn’t work for me. Iran is a great country with a great history and they have every right to defend themselves against any and all of their enemies. I believe Iran has the right to nuclear power and to weapons to protect itself.
That being said, if Iran chooses to adopt the language and posture of North Korea then I am all for a “first strike” policy against them. However, I do not believe that Iran is a threat to anyone who is willing to show common courtesy and respect to them nor do I believe the leaders of Iran can, in any way, be compared to the delusional nut leading North Korea.
I could go on but I’m pressed for time at the moment and I’m sure I’ve taken up enough room on your page already! lol.
Anyway, great article Susanne…..hope to talk to you again soon.
~ Mythos
http://mindofmythos.wordpress.com/
April 24, 2009 at 1:27 pm
samer85
Thank you for the great post, Susanne! What you wrote makes a lot of sense! I cannot understand why people like Joel Rosenberg always choose direct military confrontation before trying anything else first.
Mythos, your comment is very interesting but I respectfully disagree with you concerning North Korea. NK’s dictator is a very evil and mad man but he is not foolish enough to attack other countries because he knows very well that would mean his end. These dictators do not believe in any ideology and they are not ready to sacrifice themselves for anything. They are not suicidal like al-Qaeda terrorists. They just love their thrones very much and they would never be ready to put them in Danger.
Saddam was also like that. When he invaded Kuwait, he did not expect the Americans would be ready to fight him for that because surprisingly they gave him weapons to support him in his war against Iran although he was the one who started the invasion and started the whole war.
Of course, I wish the North Koreans would be free one day from their dictator but it is not our job to remove him. I know that any war to remove their dictator would mean the killing of many many innocents just like what happened in Iraq. We are not in place to decide to sacrifice many Iraqis or North Koreans to free their countries from oppressive regimes. They are the ones who should decide to sacrifice themselves for freedom. Not others!
Thanks for the comment!
April 25, 2009 at 1:58 am
susanne430
Mythos! Great to hear from you! Your comments are always welcome no matter how long they may be!
You most always bring interesting points into the conversation so please talk as much as you’d like.
Btw, when are you going to write again? I have an article you might like to read.
http://snuffysmithsblog.blogspot.com/
2009/04/walking-out-on-ahmadinejad-was-just.html
Samer, thank you for what you brought up. It’s great getting the perspective of one who is not American yet has experienced American involvement. You bring up things I would never think about.
Thank you both very much.
April 25, 2009 at 11:13 am
samer85
Wow, that is a great article, Susanne. I totally agree with the writer that the West’s reaction of attacking Ahmadinejad for his comments concerning Israel made all of us in the region feel that the West’s politicians are arrogant and dismissive to our views and made us feel that the Iranian president is some kind of “martyr” of free speech.
April 27, 2009 at 11:56 am
Mythos
Susanne, thank you for the welcome, and the article link….will have to check that out. Always a pleasure to read the opinions of you & Samer.
Samer, thank you for your insight and view of the situation. I admit, you made a lot of sense concerning North Korea, and I agree with you up to a point. Whether Kim Jong is nutty enough to directly attack another country is debatable….but I think diplomacy’s time has passed where North Korea is concerned.
There are always consequences for our actions, including many civilians being killed, and I acknowledge that. You are absolutely correct to point that out.
However Samer, let us not forget that their are also consequences for our inactions (such as innocent civilians being killed by their own people) as well.
Kim Jong is nothing more than a pompous ass in my opinion and he needs to be removed. Whether the North Koreans do that themselves, or a country takes him out in an all out attack, or we simply send a couple of snipers for him, either way he must go.
Leaving someone like him in power and/or taking them out by force will both result in casualties either way. So, in light of that, the sooner you take him out, the possibility of fewer victims dying at his hands in increased.
Admittedly, the situation is not good no matter what path we choose to pursue. There really is no right answer.
~ Mythos
May 11, 2009 at 5:22 am
Ryan
A great post and a great point Susanne! Christians mustn’t keep gunning for the death of their enemies. That being said, of course, a secular nation also must defend itself. But the pre-emptive strikes of Bush were not only unChristian (the terrible point being they were done as ‘Christian’ acts) but just bad foreign policy, harming many innocent civilians in the targeted countries and increasing the threat of attack to America.
June 7, 2009 at 2:44 pm
souvenirsandscars
Great post Susanne! It kind of makes me wonder though. Now that we’ve established that neither Christians nor Muslims have a ‘kill your enemies/infidels first, ask questions later’ policy, and neither does Judaism, I would think, then where does all the hatred in the world stem from? Since we all have clear directives to use violence as a last resort, rather than an automatic solution, why is war always what first comes to mind? Will we never learn…
Btw, Mythos, I don’t agree with the strike first policy in regards to North Korea either. Because even though I don’t agree with Kim Jong-il’s policies and, actually, the usage of nuclear weapons AT ALL, I don’t think it’s fair to wage war on a country only because its dictator happens to be a world-class idiot and overall maniac. Isn’t that what happened in Iraq? Afghanistan? Vietnam? And the list goes on. The people who end up paying the price are the civilians, rarely ever the leaders. And the price is just too high!
I’m sure there are other ways to solve the situation, if America does feel threatened by North Korea’s WMDs. Maybe they could all – America included – renounce them? Hold a big bonfire during which each country (figuratively, of course) burns all nuclear warheads and the world can exist as a safe and sound place.
Call me idealistic, but that sounds like a good to me…
June 9, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Coffee Bean
Dear Susanne,
You left a comment on my blog back in April. I e-mailed back that I was going to respond in another post on my blog and then did not do so until now. I cannot find anywhere on here how I can e-mail you personally so I am trying to contact you through this comment.
Please come to my blog or e-mail me at coffeebeankel@earthlink.net
Thank you,
Coffee Bean
June 11, 2009 at 3:27 pm
susanne430
Ryan, thank you for your comment. It’s always good to see you around the blogging world.
S&S, great to see you as well. Good question about where these conflicts come from since they aren’t “religion based” so to speak. I think often people hide behind a religious mask. We may think they are “good Christians” or “good Muslims,” and, hopefully, they are, but the Bible has an answer that satisfies me.
James 4 — 1What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don’t they come from your desires that battle within you? 2You want something but don’t get it. You kill and covet, but you cannot have what you want. You quarrel and fight. You do not have, because you do not ask God.
Even though you may think I’m a “good Christian,” believe me, I have desires that battle within me because that sinful self wants its way rather than God’s way! Trust me.
So maybe they are letting their selfish desires take control instead of listening to and obeying God.
Great idea about the big bonfire….ha! I wish! I agree with what you wrote about not striking North Korea first because generally it’s the innocent civilians who bear the brunt of those types of attacks.
Thank you for chiming in. Always a pleasure to hear your point of view.
Coffee Bean, thanks for getting in touch with me. I’m enjoying your post on Palestine among others.