No, I don't claim there was no violence in the pursuit of Manifest Destiny. And while there were certainly many individuals who invoked God, it wasn't a matter of US policy. And while crusade certainly has a religious overtone, it is used in a secular context as well. But even in a religious context it requires reclaiming the Holy Land in the name of God, and there has never been any implied or stated intent to do so.
Oh, and by the way, I'm not a Texan. Though I did live there for a year while refitting my boat.
__________________
John
Ontario 32 - Aria
Free, is the heart, that lives not, in fear.
Full, is the spirit, that thinks not, of falling.
True, is the soul, that hesitates not, to give.
Alive, is the one, that believes, in love. JCP
Sounds like we agree on that one. It is splitting hairs to talk about "official US Policy", as there are enough historical words and letters which make clear the intentions and excuses behind the conquest of the continent and mexico.
As you well know, there is no official German policy from WWII to kill millions of catholics, communists, jews and gypsies. Still, it was done. Modern Governments know how to use the chain of command and big hints to achieve results without putting them into print.
I'm not even speaking out against the conquests. I'm just stating that using God as an excuse for violence or selfishness or even nature and beauty is not my thing. I prefer to know who I am dealing with and why. We conquer because we can. Nature and beauty are the perception of the miracles of science. If folks would only understand that the real truth is even more fantastic than their Gods, we might be getting somewhere.
While one can certainly claim justification for militancy by the American Indians and strongly disapprove of their treatment, it's more than an historical stretch to claim it was done in the name of God.
__________________
John
Ontario 32 - Aria
Free, is the heart, that lives not, in fear.
Full, is the spirit, that thinks not, of falling.
True, is the soul, that hesitates not, to give.
Alive, is the one, that believes, in love. JCP
Ok, we're now comparing the westward expansion of the US across the North American continent with the holocaust in Europe during WWII. And we're being presented with the idea that it was not official German policy. This from a self-described conservative with progressive impulses. Sir, you have gaps. Gaps in your memory. Gaps in your education. Gaps in your knowledge of history. And gaps in your political philosophy. I will say that you type well for a non-sentient being.
__________________
“Scientists are people who build the Brooklyn Bridge and then buy it.” Wm. F. Buckley, Jr.
Heck, I'm still trying to figure out how I missed out on the "Christian" arm of the army. We didn't sing any hymns or spirituals, though I think I did hear the phrase "Let God sort 'em out".
__________________
John
Ontario 32 - Aria
Free, is the heart, that lives not, in fear.
Full, is the spirit, that thinks not, of falling.
True, is the soul, that hesitates not, to give.
Alive, is the one, that believes, in love. JCP
To my knowledge, there was no laws nor official policies set into place to kill those massive amounts of civilians.
As to comparisons, none such was made. In fact, if you read carefully, you will see where I said I was not judging the conquest here. If I was not doing that, how could I compare it to anything?
The fine point is simply that government do much of their "evil" work on the sidelines.....so they can deny it if the chit hits the fan. I don't think there are any laws which we passed to allow recent torture or rendition or Cheneys death squads. But I doubt you would claim they are no US Policy.
But, just for fun, since we know the Germans kept excellent records of everything, please point me to the legislation and orders which Hitler created to carry out these policies. If you can do so, I will stand corrected.
Was the place where the Final Solution was discussed. No laws were handed down. Rather an "understanding" was made about what had to happen.
"No one at the meeting can have misunderstood Heydrich's meaning. The historian Christopher Browning observes: "No less than eight of the fifteen participants held the doctorate. Thus it was not a dimwitted crowd unable to grasp what was going to be said to them. Nor were they going to be overcome with surprise or shock, for Heydrich was not talking to the uninitiated or squeamish"
So it was "hint hint, nod nod" as so many things are.
But back to the point. That is the way many governments work. They do not declare certain things as laws or policies because it would break international laws or ethical/moral understandings. They therefore manipulate the players to achieve the same goal, and then later chalk it up to misunderstandings or bad fortune.
Heck, I'm still trying to figure out how I missed out on the "Christian" arm of the army. We didn't sing any hymns or spirituals, though I think I did hear the phrase "Let God sort 'em out".
Chapel, in military school and officer training school.
Onward Christian Soldiers was a regular there. Of course, we were young - this only went to Junior College at which time one graduates a 3nd Lt. in the army. Unfortunately, this was during Vietnam and the popularity of "fragging", so many of my older classmates ended up living a short time. As many Vets from SE Asia know, the expected life in the field of a cocky 2nd Lt was a couple weeks.
(no, I did not graduate.......but I did consider it)
the Holocaust wasnt official German policy? Oh give me a break. Go read the transcripts of the Nuremburg trials if you have trouble believing. Of COURSE they didnt publish the policy in the official Gazette. They were MURDERING 6 MILLION PEOPLE.
It also was US policy to expand westward. How could it be otherwise when they sent the cavalry to wipe out Indians?
What on earth is gained by comparing these two events? Beats me, my boat is now in the water!! Bye now!
Point was that PB claimed the US Government policies never called for crusades and the use of our powers from God to take over the continent. I claimed that may be officially true.
The Germans did publish everything, BTW. Since they assumed they were doing the work of God and Nature, they really had nothing to hide. And everyone who helped them with the work (the churches, the french, IBM, etc) also thought they were doing the right thing.
"The Holocaust, called in Hebrew HaShoah, was the Nazi systematic slaughter of all Jews. ... The official policy, however, was to force Jews to flee Germany"
Anyway, that is a whole 'nother long story. Point is as before- that using God as your guide as to whether to conquer people makes for a tough case.
Your useless, pandering to the ignorant leftist point is then that those who believe in God and have a spiritual relationship that animates their lives, and that they believe helps them to be better people, should make no reference ot God while in positions of power or politics and should not consult the arbiter of their own moral code? That, like most of the sophistry that you publish, is just neither right nor even half-way intelligent, neither of which anyone has accused you of being.
Perhaps you might examine what transpires in an atheistic or Darwinian society or governed society. The Germans of the Hitler years were intense Darwinists. The soviet gulag was run by atheists. Likewise the Cultural Revolution in China. In fact, the record shows that the absence of God or the belief in God is a primary indicator of the capacity for men to do evil; the largest genocides and mass murderings of peoples by governments have been by those governments that are officially anti-God and atheist. You could look it up.
If there is a God, would you not consult him? It matters little though since your historical examples are fantastical examples. If you want an example of God-inspired foolishness you should have stuck with Jimmy Carter.
__________________
“Scientists are people who build the Brooklyn Bridge and then buy it.” Wm. F. Buckley, Jr.
