War: the Pope says that mankind is in danger; strive for peace

[Estro Felino]

No.

But if one country invades another unprovoked, commits one war crime after another and all that just for the purpose of stealing land, power and imperialism... what do you do?

One question. When KSA invaded Yemen, why did the USA side with the attackers and not with the invaded?
Thank you in advance.

 

[Valjean]

In that sense, there is death, and then there is death by murder or accident. Not just old age, right?

But what's the significance of death?
Christians make it part of a system of moral testing, and a gateway to eternal life. There is no empirical evidence of this.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So you think that whenever an independent and sovereign country is attacked, it is right to fight back the invaders with weaponry (instead of diplomacy)?

They have no other choice.

Also... why have an army, if you are not going to use it to defend the land against invaders?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

War is a primeval instrument to settle international disputes.
It is medieval. It was considered backward even by the times of philosopher Kant who wrote an essay called Perpetual Peace.

We can dissuade the Russians from continuing the war with diplomacy.
But if we decide to use weapons and tank to attack them too...we are not better than them,.

So judging a we as better or not, that is not you. You are not all Europeans and nor am I. Stop doing a rhetorical trick, because it won't work.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It's a sensible answrer.
Nevertheless, if I were an EU international diplomat, I would go to Putin with my legal team and after few days of negotiations, I am very confident I would convince him to withdraw all his troops and terminate the war.

Lol. You optimist, you.
You live in lala-land boy.

Why will something like that never happen?

Because of how insanely gullible and naive that is.

Because they do want to carry on the war. They do want the conflict to escalate.
The elites. And not the Russians.

/facepalm....

The Russians are the invaders, Einstein.
The war is only happening because Putin wanted it to happen. By starting it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

There are. Europeans craving for world war 3

Yes, you said that already.

I'm asking who you are talking about.

 

[Estro Felino]

Yes, you said that already.

I'm asking who you are talking about.

Quid pro quo. Answer my question of post #181, and I will answer your question.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

One question. When KSA invaded Yemen, why did the USA side with the attackers and not with the invaded?
Thank you in advance.

Changing the subject. A clear sign of desperation and knowing one is in the wrong.

We are not talking about that conflict. We are talking about the Russian-Ukranian conflict, which was started by Russia on the pretext of pure lies.

You could also point to how the US invaded Iraq on the pretext of lies, and you'ld be correct. But that conflict also is not relevant here.

What is relevant here, is the present conflict Russia-Ukraine and the fact Russia started it unprovoked on the pretext of lies and commits war crimes every single day.

So again... in your opinion, what should Ukraine have done?
And what would have been the outcome of that, do you think?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Quid pro quo. Answer my question of post #181, and I will answer your question.

1. I asked first.

2. Your question in 181 is not relevant and just an attempt to change the subject.

 

[RestlessSoul]

And still no answer. Just a meaningless one liner.

Oh well.

Rhetorical questions do not invite answers.

You ought to know that, since clubbing your interlocutors with rhetoric appears to be your default approach to discussion on here.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Rhetorical questions do not invite answers.

You ought to know that, since rhetoric appears to be your default approach to discussion on here.

It wasn't a rhetorical question.
It was an actual question.

 

[RestlessSoul]

It wasn't a rhetorical question.
It was an actual question.

I beg to disagree.


Besides, I can’t remember what it was now, and can’t be bothered to look back through several pages of your sanctimonious tirades to find out.

 

[Estro Felino]

Changing the subject. A clear sign of desperation and knowing one is in the wrong.

We are not talking about that conflict. We are talking about the Russian-Ukranian conflict, which was started by Russia on the pretext of pure lies.

You could also point to how the US invaded Iraq on the pretext of lies, and you'ld be correct. But that conflict also is not relevant here.

What is relevant here, is the present conflict Russia-Ukraine and the fact Russia started it unprovoked on the pretext of lies and commits war crimes every single day.

So again... in your opinion, what should Ukraine have done?
And what would have been the outcome of that, do you think?

Of course it's relevant.
The US has been siding with Ukraine since 2014...we all have the evidence proving it.
Victoria Nuland...Soros...in Ukraine since that date.
So...since - as you rightfully mentioned Iraq,- the credibility and reliability of the US Deep State is below the threshold of tolerability, we need to wonder cui bono, as for the prosecution of the war.


Someone could also speculate that the US Deep State settled down in Ukraine to provoke Putin and push him to invade.

What can we do now? We can terminate the war through negotiations. Period.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Of course it's relevant.
The US has been siding with Ukraine since 2014...we all have the evidence proving it.
Victoria Nuland...Soros...in Ukraine since that date.
So...since as you rightfully mentioned Iraq, the credibility and reliability of the US Deep State is below the threshold of tolerability.

Someone could also speculate that the US Deep State settled down in Ukraine to provoke Putin and push him to invade.

What can we do now? We can terminate the war through negotiations. Period.

Stop claiming a we that is not there. Your we violates Ukraine's right to self defense and rest on the fact, that you believe you are inside Putin's brain.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Of course it's relevant.

It most definately is not.

The question is about how Ukrainians should have responded to Russians invading their country.

What the US did or didn't do in some completely different conflict which doesn't involve Russians or Ukrainians is absolutely not relevant when the question is how the Ukrainians should respond to a Russian invasion on false pretext.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I beg to disagree.

I think I know better then you what the purpose of my question was.

But thanks for playing.

 

[Estro Felino]

It most definately is not.

The question is about how Ukrainians should have responded to Russians invading their country.

What the US did or didn't do in some completely different conflict which doesn't involve Russians or Ukrainians is absolutely not relevant when the question is how the Ukrainians should respond to a Russian invasion on false pretext.

Let the ICJ in The Hague decide whether it's relevant or not.
I wonder what they will decide if the question is brought to them.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Let the ICJ in The Hague decide whether it's relevant or not.
I wonder what they will decide if the question is brought to them.

Doubling down on subject changing.

Oh well.

 

[Estro Felino]

Doubling down on subject changing.

Oh well.

This thread is about the religious implications of war.
The Pope spoke as head of state, and as religious leader.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I didn't read that there were only 4 people on the planet at that time. You probably know that Adam & Eve had more children than Cain and Abel, right? Meantime, do you really think that mankind has been so kind to each other over the centuries?

Ah, so incest between full sister and brother. How pleasant. How Godly.