9/11 More Justified Than War in Iraq?, Food for Thought Options

[Simba]

Could it be possible that the 9/11 bombings be more "justifiable" than America's war in Iraq?

And later, other possibly "justified" killings.

[Simba]

Alright, so maybe 9/11 was more justified than the war in Iraq.

I would say the 9/11 bombings were actually more justified than the war in Iraq, had their vision that it is "justified by God/Allah" had been bona fide. The Muslim's behind 9/11 believed that they were killing for God. Whether this bombing really was permitted by "God," who knows?

America's only reason for going into Iraq, when it comes down to it, is probably just for resources such as oil. Iraq wasn't even involved in the 9/11 bombings and weapons of mass destruction were never found there, yet we're still there.

Anyway, now I come to the real topic I wanted to discuss, justified killings in the name of God. Basically, some scriptures state that if God told you to kill, and you did indeed kill, you would receive no negative effects (i.e. go to "Hell," receive bad karma, etc.). Opinions?

[AngelinaTaylor]

Alright, so maybe 9/11 was more justified than the war in Iraq.

I would say the 9/11 bombings were actually more justified than the war in Iraq, had their vision that it is "justified by God/Allah" had been bona fide. The Muslim's behind 9/11 believed that they were killing for God. Whether this bombing really was permitted by "God," who knows?

America's only reason for going into Iraq, when it comes down to it, is probably just for resources such as oil. Iraq wasn't even involved in the 9/11 bombings and weapons of mass destruction were never found there, yet we're still there.

Anyway, now I come to the real topic I wanted to discuss, justified killings in the name of God. Basically, some scriptures state that if God told you to kill, and you did indeed kill, you would receive no negative effects (i.e. go to "Hell," receive bad karma, etc.). Opinions?

America claimed it invaded Iraq because 1. Iraq supposedly had weapons of mass destruction, and 2. to "remove a brutal dictator". The latter was claimed AFTER it became evident Iraq didn't have any weapons of mass destruction. Is that justified? I don't think so. Now the only reason they're there is to prevent mass killings. Which isn't working out so well, considering the fact that more people are now dying than the time of Hussein.

9/11 wasn't justified either. A lot of innocent people died, and no life is ever more valuable than another - they're human lives. Religion is a bullshit reason to kill somebody, period. You're doing it for your own selfish reason. Although what can you do to stop somebody who has nothing to lose?

Breaking international law isn't really a big deal, because countries aren't technically required to follow it - it's all voluntary.