Lawmakers Want DoD Investigated for Biblical 'Armageddon' Claims
military.com
military.com
I think it's fair to say that American Evangelists do not worship the god described in the New Testament per se, but instead something closer to the vengeful god of Abrahamic origin. (The mullahs in Iran and pastors in our evangelical churches probably agree on most issues.)
you're still left with a cult of evangelicals who want to usher in the end times by helping Israel.
And if there's to grandiose, there's the more blandness of turning back progress to pre-civil rights, pre-sufferage and returning to Kings as god-given rulers.
Anyone who didn't read project 2025 did a deservice to this string of inanity.
The last one I suffered through was the era of US v. Communism with a side of AIDs around 1980. Seriously demented nonsense.
And something else again from personal dealings here: the evangelical type is pushy boot strapping God's plan for them into material world through networking, media savvy, outrage, fear and basic organizational money raising to power.
Its strange to watch. Alone they seem to have no bearings or self importance or relevance. To get what they feel they need, they attach to the flag, goverment ie to power in state.
When I read this, I just thought "Oh so its metastasized now."
Those among them who voted for Trump in 2016 hoped for the end times. The whole thing about Trump being "anointed by God to use as he did King Saul" was mainstream in mega-churches at that time. Combine that with decades of recitals that the End Times would be near when Israel's capital moved to Jerusalem (Trump proclaimed that as a handout to evangelicals) and all the nations would come to Megiddo to do battle... this is a well-trodden story.
Source? I would have thought it was way older. (Counterargument: high-octane crazy tends to mellow with time.)
"The US is uniquely responsible for bringing about the end times through violence in the middle east" has been a belief system amongst a subset of american evangelicals, many of whom hold significant power, for a while. But it hasn't been around forever. It really is an idea that grew out of the late 20th century.
Yes, I'm aware that the theology goes back to the 1890s. I don't know the details. Those details are jammed further down than the story of Americans forgetting that their stone monuments to the 10 Commandments were put up in public spaces as a tie-in with Cecil B. DeMille's movie.
Brief Reagan-era End Times Bibliography
Hal Lindsay: The Late Great Planet Earth. 1970.
Henry Morris: The Revelation Record. 1983.
Salem Kirban: 666 & 1000.
Tim LaHaye: dozens of books, and Left Behind novels. Political actor.
A complaint shared by an anonymous non-commissioned officer to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF)
claimed that non-commissioned officers were told that the Iran war is part of God’s plan and that
President Donald Trump was “anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his
return to Earth,” as originally reported by journalist Jonathan Larsen.
Between Saturday and Tuesday afternoon, MRFF logged more than 200 similar complaints
across 50 installations encompassing every branch of the military
It's real enough that 29 Senators have called for an official investigation.
Department of Defence: The Department of WarThat people so distant from the decision makers who executed this are going to lose even a night's sleep over it?
That they'll cast themselves on their knees with their cell phone in hand and ask for forgiveness; it was never supposed to be like this?
Not how the world works, friend, though imagine how much nicer a world it would be if it were that way... One can dream I suppose.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Minab_school_airstrike
It's not relevant. We have no evidence one of the nutters ordered the strike. Which makes the far more likely answer of fuckup/collateral damage in the course of a major bombing campaign a good default.
It's baseless speculation. That isn't fodder for thoughtful discussion, particulary when framed as a statement versus a question.
So, imo there us a relationship between "religious nutter" leading department of war and army not being bothered with bombing schools or hospitals.
It does not matter what regime is Iran. This one is squarly on USA. USA dis not took bait, but did what it promissed to do.
Hospitals lose protection under international law when used for military purposes for good reason. Iran and its proxies have essentially been abusing the conventions that held until now. That doesn't excuse hitting a school, nor suggest that we should do away with these protections. But if one side keeps using schools and hospitals to cover materiel, the notion that those are not legitimate military targets becomes untenable.
Nice apologia attempt, but no. Somehow all hospitals where Israel operates are oitside of geneva convention, always. All the accusations you made here are made up on the spot by you.
This is not about Iran abusing convention. This is USA and Israel official doctrine being like "it does not apply to us" and "the fact that we dont care makes us manly".
The school in question did not hosted missiles. And when israel "ordered" 200000 people to move away else they are valid target of murder, they were trying to create local refugee crisis.
Yeah, that was Hegseth being an idiot.
> apologia attempt, but no
Not an apology. Just an explanation of relevant law. If America started piling muntions on its hospital ships, those would be legal targets in a war. (We'd still complain when it was bombed.)
The more fundamental issue is nobody is following those rules anymore. China, Russia and America have explicitly rejected them. Israel, Iran and its proxies, too.
> This is not about Iran abusing convention
Not liking a fact doesn't make it untrue. America, Iran and Israel are each acting well outside the bounds of international law and have been for some time.
> school in question did not hosted missiles
We don't know. We have no evidence it did, so my default is this was a fuckup by America.
It should bring consequences. It won't, in part because we're in a world where it doesn't for any of America's adversaries. (Who, in turn, dovetailed off America's example in the Cold War. Though it's not like Iran and China weren't busy running roughshod over international law in that time, either.)
> when israel "ordered" 200000 people to move away else they are valid target of murder, they were trying to create local refugee crisis
Nobody wants a refugee crisis. What you're correctly identifying is there is limited regard for civilian casualties on the Israeli side. Though based on current numbers, they're well within norms (in Iran).
Imagine if your mom's lived somewhere for many years, and one day the SWAT team barges in and shoots her dead because their intel showed it was a meth lab in 2016...
Who is more powerful, Ted Cruz (another “powerful” “Christian” Zionist) or Donald Trump? Or Larry Ellison vs Pastor Hagee?
It’s great that people can learn stuff. It’s worth learning, for example, who got us into the Iraq war. Hint: it wasn’t “Christian” Zionists. There are very few Christian Zionists, and almost none in positions of power compared to (non-Christian) religious or ethno-nationalist Zionists.
Yes, they however do spout the policy of the government they represent. And they are supposed to be diplomats (good diplomats do not say anything to jeopardise their country's relationships with other countries whom they call "allies" too).