2 posts tagged “united states”

"It is the United States that is to lead the world to peace, the peace of Christ, the peace that He brought with Him from heaven," Sister Mary Ephrem quoted The Virgin as saying. "Dear children, unless the United States accepts and carries out faithfully the mandate given to it by heaven to lead the world to peace, there will come upon it and all nations a great havoc of war and incredible suffering. If, however, the United States is faithful to this mandate from heaven and yet fails in the pursuit of peace because the rest of the world will not accept or cooperate, then the United States will not be burdened with the punishment about to fall."

"What am I to do, child of my heart, when my children turn from me? The false peace of this world lures them and in the end will destroy them. They think they have done enough in consecrating themselves to my Immaculate Heart. It is not enough. That which I ask for and is most important many have not given me. What I ask, have asked, and will continue to ask is reformation of life. There must be sanctification from within. I will work my miracles of grace only in those who ask for them and empty their souls of the love and attachment to sin and all that is displeasing to my Son. Souls who cling to sin cannot have their hands free to receive the treasures of grace that I hold out to them."

Our Lady of America , Pray for us, Intercede for us, Guide us to your beloved son our Lord Jesus Christ.

"By thy Holy and Immaculate Conception, O Mary, deliver us from evil.”

Well then the Democrats will not. Period.

Seems the Dems are very good at lots of things - whining, complaining, and opportunistic flip-flopping. (These appear to be  attributes of any political party in the minority, so we've probably seen the Republicans behave the same way at some point, but I digress).

The President's speech wasn't bad at all. I hadn't planned on listening but said my rosary early and didn't have anything else to do so I listened. I've got to tell you that, despite assertions to the contrary, I believe the President has stuck to the same very general line regarding the "war on terror" all along. If we don't find the terrorists on their territory we'll be fighting them on ours (if you doubt that then take a look at the demographics for Muslim immigrant populations in the West - somewhere in those hundreds of thousands there have got to be like-minded Jihadists - it's inevitable). Diplomacy and political solutions may seem like attractive solutions here, but diplomacy and politics will turn out to be pawns in the hands of the terrorists that will be used against us. While we talk they'll be acting. It's happened before with so-called "civilized" countries.

The problem isn't the President, it's we, the "make love, not war" American people, swayed by every wind that blows, who can't decide what we want. Is Iraq like Vietnam? Well if it isn't it soon will be and not because the military can't do their part but because the political body and public will aren't in the game. Our military is hanging in with the mission but at some point the hoo-hah in the Congress and the media is going to get to them and when that happens morale will begin to plummet and Iraq will go to hell in a handbasket just as fast as Vietnam did. Then some weenie politician will start talking about "peace with honor" and before we know it we'll be evacuating U.S. citizens from the Green Zone with helicopters while "insurgents" try to blow 'em out of the sky.

Have the Dems always been against sending more troops to Iraq? Ha! Don't even believe it! The deal is this: if the President is for it, then the Dems are against it . . . or not . . . or vice versa . . . or whatever. They seem to have a difficult time deciding for themselves! As recently as last month leading Democrats voiced support for more troops in Iraq for precisely the reason the President stated in his speech that he was sending them. See "We Can’t Afford to Leave" and "Harry Reid: More Troops to Iraq!" and

here’s Nancy Pelosi in her pre-Speaker days on May 30, 2004, on Meet The Press:

    MR. RUSSERT: Would you send more American troops in order to stabilize the situation?

    REP. PELOSI: Yes.

To be fair, she was trying to say that we should get international troops to go, but Russert asked her (several times) that if they refused, should we send American troops, and her answer was a clear-cut “yes”. (Pelosi Was For A Surge Before She Was Against It)

'Nuff said. You can rant all day long about the Church's position on war but the fact is that the Church apparently isn't a player in the U.S. Congress' decisions. It would be great not to be fighting in Iraq but we are fighting in Iraq. What we need to do now is put our will into the war in Iraq, help the Iraqis take control of their country and their government and then move on to the next fight (which is certain to be looming well before Iraq's dust has begun to settle).

P.S. - I've been a registered Democrat my entire voting life so don't think, after reading this post, that I'm Republican etc. I view the Republicans as (barely) the lesser of two evils at present. The Democrats have embraced virtually every one of the cultural and social issues that are festerinig at the core of our society; the Republicans on the other hand are, as always, looking out for each other (i.e. Big Business at the cost of almost everything else). Both have demonstrated clearly that theirs is self-interest and little more. Efforts to reform our Congress to invigorate ethical and trustworthy behaviors have failed miserably -- neither party is truly interested in real reform, they just talk about it as though they are doing something but in fact never do anything meaningful. Disgusting and we will pay for this eventually.