Are we evolving into a new era of crusades?

Since the Roman Catholic Church suddenly got [unintentionally?] involved in the conflict between the US and its allies on one side and Iran / the majority of Muslim countries on the other side the entire conflict seems to take a different direction now.

Personally I have the feeling we're heading for a war between Muslims vs Westerners/Christians, without any sign of possible improvements, it rather seems to get worse. Are we on the verge of one to pull the trigger and set off the gun?

I notice that especially Christians are taking a less neutral; more aggressive position towards the issue. They feel there is a need to defend Christianity [with words] in response to what Muslims say, and are more or less pushed into the Bush War on Terror camp.

Tensions and contrasts between the two groups are increasing and being expressed more violently. [The Danish cartoons, the murder of Theo van Gogh for instance, and the brutal killing of a Nun two days ago].

Iran is becoming stronger and dominant than it ever was, both militarily and economically. Muslim discontent and anger against Westerners in general are a perfect combination for leading a war against the West (seeing the similarities between the current situation and the pre-WWII era?)

The Vatican's rift with Islam demonstrates that Pope Benedict XVI has swept aside his predecessor's strategy in dealing with Islam and backs a less diplomatic, more evangelistic attitude to the Muslim faith, Vatican watchers said Monday.

"While John Paul II, in his dialogue with Islam, insisted that both religions shared a faith in a single God, and made this fraternity an essential part of his campaign against violence, Ratzinger has adopted the attitude of speaking ex-cathedra telling people what they should do," said Marco Politi, Vatican watcher with Italian daily La Repubblica.

According to Politi, Benedict adopted a different strategy with Islam from the very beginning of his pontificate.

"Already in his inaugural mass, Benedict dropped any reference to fraternal relations with the Islamic religion," he said.

Gian Enrico Russoni, of the Turin daily La Stampa, ruled out "a communication error" as being responsible for the clash with Islam. Nor was it "a simple misunderstanding," he said.

He said the pope knew what he was doing when he cited an obscure Byzantine Christian emperor during a speech last week in Germany exploring the historical and philosophical differences between Islam and Christianity, and the relationship between violence and faith.


"John Paul II took time to soften the contradictions between the main religions. As far as Islam is concerned, Joseph Ratzinger destroyed with one speech all his predecessor's work."

Now, with Muslim hardliners venting their anger, the Vatican strategy towards the world's fastest growing religion "has to be entirely rebuilt," says Politi.


Source

[edit on 19-9-2006 by Mdv2]

This is undoubtedly leading to what we fear the most.

Religious affiliation is a process in which people give up their individuality and subscribe to the preachings of a select few. The boundaries created by religion create cultural division and competition between civilizations.

The nation of islam has yet to stand up against the forces of Extremism the same way your peace loving christian has refused to stand up against the forces of Right wing imperialism.

The pride and cultural identity provoked by religion and its preachings are once again responsible for the dawn of another war. When will people learn? Where is this going to get us? How is it fair that I should live in fear because some religious zealots couldnt come to an agreement?

I sometimes question if this is indeed our reality, and unfortunately this is what people have asked for.

In my opinion this will be a HUGE war, very similar to the crusades. More people will die, nukes will be dropped. The balance of life will be forever disturbed by the course of the next 5-10 years.

I believe we are heading for a new series of crusades, there was a documentry on channel 4 in the UK at the weekend called "The Doomsday Code" link to their webby that stated that american evangical christians beleive that the country of isreal must be totally within the control of Israel (i.e. no palistinian control) before the second comeing can happen, and pressure from this group is the reason why George Bush backed off from the "roadmap to peace" within the middle east and took a more agresive tone.

The crusade has never stopped its just that we have been occupied with other issues but to the radicals involved its a never ending battle.

The crusade against the middle east started with the creation of the war on terror.

That's when was enacted officially.

But we all know that prior to that it was God will that we were taken to Iraq to free the people and bring them democracy.

Wars base on religion has always been part of the make over of the world. We all can not possible agree on anything as a whole.

Now claiming Islam to be the source of all evil and been Islam a religion I guess with the war on terror that is exactly what it has been done, we are fighting a religious war.

I agree with you Marg, but as I mentioned many people did take a negative or neutral position on the War on Terror, now the church has become involved in the war between the West/Bush Camp and the Muslim community, they might very well decide to support the Bush Administration, especially if violent crimes will be committed against members of the Vatican/church.

That would be a very dangerous development, as it would really split the world community apart into two sides.

There is a desparate effort by fanatics on both sides to ignite a general clash of cultures. Frankly I think about 90% of the people on either side want nothing to do with it, in order to change that, the fanatics are doing their best to ramp up the fear and hysteria.

It's up to the rest of us whether they succeed or fail.

Originally posted by xmotex
There is a desparate effort by fanatics on both sides to ignite a general clash of cultures. Frankly I think about 90% of the people on either side want nothing to do with it, in order to change that, the fanatics are doing their best to ramp up the fear and hysteria.

It's up to the rest of us whether they succeed or fail.

Great sysnopsis.

I vote NO WAR.

yes, xmotex,


'same as it was, same as it ever was, ...

THERE IS WATER AT THE BOTTOM OF THE OCEAN!!!' -the talking heads

It's possible. Things are really heating up around the world...we've got unrelated riots and/or anarchy in a few countries, Russia calling for a universal government, this most recent stuff in Thailand, and the situation with the Muslims.

I think a lot of it hinges on how far the Muslims calling for death to everybody decide to take things. So far we've had some churches burned in the west bank and a nun killed. There's a lot of politically correct hardheadedness when it comes to Islam, but if the violance spreads into the US or the UK, a state of emergency could be declared, which could lead to a lot of things...

The desirable result is a world wide fight against religion like xmotex and Mdv2 said, and to me if the Vatican is attacked in any way that will be the excuse to go into full scale against the middle east and Islam itself.

The outcome will be very dangerous indeed because the different agendas been pushed here.

I'm curious, the Vatican is technically a state within itself, correct? So who provides military aid if something like this happens? Rome? That's a complex issue.

Yeah, I suggested the same at this link: Thread

I certainly believe that the "Christians" and Muslims are starting a new crusade to strengthen their agenda. I have believed that since the tragedy of 9/11.

[edit on 19-9-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]

Originally posted by Astygia
I'm curious, the Vatican is technically a state within itself, correct? So who provides military aid if something like this happens? Rome? That's a complex issue.

The Swiss guards will have to do the job:

The force has varied greatly in size over the years and has even been disbanded. Its first, and most significant, hostile engagement was on May 6, 1527 when 147 of the 189 Guards, including their commander, died fighting the forces of Holy Roman Emperor Charles V during the Sack of Rome in order to allow Clement VII to escape through the Passetto di Borgo, escorted by other 40 guards. The last stand battlefield is located on the left side of St Peter's Basilica, close to the Campo Santo Teutonico (German Graveyard).

Today the Swiss Guard is not considered to belong to any larger force, but is instead the army of the sovereign state of the Vatican. At the end of 2005, there were 134 members of the Swiss Guard. This number consisted of a Commandant (bearing the rank of "oberst" or Colonel), a chaplain, three officers, one sergeant major ("feldwebel"), 30 NCOs, and 99 "halberdiers", the rank equivalent to private (so called because of their traditional weapon). Not only are the guards fully trained and equipped in modern tactics and weaponry, they also receive instructions in using the sword, and the recognizable ceremonial weapon of the Guard, the halberd.

The guards must be Catholic, unmarried males with Swiss citizenship who have completed basic training with the Swiss military and can obtain certificates of good conduct. Recruits must have a professional diploma or high school degree and must be between 19 and 30 years of age and at least 174 cm (5'9") tall[3].


Source

[edit on 19-9-2006 by Mdv2]

Yes the Vatican is a nation on its own that does not answer to any government. The also have anything they need within the ranks of their clergy.

If conspiracies are correct they have from spies to their own secret service and elite guard, plus they will not have any problem recruiting their own crusaders to protect their sovereignty.

I imagine that they can buy also mercenary fighters if needed.

Mdv2, I didn't know the details of the swiss guard, thanks for the post.

What I'm getting at is, who provides real military support in the event of actual attacks on the Vatican? Marg suggests mercs, I hadn't considered that. But do they have an actual alliance with someone in the event of such an attack? I can't find any information on this.

Personally if the Vatican is actually in the need of help, then I think the entire Western world, or Europe as a whole is in a need of help.

The Vatican is a sovereign state in Rome, Italy would never accept other than Italian forces to enter Italy without permission. So theoretically I think we might say that if the Vatican is ''at war'', Italy (and Europe) will simultaneously be at war.

Actually I think that no even Italy has muslin in their country I think the whole nation is Catholic, so It will make very difficult to do any attempts against the Vatican possible.

People will probably hang anybody that dare attack their holiest site.

can I just ask you guys something?

What is the purpose of the 'crusade' And who in your opinion, instigated it, or stands to gain most?

If the crusades were to 'regain' jerusalem. And lets just say control of it went back and forth on several occasions, and now it is divided up. What is the motivation in this 'modern' crusade. I guess it is all just under the very large, and very flexible umbrella of the NWO? A concept which can just about claim owenership to every incident on earth.

This whole pope thing disgusts me. I'm not gonna take sides, but heh, people have twisted his words. He used a qoute of a medi-evil emperor about Islam being violent, and one that preaches to spread its beliefs by the sword, which lets be honest, both faiths were guilty of at that particular point in history.

Now, here in London, at Westminster Cathedral, worshippers were confronted by an angry mob of activists, covering their faces (cowards) shouting insults to the worshippers, holding up signs about "Islam will conquer Rome" and "May Allah curse the pope" (which itself is lowering thesmelves surely to 'insulting' mohammed, do we see Catholics bombing mosques in the west bank? No. The response has been awful from the muslim world. Some clerics have called for the Pope to be killed. Al Qaeda cells have promised to kill 'worshippers of the cross' unless there is a full retraction. This is the well thought out response, in defence of a faith that is entirely peaceful, doesn't have a chip on its shoulder, and isn't so go damn vengefull.

Notice how the UK media has hidden this. Only through extensive searching on the internet has the news on catholics being killed, churches being bombed, and threats on the popes life. Sky and the BBC both use the newswires service, that have reported this, and yet Sky, the Beeb, ITV (the real mass exposure press outlets) have covered it up. Now if it was the other way round? Christians gathering outside mosques, spitting at muslims? The double standards is what gets me.

It is clear that there is a wedge being driven between people of faith, and this also includes aetheists. I am not of faith, but what really stands out in recent years, is the vile intolerance and insults from the direction of atheists to those of faith. It is worrying, I just don't think its in the context that most people on the site believe it to be

[edit on 19-9-2006 by Peyres]

I think the modern crusade is against the muslin and Islam in the middle east. taking into account that results of the Pope's speech, some wonder if muslin radical would dare attack the Vatican to show their anger.