Patriotism

[Noel's angel]

when is patriotism a virtue?-When it is interpreted correctly.

[IesusDeus]

Yes I love them.
I am not saying that you should not love your culture, etc...
It is a question of priorities. What comes first.

Let me put it this way.
I am closer to a brother in Christ who has a iraqi passport,
than a canadian/american who is an atheist.

I love heaven more than I love my country.
(Heaven is my first country.)

And I love mankind more than I love canadians / american / french / ...

I do not put barriers in my love. I understand the differences,
but I try to love like God does without limitation. It is not easy.
But we are caled to be perfect like God.

For me a human being is foremost who he or she is globally, than is passport or culture.

Against it is a question of priorities.
I cherish my country and my culture, but I am also open (and I love)
other countries and cultures.

Patriotism is wrong when it is limiting or when it is not loving, or when it is pride. (One of the seven deadly sins BTW.) Too often, I see pride in patriotism. (The rest of the world see a lot of pride in americans. Why is that?)

Pride is a deadly sin. Humility is a virtue...

We need more humility....

[IesusDeus]

Let me put it another way:

Who(which) do we love more God or our country?

If I say my country I have broken God's first commandment.
God comes first, always. We need to love God more than everything.

What is the second most important commandment?
To love one another like Jesus loves us.
If my patriotism brings me into not loving one another, than it is not good. Period.

What comes first is the love of God, than the love of others.
Only after those two commandments, can you add love of your culture, etc...

[Noel's angel]

Patriotism doesn't mean that you love your country over God-of course God comes before all else, but you can still love your country and your culture. People love eachother, but it doesn't mean that we love God any less

[RandomProddy]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Jun 11 2005, 07:24 PM']it is in america.
[right][snapback]609279[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

What America thinks of Irish nationhood is irrelevant.

[Aloysius]

who are you talking about that doesn't accept the tricolors? unionists? I mean, if they want to they can accept the four little red lines on the union jack as representative of Ireland... but I'd rather Ireland have its own flag. also, I like the Erin Go Braugh flag better anyway... with the harp and all. I'm a trad Irish Republican who was born and raised in America because of a little potato famine way back when... I long for the good old days when Sinn Fein actually worked for Catholic social justice.. Rerum Novarum style and all that... ah, but I digress... I actually think it ought to be something the Irish in Ireland are proud of, that we are almost the only ones not defeated by the American melting pot and still care about the place of our ethnic origins after so many generations.

yes, ID, priority wise it is better. but loving something doesn't exclude anything... so me saying you should love your country and culture doesn't exclude putting God above it. but on earth, in the natural way humans work, we ought to band together in groups that look after one another. I am no nationalist... I am actually looking into a theory of mine that micro-nationalism is a response to all the mayhem left in the ruins of Christendom and that if there were Catholic micro-nationalists we could attempt to rebuild western civilization... but patriotism doesn't mean nationalism.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='RandomProddy' date='Jun 12 2005, 05:50 AM']What America thinks of Irish nationhood is irrelevant.
[right][snapback]609605[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Rely I don't think so we have been funding Irish rebellion for over a hundred years now, when The IRA needs money, they can always find money in america, ALWAYS. sounds pretty relevant to me.

[Aloysius]

I'm not sure RandomProddy is a fan of the rebellion? I could be wrong... we really shouldn't be opening up that can of worms. :ph34r:

anyway, I'm almost positive she's no fan of the current IRA... so yeah... that could get ugly.

[Don John of Austria]

Fan or not it is simply ignorant of reallity to say that " What America thinks of Irish nationhood is irrelevant." It is american Money that funded irish Nationhood, it is American Money that continues to support it, That IS relevant.

[ardillacid]

I didnt have time to read the whole thread, so hopefully i'm not beating a dead horse.

[quote name='MichaelFilo' date='Jun 2 2005, 08:17 PM']Seconding Socartes's statement, I'm sorry I cannot remember where the Church made that statement. However, it's a virtue. It can be corrupted in many ways (thinking your nation is perfect (not possible), or thinking your country is more favored by God (Americanism)). However, it is still a virtue, and you can tell that when a man is not patriotic, he is also not very faithful and obedient. I'm not saying those who don't love their country are bad, but lacking any virtue is just one more weak spot for senior Satan and the demonic gang.

God bless,
Mikey
[right][snapback]605907[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

How do you know God does not favor America? He has showered blessing upon blessing on our country. in 200 years we went from peons to the greatest nation ever. Prove your point

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='ardillacid' date='Jun 12 2005, 11:05 PM']I didnt have time to read the whole thread, so hopefully i'm not beating a dead horse.
How do you know God does not favor America? He has showered blessing upon blessing on our country. in 200 years we went from peons to the greatest nation ever. Prove your point
[right][snapback]610155[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


the very fact you would say that we are the greatest nation ever pretty mush invalidates your opinion, in what way are we the greatest Nation ever?

[ardillacid]

Sorry, I didn't mean moral values. Economically is one way. we have a GDP of like 8 trillion, the largest in the world. Our military is the highest tech, and most well funded. our military budget, if i am not mistaken, is greater than the whole world's combined. in these ways we are the greatest

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='ardillacid' date='Jun 12 2005, 11:29 PM']Sorry, I didn't mean moral values. Economically is one way. we have a GDP of like 8 trillion, the largest in the world. Our military is the highest tech, and most well funded. our military budget, if i am not mistaken, is greater than the whole world's combined.  in these ways we are the greatest
[right][snapback]610180[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Not than has ever been, not even in those ways, we can bearly hold on to Iraq and afghanastan, we are nothing compaerd to the British Empire of the 19th century. Now could we take them in a fight Yes, but we are no where near as superior to the rest of the world as the were.

And I don'tthink our military budget is bigger than everyone elses combined, but it is certianly the biggest.

[ardillacid]

The British lost to us, didn't they? And after us, soon other colonies followed suit. They didn't even have to deal with suicidal maniacs who would rather blow themselves up than look at us. Plus the British had the luxury of fighting people who actually declared war, not coward who won't fight a real war.

We are holding onto afganistan and irag perfectly. we have not even lost 2000 soldiers, rather small, considering the endless numbers that died in WWII.

Yes we are more superiour than they were. We have beaten Britain (more than once.), France, Spain, Russia, Germany, Austria, Italy, and so many others it would be superfluous to name them all. Look at Omar khadafi. just the threat of war makes him disarm. we took an entire country (irag) in a matter of days. The only wars we lose are because of the media constantly attacking our nation. (see viettnam which we never lost a battle, yet lost the war) We have virtually defeated communism.

"The main reason for the increase in world military spending is the massive increase in the United States, which accounts for almost half of the world total...."
[url="http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/ArmsTrade/Spending.asp"]http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/Ar...de/Spending.asp[/url]

[Noel's angel]

I agree with RandomProddy on this one. America's view on Irish nationhood is irrelevant. And America ISN'T God's 'favourite' country-who cares who 'great' the American army is when it has killed thousands of innocent people. True, it isn't the only one, but I'm not the one claiming that God loves my country better than everyone else's. America should stick to solving problems in their own country instead of giving money to terrorists so as they can kill innocent men such as Robert McCartney, then turn around and meet with the victim's family as if they were being the 'saviours'. The British and Irish governments shouls tick to trying to resolve the problems in Ireland themselves instead of allowing George Bush and his band of merrymen to come in pretending to know what the situation is really like

[RandomProddy]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Jun 12 2005, 06:49 PM'] I long for the good old days when Sinn Fein actually worked for Catholic social justice
[right][snapback]609683[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I'd find that humorous if it wasn't such a slander against Catholicism.

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Jun 12 2005, 06:49 PM']I actually think it ought to be something the Irish in Ireland are proud of, that we are almost the only ones not defeated by the American melting pot and still care about the place of our ethnic origins after so many generations.
[right][snapback]609683[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Question for the forum: What language is the above sentence in?

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Jun 12 2005, 08:05 PM']Rely I don't think so we have been funding Irish rebellion for over a hundred years now, when The IRA needs money, they can always find money in america, ALWAYS. sounds pretty relevant to me.
[right][snapback]609739[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I'll tell you what is relevant.

After the events of 9/11 the Star-Spangled Banner is played by royal troops at the changing of the guard in London in a gesture of solidarity, then Tony Blair, one of the first people to fly to the US after the attacks, got a standing ovation for addressing Congress days after the attacks and is later awarded the Congressional Gold Medal. Weeks after the attacks, British cruise-missile armed nuclear submarines join in an attack on targets inside Afghanistan whilst we send the Paras and the SAS (world's best special forces) to help hunt down Al-Quaeda. Then, after having done all that, we bust a gut helping the US to secure an international coalition against Iraq and, against all odds, desperately seek a second resolution (unfortunately to no avail). Just to make sure of our alliance, we send 45,000 servicemen and women to Iraq and almost flawlessly take Al Basrah.

Just in case you don't know, let me point out that Ireland is a neutral country, is not a member of NATO and Sinn Fein was against the actions in Afghanistan.

And in case anyone is still under some illogical veil:

"Many Americans would be unaware of the negative attitudes toward their country in Ireland. A Sunday Independent poll published in mid-December, 2001, revealed that 67% of respondents did not approve of the way George W. Bush was conducting the war in Afghanistan. Three days later, Niall O'Dowd, a linchpin of support for the Irish peace process in the United States, noted what had grown into "rabid American bashing in Ireland" and cited a survey by the Eurobarometer agency which showed 56% in Ireland opposing the use of Irish airports for American supply planes.

(By mid-February, 2003, and a new war, an Irish Times poll revealed that 63% disapproved of the offer of Ireland's airports to the US in the absence of any final UN Security Council resolution backing a war on Iraq, and [b]49% would be opposed to the offer of airports even if the Security Council passed such a resolution.")[/b]

Basically americans spend millions on terrorists who back-stab their american supporters and attack one of america's closest allies, whilst millions of americans continue to hone allegiance to a country that wouldn't help it in a time of war.

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Jun 12 2005, 09:23 PM']anyway, I'm almost positive she's no fan of the current IRA
[right][snapback]609771[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Good guess, and I'm a he btw

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Jun 12 2005, 09:37 PM']Fan or not it is simply ignorant of reallity to say that  " What America thinks of Irish nationhood is irrelevant." It is american Money that funded irish Nationhood, it is American Money that continues to support it, That IS relevant.
[right][snapback]609779[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

It's not really anything to do with you though..

[quote name='ardillacid' date='Jun 13 2005, 07:10 AM']The British lost to us, didn't they?
[right][snapback]610209[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Well we colonized the place so we really lost to ourselves

[quote name='ardillacid' date='Jun 13 2005, 07:10 AM']And after us, soon other colonies followed suit.
[right][snapback]610209[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Actually the Empire got bigger afterwards.

[quote name='ardillacid' date='Jun 13 2005, 07:10 AM'] They didn't even have to deal with suicidal maniacs who would rather blow themselves up than look at us.
[right][snapback]610209[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

We still have about 8,000 soldiers in Iraq.

[quote name='ardillacid' date='Jun 13 2005, 07:10 AM']we took an entire country (irag) in a matter of days. 
[right][snapback]610209[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Britain holds the unique honour of winning the shortest war in history, which we won after 38 minutes. If you are trying to impress a Brit about military skill you still have a way to go yet

Edited June 13, 2005 by RandomProddy

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='ardillacid' date='Jun 13 2005, 12:10 AM']The British lost to us, didn't they? And after us, soon other colonies followed suit. They didn't even have to deal with suicidal maniacs who would rather blow themselves up than look at us. Plus the British had the luxury of fighting people who actually declared war, not coward who won't fight a real war.

We are holding onto afganistan and irag perfectly. we have not even lost 2000 soldiers, rather small, considering the endless numbers that died in WWII. 

Yes we are more superiour than they were. We have beaten Britain (more than once.), France, Spain, Russia, Germany,  Austria, Italy, and so many others it would be superfluous to name them all. Look at Omar khadafi. just the threat of war makes him disarm. we took an entire country (irag) in a matter of days.  The only wars we lose are because of the media constantly attacking our nation.  (see viettnam which we never lost a battle, yet lost the war) We have virtually defeated communism.

"The main reason for the increase in world military spending is the massive increase in the United States, which accounts for almost half of the world total...."
[url="http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/ArmsTrade/Spending.asp"]http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/Ar...de/Spending.asp[/url]
[right][snapback]610209[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Okay first lets get some things straight I said the 19th century not the 18th and we did not "defeat" Britian in 1783, we defeated one army with the French fleet helping us. What caused Briatian to let us go was a simple cost benifit analysis, our little war was costing too much money and trade, and they other concerns on the continent. We lost the War of 1812, we did not win a single battle until New Orleans and that was after the war was over. The British gave us good terms because they needed to fight Napolean nothing more. Getting us out of the War ment they didn't have to continue to defend Canadas borders At that time we where still concidered "upstart colonies" and not a priorities. As Late as the !870's Britian had serious people discussing the Reconquest of America and it is not far fetched that they might have been able to do it. Now by 1870 it would have been a nasty bloody war but with the resources of India and the rest of the Empire She probably could have done it, but agian it just wasn't worth it.

Now as to the guerrillas fighting in Iraq and Afghanastan, there is nothing Cowardly about them, nothing. Blowing yourself up to kill the enemy is not Cowardly, it is suicidal and might very well send you straight to Hell but itis not cowardly. Oh and al' quida( sp?) did declare war, something I will remind you WE haven't done in 64 years. While I agree with you that the media blows our losses way out of proportion ( we haven't lost more than in a major divisional engagment of WWII) it is a reflection of our lack of Will. The Average American is a pansy who gets all bent out of shape that we lost 10 or 20 men who volenteered to go and fight. Our mothers cry that there little boy didn't sign up to fight people. A 19th century british mother would have slaped her around. Furthermore , while we have had relativly few losses it has been with overwelming force, force the britsh oof the 19th Century would have felt absurd, many forces consisted of a few hundred or at the most a few thousand men, 12 or 15,000 men was concidered a Major army, and was ussually able to stomp anyone who opposed them.

By the way we have never fought either France nor Russia. France we did have a bit of shooting with in the late 18th century but we didn't really do all that well with it, I mean our ships did respectably but we lost more than we won. And we have never Faced Russia in a shooting war, if you mean the the Soviets we had to resort to economic tricks to bankrupt them into submission precisely because we knew we couldn't win a shooting war.

[quote]The main reason for the increase in world military spending is the massive increase in the United States, which accounts for [color=red]almost half of the world total[/color]...."[/quote]

Almost half is not more than everyone else, and the fact that there are no numbers here is very telling that this is probably a less than reliable source.

Edited June 13, 2005 by Don John of Austria

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='RandomProddy' date='Jun 13 2005, 04:26 PM']I'd find that humorous if it wasn't such a slander against Catholicism.
Question for the forum: What language is the above sentence in?
I'll tell you what is relevant.

After the events of 9/11 the Star-Spangled Banner is played by royal troops at the changing of the guard in London in a gesture of solidarity, then Tony Blair, one of the first people to fly to the US after the attacks, got a standing ovation for addressing Congress days after the attacks and is later awarded the Congressional Gold Medal. Weeks after the attacks, British cruise-missile armed nuclear submarines join in an attack on targets inside Afghanistan whilst we send the Paras and the SAS (world's best special forces) to help hunt down Al-Quaeda. Then, after having done all that, we bust a gut helping the US to secure an international coalition against Iraq and, against all odds, desperately seek a second resolution (unfortunately to no avail). Just to make sure of our alliance, we send 45,000 servicemen and women to Iraq and almost flawlessly take Al Basrah.

Just in case you don't know, let me point out that Ireland is a neutral country, is not a member of NATO and Sinn Fein was against the actions in Afghanistan.

And in case anyone is still under some illogical veil:

"Many Americans would be unaware of the negative attitudes toward their country in Ireland. A Sunday Independent poll published in mid-December, 2001, revealed that 67% of respondents did not approve of the way George W. Bush was conducting the war in Afghanistan. Three days later, Niall O'Dowd, a linchpin of support for the Irish peace process in the United States, noted what had grown into "rabid American bashing in Ireland" and cited a survey by the Eurobarometer agency which showed 56% in Ireland opposing the use of Irish airports for American supply planes.

(By mid-February, 2003, and a new war, an Irish Times poll revealed that 63% disapproved of the offer of Ireland's airports to the US in the absence of any final UN Security Council resolution backing a war on Iraq, and [b]49% would be opposed to the offer of airports even if the Security Council passed such a resolution.")[/b]

Basically americans spend millions on terrorists who back-stab their american supporters and attack one of america's closest allies, whilst millions of americans continue to hone allegiance to a country that wouldn't help it in a time of war.
Good guess, and I'm a he btw
It's not really anything to do with you though..
Well we colonized the place so we really lost to ourselves
Actually the Empire got bigger afterwards.
We still have about 8,000 soldiers in Iraq.
Britain holds the unique honour of winning the shortest war in history, which we won after 38 minutes. If you are trying to impress a Brit about military skill you still have a way to go yet
[right][snapback]610610[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]



Randomproddy-- I am not argueing wether or not the Rebellion in Ireland is currently just or not, I am saying that the Fact that American money supports it makes what American's think about Irish nationhood very relevent.

P.S. The Brits won a battle in Basra even after they had run out of ammo and could not get support--- how, a bayonet charge, and not just one, but charging from house to house until the had fought there way out of the area, the killed or wounded enough of the enemy that the enemy withdrew. this was in 2003-- No Random I'll never question british troops courage or skill. It is the British people at large that I wonder about.

Edited June 13, 2005 by Don John of Austria

[RandomProddy]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Jun 13 2005, 11:41 PM']It is the British people at large that I wonder about.
[right][snapback]610641[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Same here

Edit: Just to point out, I don't have anything against the Irish people, just some of the politics. As a gesture, I'll point out one interesting thing. One of the first regiments that got into Iraq was the Irish Guards [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Guards"]Link[/url] [url="http://www.army.mod.uk/irishguards/"]Link[/url]

Edited June 13, 2005 by RandomProddy

[Ellenita]

[quote]"The main reason for the increase in world military spending is the massive increase in the United States, which accounts for almost half of the world total...."[/quote]

Money which could be spent better elsewhere!

The build up of military hardware results in other countries trying to follow suit - example - Iranian journalist on TV today saying 'why shouldn't we have a nuclear bomb, Israel has one, Pakistan has one and they aren't questioned about it'.

A lose, lose situation....

[quote]we took an entire country (irag) in a matter of days[/quote]

Don't know how many times we've got to say this, but US troops were not the only ones fighting in that war.....or still stationed out there. :angry:


[quote]It is the British people at large that I wonder about.[/quote]

*faints* Something we have in common Don John!