Conservatives Defend Boykin's War Remarks

Yahoo News ^ | 10/20/03 | LIBBY QUAID

[RJCogburn]

Religious conservatives in Congress are defending a Pentagon general who referred to the war on terror as a Christian fight against Satan.

In remarks many consider demeaning to Islam, Army Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin has told church audiences his mission is "a battle with Satan." The struggle, Boykin said, is "because we're a Christian nation, because our foundation and our roots are Judeo-Christian ... and the enemy is a guy named Satan."

Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., drafted a letter Monday asking Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld not to discipline Boykin, saying that elected officials and military leaders have talked about God and spiritual matters throughout U.S. history.

"As elected officials serving in the United States Congress, we recognize the vital importance our personal faiths play in helping us make decisions," Tiahrt wrote. "We ask that any actions taken in response to Lt. Gen. Boykin's remarks not, in any way, intimidate the free religious exercise of his faith."

Boykin, a three-star general, is deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence. He's also told audiences that President Bush is in the White House "because God put him there for a time such as this," and he once said after a 1993 battle with a Muslim warlord in Somalia, "I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God, and his was an idol."

The general apologized Friday to those offended by his comments.

Pentagon officials released Boykin's statement Friday after hours of weighing how to quell the criticism of the general's speeches, some of which he made while in uniform.

Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice,seemed to reproach the general Sunday on ABC's "This Week."

"The president's views on this are absolutely clear, and I think the president is very clear on what he means here," Rice said. "This is not a war between religions. No one should describe it as such."

Rumsfeld has declined to comment on Boykin's statements or say whether he would take action. A Pentagon spokesman declined to comment on the letter Monday.

The Kansas congressman circulated the letter among colleagues, including Missouri Republican Rep. Todd Akin, who signed it. Tiahrt serves on the defense spending subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, while Akin serves on the House Armed Services Committee.

"The general is an outstanding leader and is widely respected in the military," said Akin spokesman Steve Taylor. "He has expressed he needs to be more guarded in his statements, and the congressman believes that is sufficient. And he agrees with Secretary Rumsfeld that he is an exemplary public servant."

[RJCogburn]

we recognize the vital importance our personal faiths play in helping us make decisions

Absolutely, but Boykin is a nutcase, IMO.

[Argus]

Maybe, but is he as nutty as Wesley Clark?

[John Beresford Tipton]

"Maybe, but is he as nutty as Wesley Clark?"

Life principle #33:
Anything can look good if compared with a sufficiently bad alternative.

[dennisw]

And why would Boykin be a nutcase? Because he told it like it is about Islam in a church?

[John Beresford Tipton]

" why would Boykin be a nutcase?"

Because while we are trying to overcome the fanatic ragheads we don't need that jackass general recruiting more nuts into their fold by making speeches that it a war of religions. That is why Bush keeps saying "this isn't about Islam". Does Bush believe that, problably not, but he at least has enough brains not to make a bad situation worse.

[FreeReign]

[Rice]:"The president's views on this are absolutely clear, and I think the president is very clear on what he means here," Rice said. "This is not a war between religions. No one should describe it as such."

Anybody who disgrees with this can sign up now in the war against 800 million.

[Argus]

I gotta say, I find Boykin refreshing. In any case, he doesn't make policy, he carries it out. Many of the greatest warriors in our history would be considered nutcases today - Patton, Stonewall Jackson, Mad Anthony Wayne, the list is long and distinguished.

[FreeReign]

He's also told audiences that President Bush is in the White House "because God put him there for a time such as this," and he once said after a 1993 battle with a Muslim warlord in Somalia, "I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God, and his was an idol."

The guy believes in his god. What so wrong about that?

[ETERNAL WARMING]

"This is not a war between religions. No one should describe it as such."

Er, have they told the Muslims that? They seem to think it's a War against Jews and Christians. Does anyone seriously doubt that that is precisely what it is?

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Add to your list Douglas MacArthur.

[Unam Sanctam]

As I said in another post, it is not a war against all of Islam, but only those strains that practice and promote offensive physical jihad and terrorism. Clearly there are more pacific strains (like the Sufis), and of course Islam might undergo a Renaissance, Reformation and Enlightenment and diminish its fanaticism, as Christianity already has in centuries past. Islamists may be numerous within Islam, but to say that Islamists (and not Islam as a whole) are the enemy of the United States of America is simply a statement of fact. Why feed the Islamist propaganda mill by falsely portraying the struggle as a war against all of Islam? It is just stupid, inaccurate and harmful. As a Christian, I believe that Islam is a false religion, but as an American, I also believe in freedom of religion, so long as the practice of a religion does not harm others. Thus it is the specific practice of jihad and terrorism that I object to, not the entire religion. Boykin may have a right to say what he did, so long as he makes it clear that it is his own opinion and not government policy. However, I believe it to be an extremely stupid, ill advised and irresponsible statement for someone in his position to make.

[John Beresford Tipton]

"The guy believes in his god. What so wrong about that?"

He can believe in any god he wants, no problem. And before radio and TV he could probably make speeches here without there having a bad effect on our military operations on the other side of the world.

But his statements will be use by OBL and others to justify a holy war, one religion against another. "The crusaders are going to come and make us renounce Allah, etc."

Give him a 100% for Faith,
give him a 0% for brains

[clintonh8r]

Only the seriously deluded and the terminally PC.

[ApesForEvolution]

Aren't you a devout atheist?

[stevem]

I suspect that there isn't any endeavor as compelling as war. This is because most of what makes us civilized is measured only by our own yardsticks. In this environment, any general that doesn't believe God is on his side is, IMHO, in the wrong line of work.

[ApesForEvolution]

Until this very moment did I ever doubt that America would win this war.

Americans don't even understand their enemy, and now, the exact words of the Holy Bible, God's own words, are not 'pc' enough for a man of faith who is a warrior for his nation.

Quite frankly, everyone, each one, in America will end up exactly where he or she belongs. And most won't like it.

[John Beresford Tipton]

Lincoln was asked whether he didn't think God was on his side.

Lincoln replied that he thought it more important that he be on God's side.