Kenya Defence Forces (KDF)

Vitruvian wrote:

rwigi wrote:@ Kepler. Thank you for that.

@Kobooz:

@vitruvian You will come to be surprised that it works when men pray. I
will also tell you that Israel stands, feels more secure to be in
Jerusalem than in most cities in East Africa not because of military
might, not because of protection from sammy but because of divine
favour.

I could not agree further with you. History time and time again has proved that a man who believes on his own strength fails. Failing to acknowledge God is recipe for irreversible downfall. It may be slow in coming but it ultimately comes.

KDF needs to train and have the best weapons but their success is dependent on whether God helps them win or not. God not being visible when soldiers fight does not mean he is not there and helping them.

@Vitruvian: God and not just training will determine whether KDF win or lose.

Why should God help KDF and not the more pious Al-Shabaab? Are we not all his children? Are Al-Shabaab evil or have they simply strayed? And if the latter, in His omniscience and omnibenevolence, can He not find room for forgiveness and put them on the right path?
I have never been in a foxhole or faced the prospect of imminent death but have been under extreme stress on many occasions. Reasoning and level-headedness, as well as MY will - not blind faith - got me through. My experiences, therefore, may be different from yours so please understand that I do not place much emphasis on a speculative and indeterminable ethereal being alleged to possess superhuman powers.
We are all atheists. The difference between you and I may only be in that, as an enlightened freethinker, I believe in one god less than you do, of which there are so many to choose from. I am simply more atheist than you are.
There is ample empirical evidence for most everything that surrounds us and my personal choice has been to follow the more difficult route - understanding. I don't want to believe. I want to know.

This, however, NOT being the right forum for such a debate, I will leave it with the aphorism quoted above - there are no atheists in foxholes. Which, considering man's fickle nature, is not only to be expected but also understood.

mogen wrote:

Vitruvian wrote:
Why should God help KDF and not the more pious Al-Shabaab? Are we not all his children? Are Al-Shabaab evil or have they simply strayed? And if the latter, in His omniscience and omnibenevolence, can He not find room for forgiveness and put them on the right path?
I have never been in a foxhole or faced the prospect of imminent death but have been under extreme stress on many occasions. Reasoning and level-headedness, as well as MY will - not blind faith - got me through. My experiences, therefore, may be different from yours so please understand that I do not place much emphasis on a speculative and indeterminable ethereal being alleged to possess superhuman powers.
We are all atheists. The difference between you and I may only be in that, as an enlightened freethinker, I believe in one god less than you do, of which there are so many to choose from. I am simply more atheist than you are.
There is ample empirical evidence for most everything that surrounds us and my personal choice has been to follow the more difficult route - understanding. I don't want to believe. I want to know.

This, however, NOT being the right forum for such a debate, I will leave it with the aphorism quoted above - there are no atheists in foxholes. Which, considering man's fickle nature, is not only to be expected but also understood.

@Vitruvian

Having or having no faith in a Supreme Being is a personal choice. Military chaplains have a long long history [eg the first English military-oriented chaplains were priests on board naval vessels during the 8th century]. In a combat environment military chaplains have an important role to play. A chaplain provides spiritual and emotional support for service personnel and conduct religious services. Many armies still retain Chaplains, a term that now includes Rabbis, Imans, priests, pastors, humanistic chaplain or lay representative of a world view.

Surely, the emotional toll on soldiers in combat environments for prolonged periods of time is no small matter. If you check records of war veterans you will note that an overwhelming number of them suffer from emotional/mental health issues for life. The US has huge numbers of these cases from Vietnam to Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan. Chaplains and prayers have made a difference for many. After all 'there are no atheists in foxholes or crashing aeroplanes'.

Vitruvian wrote:@Vitruvian Having or having no faith in a Supreme Being is a personal choice. Military chaplains have a long long history [eg the first English military-oriented chaplains were priests on board naval vessels during the 8th century]. In a combat environment military chaplains have an important role to play. A chaplain provides spiritual and emotional support for service personnel and conduct religious services. Many armies still retain Chaplains, a term that now includes Rabbis, Imans, priests, pastors, humanistic chaplain or lay representative of a world view.

Surely, the emotional toll on soldiers in combat environments for prolonged periods of time is no small matter. If you check records of war veterans you will note that an overwhelming number of them suffer from emotional/mental health issues for life. The US has huge numbers of these cases from Vietnam to Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan. Chaplains and prayers have made a difference for many. After all 'there are no atheists in foxholes or crashing aeroplanes'.

[1] All authority comes from God (Nothing would be if God did not WILL it). God willed that I be born and become a soldier under certain authorities (presidents)

[2] No one has proven the existence, or lack of existence, of God (the existence of the Higgs Boson further moves the question to "Who created the first Higgs Boson particle? for me). I would rather die believing in God than resurrect and face God, and the consequences, as a nonbeliever. If there is no resurection, I lose nothing still coz I will be dead, right?

[3] Research has shown that people of faith live healthier and longer lives. We all love a winner, don't we?

Vitruvian wrote:

rwigi wrote:@ Kepler. Thank you for that.

@Kobooz:

@vitruvian You will come to be surprised that it works when men pray. I
will also tell you that Israel stands, feels more secure to be in
Jerusalem than in most cities in East Africa not because of military
might, not because of protection from sammy but because of divine
favour.

I could not agree further with you. History time and time again has proved that a man who believes on his own strength fails. Failing to acknowledge God is recipe for irreversible downfall. It may be slow in coming but it ultimately comes.

KDF needs to train and have the best weapons but their success is dependent on whether God helps them win or not. God not being visible when soldiers fight does not mean he is not there and helping them.

@Vitruvian: God and not just training will determine whether KDF win or lose.

Why should God help KDF and not the more pious Al-Shabaab? Are we not all his children? Are Al-Shabaab evil or have they simply strayed? And if the latter, in His omniscience and omnibenevolence, can He not find room for forgiveness and put them on the right path?
I have never been in a foxhole or faced the prospect of imminent death but have been under extreme stress on many occasions. Reasoning and level-headedness, as well as MY will - not blind faith - got me through. My experiences, therefore, may be different from yours so please understand that I do not place much emphasis on a speculative and indeterminable ethereal being alleged to possess superhuman powers.
We are all atheists. The difference between you and I may only be in that, as an enlightened freethinker, I believe in one god less than you do, of which there are so many to choose from. I am simply more atheist than you are.
There is ample empirical evidence for most everything that surrounds us and my personal choice has been to follow the more difficult route - understanding. I don't want to believe. I want to know.

This, however, NOT being the right forum for such a debate, I will leave it with the aphorism quoted above - there are no atheists in foxholes. Which, considering man's fickle nature, is not only to be expected but also understood.

I
would rather die believing in God than resurrect and face God, and the
consequences, as a nonbeliever. If there is no resurection, I lose
nothing still coz I will be dead, right?

Spartan wrote:Vitruvian, I hate to be on opposite sides with you, bro. And of course I am one of the forumers who best understand (and respect) you here. I've sat out this God and Soldier thread since it begun but I must admit, I've finally succumbed to its allure. In the West, liberals equate belief in God with all sorts of ''uncool'' atributes, chief among them the inability of a person to think for oneself.

This is my 'coming out', ladies and gentlemen, officers and men, I believe in a higher Being, God to be exact. I've been in a trench and other life-threatening bad days at work, and I admit - I prayed to God to forgive the sins of my past and accept me should I not leave the field on which I found myself. You see, as a soldier, my role models as World War II soldiers, soldiers who believed in their mortality and in the good that would come out of the missions they were prepared to sacrifice their lives for. I've spent hours reading their letters and I believe we would be in one big German empire (or dead) were it not for their sacrifices, made possible by their belief in a higher being, a force for good.

I fully signed off on this work and accept all its hazards, including the likelihood of an early death. I've had my whole life to comprehend my response to the question of whether God is there or not, and I have two conclusions as follows;

[1] All authority comes from God (Nothing would be if God did not WILL it). God willed that I be born and become a soldier under certain authorities (presidents)

[2] No one has proven the existence, or lack of existence, of God (the existence of the Higgs Boson further moves the question to "Who created the first Higgs Boson particle? for me). I would rather die believing in God than resurrect and face God, and the consequences, as a nonbeliever. If there is no resurection, I lose nothing still coz I will be dead, right?

[3] Research has shown that people of faith live healthier and longer lives. We all love a winner, don't we?

@ Vitruvian: I like your thinking and if you ask me I believe you are one of the forum's heavy weights. That said, I disagree with you 101% when you start saying there is no God. I rest my case.

Vitruvian wrote:

Spartan wrote:Vitruvian, I hate to be on opposite sides with you, bro. And of course I am one of the forumers who best understand (and respect) you here. I've sat out this God and Soldier thread since it begun but I must admit, I've finally succumbed to its allure. In the West, liberals equate belief in God with all sorts of ''uncool'' atributes, chief among them the inability of a person to think for oneself.

This is my 'coming out', ladies and gentlemen, officers and men, I believe in a higher Being, God to be exact. I've been in a trench and other life-threatening bad days at work, and I admit - I prayed to God to forgive the sins of my past and accept me should I not leave the field on which I found myself. You see, as a soldier, my role models as World War II soldiers, soldiers who believed in their mortality and in the good that would come out of the missions they were prepared to sacrifice their lives for. I've spent hours reading their letters and I believe we would be in one big German empire (or dead) were it not for their sacrifices, made possible by their belief in a higher being, a force for good.

I fully signed off on this work and accept all its hazards, including the likelihood of an early death. I've had my whole life to comprehend my response to the question of whether God is there or not, and I have two conclusions as follows;

[1] All authority comes from God (Nothing would be if God did not WILL it). God willed that I be born and become a soldier under certain authorities (presidents)

[2] No one has proven the existence, or lack of existence, of God (the existence of the Higgs Boson further moves the question to "Who created the first Higgs Boson particle? for me). I would rather die believing in God than resurrect and face God, and the consequences, as a nonbeliever. If there is no resurection, I lose nothing still coz I will be dead, right?

[3] Research has shown that people of faith live healthier and longer lives. We all love a winner, don't we?

Spartan, thanks for the respect and civility you display, not only in this post but on this forum in general.

Allow me, then, to 'come out' too and explain my thoughts.
Religion is a matter of faith and a personal choice. And I respect personal choice, individual choice, provided it does no harm to others. I will not, for example, accept one's personal choice to empty a machine-gun into a school bus as an expression of one's faith.
There is a distinction between faith and religion (though - for obvious reasons - clerics will dispute this). An analogy here may be embracing the principles of democracy - faith - but not aligning oneself with any political parties - religion - though they may claim to advocate the same principles. I consider faith - the principle - as necessary to Mankind. Religion, I do not. Whatever its original form and purpose, it has evolved into an entirely different animal.
As a believer may have faith in the existence of God, so may a scientist have faith in the existence of life on other planets. In both cases there is (as yet) a total absence of any empirical evidence.
Culturally, I am Christian. I was educated in a parochial school in Nairobi - two, in fact. Consequently, my insight into the Scriptures is quite profound. Such as they are, I am pretty sure that even you, Spartan, would not give them much consideration were not the label 'Holy' attached to them and were they not associated with faith. Outside the context of faith, they are merely stories, even fairytales. And I mean no disrespect to the faithful.
The priests in my school encouraged the theological vide scientific debate and actively participated in it, though, in retrospect, they may have come to regret it. Because such debate allowed us to question the validity of religion. It encouraged critical thinking. It allowed us to think outside the box and not simply accept religion because we had been indoctrinated when we were little innocents, or because we had been threatened with unusually cruel and everlasting consequences should we dare exercise our (God-given) intellect by entertaining alternative truths. One of our conclusions was that - in a place such as Africa - the identity of the True God(s) actually depended on who colonised you first. First the land, then the mind.
If an atheist is one who does not believe in the existence of God or gods, then I cannot claim to be an atheist, in that I cannot disprove the existence of God (or prove his non-existence). This would be futile and to a scientist, proof is crucial. On the other hand, because of the sheer absence of any evidence whatsoever, I can claim that there is a very high probability that God does not exist. And since the existence of God is not my contention, it is not up to me to disprove it.
At the same time, my God-given intellect does not allow me to accept that 'God' is the correct answer to the multitude of questions we have about the cosmos, about biology, about Man. The fact the we don't (yet!) know who made the God Particle (or any other thing) doesn't mean that God made it. Such an answer is as uncritical as saying "some guy in Poland." I may then challenge you to prove that he didn't, rather than assume the burden of proof upon myself for a contention I made.
So, did God make the Higgs Boson?
One may choose to believe that he did. That is matter of faith. In the absence of empirical evidence, another may say that there is no proof that he did or, indeed, that there is no proof that he exists to have done so, so he probably didn't. That is a matter of critical and scientific thought. But you cannot ask one to disprove that he made that goddamn boson (or that he exists).
If that were a valid argument, then all the gods worshipped by humanity across the ages - from Horus through Quetzalcoatl, Zeus, Thor, Amaterasu, Allah and Vishnu to Yahweh - and all those that may be worshipped in future, do and will exist. None of them can be disproved. In which case I must ask myself, which of these thousands is the True God?
I said earlier that I don't want to believe, I want to know. If God exists, I want to know, not merely believe.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

As to rather believing than having to face the consequences, my take is this: if God exists and is omniscient, He will understand my beliefs and reasoning. Indeed, unless the Scriptures are untrue, He already does, He always has and is in fact individually and solely responsible for the nature of my understanding and reasoning. My thoughts (as my very existence) are His doing; and if God is omnibenevolent, he cannot possibly punish me for His own deeds.
There. I'm going to Heaven. I choose, therefore, not to live in fear.
Finally, a 2,300-year-old quote:
Is God willing to prevent evil but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?
- Epicurus.

@mekatiliti, @ole nkarei - though you may be of conflicting views on this issue, I respect your right to foster and express them

@ Vitruvian: I like your thinking and if you ask me I believe you are one of the forum's heavy weights. That said, I disagree with you 101% when you start saying there is no God. I rest my case.

@rwigi - with respect, that is not how cases are rested, heh heh!

MOOZALENDO wrote:...People sometimes run away from/suppress evidence that does not fit into their perspective of the origins of the world i.e., if the facts do not fit theory, CHANGE THEM!

...I think that the greatest and perhaps ONLY LIMIT to what exists is our state of knowledge.

...Since we are willing to objectively consider all evidence available, why do we suppress this particular aspect of order and patterns? I aver that there is abundant evidence of intelligent design in nature. I would therefore not exclude the existence of God as the designer!
Mooz

githinjibn wrote:Enough with this indoctrination about this 'God particle' thing. Kwani this forum has now turned into a physicists blog. The reason we check out this forum on a daily basis is to acquaint ourselves with the latest in matters military.

Efrommers wrote:

@githinjibn,
I would suggest you swim with the tide not against the tide

Flying Crane wrote:Order in the ranks Gentlemen !!!!!!!!!!!!
Revert back to armed Communiqués or step over to the


“HEADLINE POLITICS & CURRENT AFFAIRS” page.

Don,t turn this web into a kikomba market.

Applause @ githinjibn

Efrommers wrote:

@githinjibn,
I would suggest you swim with the tide not against the tide

@Efrommers refresh your memory , military discusion is the tide of this page so lets keep that discussion.

A.S.P

Cycoh 'DUDUS' wrote:

ole Nkarei wrote:The effective strategy to degrade the AS is, simply put, to cut it off from the Civilian population by (i) physical,(ii) ideological and (iii) psychological separation. Physical – drive AS away from Civilian population and localize this Population in defendable and Administratively viable Centres; Ideological – destroy the ideological basis for the attraction to the AS’s Jihad against invading Christian Kaffir (co-opt local Militia in Forward Units and prominently manifest the ‘’Islamic /Kenya- Somali face’’ of KDF forces in Theatre); Psychological – ‘’heart and mind’’ campaign through provision of rudimentary social services, law and order, demonize the AS (!!)etc.

Too much catastrophic ON.I beg to differ with you on this.

Honestly if we use this "US-Taliban" methodology to get rid of Al Shabaab, we might find ourselves in a very big mess!!...Just like the US (Victims of suicide bombers).

ISOLATING someone who is critically n illusionally, salivating for some seven virgins, located in....God knows where, isn't the best way to deal with such lunatics. But I know it can be done besides isolation, coz where there is a will there is a way.

Sierra-Leone's soldiers profile
The Army is modeled on the British Army and came into existence after independence in 1961.
Sierra Leone has very limited modern weaponry.
The country has a wide variety of used second-hand foreign imported arms.

Analyst wrote:Gentlemen,

My opening remarks with reference to the God and Vitruvian is an Einsteins classic saying

Before God we are all equally wise – and equally foolish.
- Albert Einstein

In addition to the religion context poked by Vitruvian in the context, i will revoke it and warn that

God has no religion. (- Mahatma Gandhi)

Vitruvian's mind, words, and believes are corrupted by too much of philosophy studies. Students of philosophy regardless of their christian upbringing and proper social-cognitive development, will, upon mastering the basics of philosophical theories antagonize the order of nature and belief. (proselytization and radicalization by scholarly dogmas)

Here i blame Vitruvian's subscription to too much theoretical-practical dogma's about believe and manifestation of deeds that disapprove existence of God per-se

Vitruvian....et al; 'I think that God in creating Man somewhat overestimated his ability. - Oscar Wilde

Vitruvian's non-believer-believer (luke-warm state) is not new to psychologists. In January 2011, there was debate on 'Army's spiritual fitness', in the United States, where key congressional members and the defense ministry sought to push for a rule that required all army enlistee's must believe in God. (This program is still under fire though)

Vitruvian is what the military psychology experts describe as “Foxhole Atheists” a psychological problem that gradually manifests if both 'PHILOSOPHY, and WAR,' have manifested in the cohorts life. (events witnessed in war and the non-believer aspect of this cohorts mind are digested with pragmatism ingested in a reactive form; then this re-activeness forms a mindset that refutes existence of God, since if God existed and had love for mankind as religiously perceived, would not allow such atrocious events as witnessed by the cohort to happen).

Post-war depression and traumatic events, analysis of war events, and a strong bias to the philosophical theories of atheism and reinforced truths about religion as a respite for lack and poverty, radicalize and reinforce the believe that God is a coincidence....unfortunately, Coincidence is God’s way of remaining anonymous.
- Albert Einstein

Vitruvian is only providing insight about his (psychologically inspired disbelief in God.... His mindset from his encounters, (either physical, academically, or inspired in a sectarian environmental/factor) is a state of indifference, or the suppression of emotions due to lack of possessing the level of skill required to confront the psychological challenge/trauma.

In conclusion (a psychologists summary note)...Vitruvian's atheist-believer state is a state of apathy. The etymology of apathy sheds light on both theological indifference in both military/police and the civilian's inability to control their disbelief in God and events that describe his lack of control on atrocities and situations that traumatize such as accidents, painful deaths, loss of loved ones, war etc.).

End Notes

Vitruvian's postulations on atheism is a state of indifference towards events and things which lie outside his control.
His philosophy, is that all things are exterior, and that everyone (the human being) is only responsible for his representations and judgments.

Vitruvian, dear brother;

When a man takes one step toward God, God takes more steps toward that man than there are sands in the worlds of time.

There are no accidents. God’s just trying to remain anonymous.

Vitruvian wrote:
Albert Einstein, actually speaking about God (and not the duality of human nature):
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modelled after our own - a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbour such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms."
"The word god is for me nothing but an expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honourable but still primitive legends which are nevertheless still pretty childish. To me, the Jewish religion, like all others, is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions."

mogen wrote:... Blaise Pascal's wager/gambit [@Vitruvian thanks for bringing it up]. The French-mathematician's attempt to address the question of God's existence is spectacular.
He concluded: The assumption (Wager) that God exists superdominates a wager against the existence of God: The worst outcome associated with wagering for God (status quo) is at least as good as the best outcome associated with wagering against God (status quo); and if God exists, the result of wagering for God is strictly better that the result of wagering against God.. that is: if I wager for God, and God does not exist, then I really do lose something. but if I wager against God, and it turns out God indeed does exist, then I lose everything. Pascal draws the conclusion at this point that rationality requires you to wager for God.

'Matter can neither be created nor destroyed' - is an interesting one. I know that it takes much more faith to believe in macro-evolution than in creation. As a health professional, I have never ceased to marvel at the makeup of the human body. In its anatomy, physiology and all it is way too organised to have just happened by chance. The brain cells, for instance, pack an amazing punch. You could have numerous computers over a large area to even come close to approximating what a 1kg brain of a child can accomplish. Eish, intelligent design makes more sense to me.

Vitruvian wrote:
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modelled after our own - a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbour such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms."

"The word god is for me nothing but an expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honourable but still primitive legends which are nevertheless still pretty childish. To me, the Jewish religion, like all others, is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions."

ole Nkarei wrote:
And yet.....

''My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind''

And yet also..

..''Every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe-a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble.''

Vitruvian wrote:

MOOZALENDO wrote:...People sometimes run away from/suppress evidence that does not fit into their perspective of the origins of the world i.e., if the facts do not fit theory, CHANGE THEM!

...I think that the greatest and perhaps ONLY LIMIT to what exists is our state of knowledge.

...Since we are willing to objectively consider all evidence available, why do we suppress this particular aspect of order and patterns? I aver that there is abundant evidence of intelligent design in nature. I would therefore not exclude the existence of God as the designer!
Mooz

I reiterate that I respect each person's religious beliefs and entitlement to them, whether or not I agree with their particular point of view.
I reiterate that I cannot disprove the existence of God and therefore cannot discount the possibility of its existence.
This, however, also depends on how exactly we define God. If in the Biblical sense, well, I have a problem with that because I do not see how I can pursue an inferential discourse against such a backdrop. If "God" is synonymous and interchangeable with and indistinct from what is generally understood as "Nature," we have a totally different parley.
That said, a debate on the concept of intelligent design, from my perspective, would be unavailing because it would boil down to the simplistic question of what Intelligence designed the Creator and Who created the Intelligence. Necessarily, a counterintuitive quantum reflection model would come into play and we'd be back to square 1 again. We'd be playing a game of ping-pong.
Science, and the scientist's perception of science, has come a long way since the 19th century and by 100 years ago - in the Age of Curie and Einstein - the idea of an Ultimate Scientific Truth, the concept that "we already know all there is to know," had been totally and thoroughly debunked. As we speak, Darwin and Einstein are being tweaked, modified, prodded and questioned as new evidence comes in.
If it has always been the scientific method to draw a conclusion from the Facts, it has always been the religious method to search for, and often fabricate, facts to support the Conclusion. I am sure we are all aware of the Human censorship that gave the Bible only four Gospels.
Yet I do, indeed, agree with you: the only limit to what exists is our state of knowledge. And our knowledge is based on evidence. What evidence is there of intelligent design? I will accept it if it can be demonstrated.
The scale of the Cosmos is such that we shall never find The Answer whilst humanity exists. Thus, we are confined to choose between the static of intelligent design, or the dynamic of scientific interpretation.
Whichever course we opt to follow is our personal choice.

Code:

[img][/img]