In genocide, do the scriptures say to defend others?

[AR_Clint]

I have a relative that told me the Book of Mormon and Doctrine & Covenants state we should not enter war with anyone unless it is to defend our own country. He even went as far as to say in cases of genocide (the holocaust was mentioned), we should not step in unless God specifically says to.

Here are the scriptures he gave me:

Alma 43:46-47

Alma 48:14-15

D&C 98:33

Is there any evidence in the scriptures or in modern day revelation that state it is okay for one nation to defend unarmed, innocent people in other nations?

[NeuroTypical]

Is there any evidence in the scriptures or in modern day revelation that state it is okay for one nation to defend unarmed, innocent people in other nations?

If President Hinkley giving a talk in General Conference reaches that bar for you, the answer is yes.

War and Peace - April 2003

As I discuss the matter, I seek the direction of the Holy Spirit. I have prayed and pondered much concerning this. I recognize it is a very sensitive subject for an international congregation, including those not of our religious faith.

...

In the course of history tyrants have arisen from time to time who have oppressed their own people and threatened the world. Such is adjudged to be the case presently, and consequently great and terrifying forces with sophisticated and fearsome armaments have been engaged in battle.

...

as citizens we are all under the direction of our respective national leaders. They have access to greater political and military intelligence than do the people generally. Those in the armed services are under obligation to their respective governments to execute the will of the sovereign. When they joined the military service, they entered into a contract by which they are presently bound and to which they have dutifully responded.

...

It is clear from these and other writings that there are times and circumstances when nations are justified, in fact have an obligation, to fight for family, for liberty, and against tyranny, threat, and oppression.

...

[We are] in the position of those who long for peace, who teach peace, who work for peace, but who also are citizens of nations and are subject to the laws of our governments. Furthermore, we are a freedom-loving people, committed to the defense of liberty wherever it is in jeopardy. I believe that God will not hold men and women in uniform responsible as agents of their government in carrying forward that which they are legally obligated to do. It may even be that He will hold us responsible if we try to impede or hedge up the way of those who are involved in a contest with forces of evil and repression.

[AR_Clint]

What about in scenarios where our country isn't threatened? Maybe like a Rwanda genocide scenario?

[Guest FixingTheWrongs]

What about in scenarios where our country isn't threatened? Maybe like a Rwanda genocide scenario?

In most cases a tyrant or dictator usually doesn't just stop with his own country but trys for more power and territory, eventually the effects spill over into other countrys and, in many cases throughout history, the world. Acting early saves lives, before it becomes a bigger problem.

Stopping a mass killing of the innocent is a worthy cause to get involved IMO, regaurdless of it is in our country or not.

[xLandonx]

When the Lamanites took arms against the people of Ammon (Anti-Nephi-Lehies) the Nephites took up arms in their defense. This to me tells me it's perfectly acceptable to take measures to defend those who are unable to defend themselves.

[Blackmarch]

I have a relative that told me the Book of Mormon and Doctrine & Covenants state we should not enter war with anyone unless it is to defend our own country. He even went as far as to say in cases of genocide (the holocaust was mentioned), we should not step in unless God specifically says to.

Here are the scriptures he gave me:

Alma 43:46-47

Alma 48:14-15

D&C 98:33

Is there any evidence in the scriptures or in modern day revelation that state it is okay for one nation to defend unarmed, innocent people in other nations?

In the BoM the nephites stepped in to defend the converted lamanites....

Also, everyone is a brother or sister - defending such from predations is justifiable.

[rameumptom]

It is not an easy answer here, because often the choice we make has unintended consequences.

For example, Woodrow Wilson brought us into WWI in the hopes of reshaping the world. Afterwards, we divided up ancient empires in new ways. He created the League of Nations, which put a lot of economic pressures on Germany. These things ended up leading to the Second World War, where we had reason to enter because we were attacked. Had Wilson kept us out of WWI, it is very possible there would not have been a Hitler or WWII. For nations like Yugoslavia, it required a strong communist fist to force people to live together. Once gone, they returned to their centuries-old fighting in the Bosnian-Serbian war. Today we only keep them apart by having an army stand between them. While I hate to see genocide occur, I do not think we can keep the world from doing such terrible things without literally having a US military police force in every town in the Third world.

Our involvement in Iran in the past, kicking out one government, installing the Shah, etc., has now led to decades of radical Islamic rule.

I can go on with a lot more events like this: Korea, Vietnam, Philippines, etc. Often, it is better to allow a people to prepare themselves for freedom and self government. We are finding that out in Afghanistan and Iraq right now.

Instead, we should be a refuge from the storms in other countries. Open our doors to those who want to live free and safe. Blackmarch's statement about Nephites defending the Ammonites needs an important correction: FIRST, the Nephites invited them to live on Nephite lands, and THEN defended them on Nephite territory. The righteous Nephites never did invade Lamanite territory at any time. Nor should we, unless as a truly defensive measure (as in WWII, where we had to decide where to have the battlefields).

[Guest gopecon]

I think the 2nd Great Commandment - Love they neighbor as thyself - applies here. If it is okay to defend self or family, I can't see why it would not be good to defend someone else's life and liberty.

Ram - I don't think that you can look at past mistakes to say that we should never get involved. Caution and good judgement should be used. We (America and the West) do need to be careful about trying to solve every problem in the world - it can't be done.

[rameumptom]

The problem is, even our best judgment in the past has led to great consequences further down the road. We should not be so glib or presumptuous to think we hold the key to all wisdom. I strongly believe in chaos theory: a butterfly flapping its wings today in China can cause severe storms in the USA 2 weeks later. WWI led to WWII. Our decisions often do not include caution, and judgment is always a fickled thing - just look at how our reaction to 9/11 led us into ever expanding military exploits and attempts to democratize the world, including failures in Afghanistan and probably Iraq.

Our efforts in Iraq destabilized the fragile balance in the area, especially with Iran, leaving Iran to be a considerable regional power with no counterbalance. It never fails that when we "fix" something, two other things break.

[Vort]

Is there any evidence in the scriptures or in modern day revelation that state it is okay for one nation to defend unarmed, innocent people in other nations?

The obvious example is how the Nephites accepted and protected the people of Ammon.

[Matthew0059]

The example of the Nephites protecting the Anti-Nephi Lehites is a good one, but it should be remembered that the relationship was of a covenant nature: the Nephites extend their armies to protect the A-NL's, and the A-NL's provide the Nephites with extra resources (mainly food) to supplement the army and nation during war. Furthermore, the A-NL's had lived according to the Law of the Gospel (i.e., they were not "reaping what they had sown" but were wholly innocent in the matter).

So, if there is a group that comes to us asking for help, and if they are willing to come live within our borders and are willing to show forth the meekness expected in the situation, is there any problem in protecting them? No, I don't think so, so long as they do their part.

If there is a group far away that demands our aid without any promise of compensation or help (showing a desire for self-sustenance), is it our obligation to help them? No, it is not. We are not the world's police force.

President Reuben J. Clark had some interesting things to say regarding these topics (you can find a compiled list of quotes here. One quote I have always loved, regarding the fact that America is no longer a moral force in the world, goes:

There is indeed no moral force left in all the world to whose voice the warring nations are as yet willing to hearken. We are now living under the law of the jungle where in cataclysms every beast fights to the death for his own life.

Are we Christians? We act like pagans . . .

Frankly, America would not be justified in engaging in a foreign war to prevent the genocide of another race, except said race would be willing to leave their very homeland and immigrate to the U.S. (not that there's much room over here...). With our track record, the CIA would have the victim's country completely in shambles by the time we have finished "saving" them, and a ruthless dictator would be set up, who would then go about ruling the people in such a manner that many of them will wish they had, in fact, died in a war of genocide.