God is a supporter of war

I appreciate con's response. I am also not sure if I am following this site's rules properly, so I ask that the voters bear with me (this is my first debate). If I was not supposed to begin defending my position in round 1 I ask that you simply vote based off of this round. Con did not deal with the passages I cited directly, but passed over them and used his own to try to defend his position. I tried concisely show the consistent stance of God towards war through the whole narrative of the Bible, but that was not addressed. For this round I will rebut the passages con cites in defense of his stance. The first passage he quotes is 1 Chronicles 28:3 which is what God says to David when David expresses his desire to build a permanent temple. Before this point the Israelites had a portable tabernacle which was where worship was centralized. This tabernacle housed the Ark of the Covenant. David, during his reign as king, wished to erect a permanent temple for God. As con has quoted, David was denied because God said he was a man of war and had shed blood. Con has interpreted this as meaning God will never approve of war or as the debate subject frames it "supports" war. This view has inconsistencies which I will address below. David became the king of Israel after God rejected Saul for not waging war like God had commanded him. Saul was the first king of Israel. At one point as king God had commanded Saul to wage war on the Amalekites, with very specific instructions. 1 Samuel 15:3 "Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey."" Here God commands Saul to destroy the Amalekites. Not only destroy, but to leave nothing alive. Saul disobeyed and left the animals which would be good for sacrifice alive. This is the beginning of his downfall which leads to David's ascension as king. Take note that that this change only took place because God had commanded Saul to wage war in a specific manner. David is called a man of war and one who sheds blood because of what he did outside of what God commanded. Since God seems to support war (look at the case of Saul just mentioned) we should look at what God could mean. David was not such a great guy as we usually remember him. David committed countless atrocious sins and murder. An example of his bloodshed is in the murdering of Uriah after he had slept with Bathsheba. Another can be seen when David is living under Achish, the king of Gath when he is being endangered by Saul in Israel. In this time period David was constantly robbing and murdering many in the surrounding area so that they could not report the crimes to Achish (see 1 Samuel 27). David continued to do this over the span of several years. None of these horrific things were commanded by God (unlike Joshua who was commended for the wars he commanded), which is why God judged these as horrible acts. This is why David was not allowed to build the temple. Con also cites Matthew 5:44 which says to love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. He also brings up "turning the other cheek" which is taken from the same dialogue, Jesus' sermon on the mount. The sermon on the mount is describing the life of a true follower of Christ. These are individual commandments targeted toward a specific group of people. The commands of an individual Christian and a secular government are not identical. If this were the case and these commands were to be followed by governments then there would be no laws that would be able to execute any sort of justice whatsoever. If we apply other passages from the sermon on the mount to how government should function like if someone takes your tunic, "give him your other cloak as well," society would collapse. This is why human governments are given the responsibility of executing justice as mentioned in round 1 with Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2. I think I have adequately shown that God supporting certain wars is a consistent theme all throughout the Bible and that God has entrusted human governments with the responsibility of executing justice. I think I have also shown that con's verses do not fit contextually, nor with the consistency of the Bible as a whole. We let the voters decide. Thanks for the debate!