Explosion in St. Petersburg - Please avoid speculation and show some respect

Not saying they are purposely targeting civilans but they either seem to be running on faulty Syrian intelligence or don't care killing 1 rebel even if 10 civilians die.
According to your link they are killing 4.5 suspected civilians for every 6 extremists, that's not great but it is better than 10:1 (and also better than the US's 3:1 record in Iraq)
 
What exactly do you want people to say? thoughts and prayers? that kind of non sense?

We have enough suppression of speech as it is these days, with this forum being the latest victim, its a real shame.

Confusing 'freedom of speech' with 'freedom of speech WITHOUT consequence' is the real problem. People seem to think they can espouse dumb, ignorant, disrespectful drivel at every turn these days and expect not to face any repercussions.

Then again, this is the internet. Normal, decent people rules don't apply here.
 
I get what some of you are saying about how boots on the ground, air strikes and the west being unsuccessful at stemming the threat of ISIS and other various terrorist factions but surely now with the attack on Russian and the likelihood of them retaliating, the more countries involved in "the fight on terror" the better?

Russia does have strong allies in the form of China but more importantly in the middle east, Iran.

I do however think its important that they all sit round and plan to work together and not just steam in and do their own thing.

I guess its also worth noting that like the west, Russia does not have a good track record of fighting in the Middle East.
 
I get what some of you are saying about how boots on the ground, air strikes and the west being unsuccessful at stemming the threat of ISIS and other various terrorist factions but surely now with the attack on Russian and the likelihood of them retaliating, the more countries involved in "the fight on terror" the better?

Russia does have strong allies in the form of China but more importantly in the middle east, Iran.

I do however think its important that they all sit round and plan to work together and not just steam in and do their own thing.

I guess its also worth noting that like the west, Russia does not have a good track record of fighting in the Middle East.
Iran is the number one state supporter of terrorism across the globe. I don't really see China and Russia as allies either, they're rivals make no mistake.
 
While the west has certainly not helped the situation in the middle east (probably made it worse), there were Islamic terrorist attacks before the rise and ISIS and I imagine there will still be a threat after their demise.
 
China and Russia are not the same allies as they were decades ago because the China of today is significantly different to the China of yesterday. The politics and economy of China have changed so much that its older friendlier allies are no longer as useful. The western forces China previously bumped heads with are now of great use to China economically, with relations improving considerably.
 
Horrible to see this I wouldnt want to be that guy when the Spetsnaz get hold of him in the hours or days to come

haha more like when the death squads get hold of them..... I would link to the times article but you have to pay for that.

http://cafe.comebackalive.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=43370

Confusing 'freedom of speech' with 'freedom of speech WITHOUT consequence' is the real problem. People seem to think they can espouse dumb, ignorant, disrespectful drivel at every turn these days and expect not to face any repercussions.

Then again, this is the internet. Normal, decent people rules don't apply here.

Ah yet again someone who doesn't understand the concept of free speech...

Someone may find me saying.... "Like all religions, Islam is nonsense and I will not respect it". "disrespectful" but its kind of tough really.

And the fact that you think people should face "repercussions" because of something they say on the internet speaks volume for your character.
 
Last edited:
And the fact that you think people should face "repercussions" because of something they say on the internet speaks volume for your character.

Only in that you should expect to see some kind of moderation. This is a forum linked directly to a popular electronics retailer, not 4chan. It's full of all sorts of wonderful people (mostly). Just because we can cower behind the anonymity of our usernames doesn't mean we should be allowed to make brash, unfounded accusations about a whole creed/race of people, some of whom might well be reading said comments.
 
Well, the law seems to agree with him....

The law is an ass.

You can argue that morality and legality correlate if you like, but never attempt to claim something is moral because it is legal or immoral because it is not. That's an Appeal To Authority in a very literal way and littered with counter-examples.

EDIT: I lost track of what thread I was in - just popped up in my alerts and I responded. I'm done discussing politics in a thread about this tragedy. Maybe we should spin this off into another if people want to argue about it.
 
Only in that you should expect to see some kind of moderation. This is a forum linked directly to a popular electronics retailer, not 4chan. It's full of all sorts of wonderful people (mostly). Just because we can cower behind the anonymity of our usernames doesn't mean we should be allowed to make brash, unfounded accusations about a whole creed/race of people, some of whom might well be reading said comments.

Obviously the forum has rules, and I wasn't referring to racism thats a whole different topic, but ideas can be criticised and so can people, for following said ideas.
 
The law is an ass.

As a general statement that is quite patently untrue, in specific examples I will agree wholeheartedly

You can argue that morality and legality correlate if you like

I wasn't, though of course there is basis for loose correlation but it is not an absolute one

but never attempt to claim something is moral because it is legal or immoral because it is not

Haha, no, I would never do that...in fact I have probably spent most of my life arguing the opposite :p

Basically it was just a counter against the personal attack by pointing out that the law and thus by extension a lot of people, think the same way, so I think the poster overreacted with the 'speaks volumes for your character' insinuation
 
Back
Top Bottom