Woolwich serious incident

NZB · 24 May 2013 at 21:53

If history has taught is anything it's that big wars with thousands or millions of innocent deaths are an inevitability. Acts like this do nothing but provide the excuse for some maniac leader with military means to go and wipe a country out, all it takes is the wrong leader in power at the wrong time and i hope to god i'm dead before that day comes. We all know it, but choose to fool ourselves into thinking the future only holds utopia.

All because of a handful of nutjobs that use an otherwise peaceful religion to justify their own ends.

Craterloads · 24 May 2013 at 21:54

Jokester said:
The UK operates to internationally recognised and acceptable rules of engagement.

These do not include running down an unarmed man and hacking him up.

Drone strikes, funerals are legitimate targets, state sanctioned. Rules of engagement my butt.

Many in non combat situations, bystanders are legitimate collateral damage. Training camps ( barracks) targets.

Jokester · 24 May 2013 at 21:57

Craterloads said:
Drone strikes, funerals are legitimate targets, state sanctioned. Rules of engagement my butt.

Many in non combat situations, bystanders are legitimate collateral damage. Training camps ( barracks) targets.

Wrong country I think you'll find.

badcompany · 24 May 2013 at 21:57

Craterloads said:
Drone strikes, funerals are legitimate targets, state sanctioned. Rules of engagement my butt.

Many in non combat situations, bystanders are legitimate collateral damage. Training camps ( barracks) targets.

Believe all the propaganda your fed? I feel for you I really do, just don't go and get radicalised now will you there's a good boy.

badcompany · 24 May 2013 at 21:59

Jokester said:
Wrong country I think you'll find.

His puppet masters aren't that bright, cost too much to make that distinction in the jihad monthly mag he probably reads.

teaboy5 · 24 May 2013 at 22:05

There's a few people in this thread that I would worry about. One sounds like hes one talk away from joining the fight.

badcompany · 24 May 2013 at 22:11

teaboy5 said:
There's a few people in this thread that I would worry about. One sounds like hes one talk away from joining the fight.

Yer some Islamist sympathisers on here.

C.R.A.Z.Y · 24 May 2013 at 22:12

Jokester said:
I wouldn't try to justify that though - he was quite rightly locked up for what he did and there is no excuse for it.

He got only a matter of months though which I think was way too lenient considering it should have been attempted murder!!

No one is trying to justify this horrific murder and crime, rather understand WHY it has happened rather than bury our heads in the sand. Obviously prevention is better than cure.

George as usual sums it up very well:

Castiel · 24 May 2013 at 22:14

Craterloads said:
This country is at war, these men aligned themselves with the opposing side and killed an opposing soldier in war. You cannot disprove any of that. It's not nice or pretty but war isn't.

They were not soldiers, they also were not following any specified RoE, there was no engagement or articles of war being followed by them. They are not members of a legitimate army or recognised opposing militant faction, they were not enemy combatants or militias, what they are is murderers, they unlawfully killed an innocent person who was no threat to them. They murdered someone, and attempted to justify it through an interpretation of foreign policy and radical Islamism. It really is as simple as that.

They didn't necessarily target him because he was a soldier, there is no evidence that they knew he was a soldier...they targeted him because he was wearing a Help for Heroes hoodie and suspected he might be, and they decided to murder him.

If a UK soldier killed a Afghan civilian (or a recognised enemy combatant not engaged in combat or an immediate threat) in a similar way, they would also be subject to the same arrest and justice as these men, possibly worse as a UK serviceman is expected to act in accordance with RoE and international law, and the services prison system is somewhat harsher than the civilian one.

What they did was wrong, there are no valid acceptable justification for their actions.

Jokester · 24 May 2013 at 22:16

C.R.A.Z.Y said:
No one is trying to justify this horrific murder and crime, rather understand WHY it has happened rather than bury our heads in the sand. Obviously prevention is better than cure.

Craterloads is very much trying to argue a justification of it, that it was in some way a legitimate military attack.

dave_beast · 24 May 2013 at 22:16

C.R.A.Z.Y said:
He got only a matter of months though which I think was way too lenient considering it should have been attempted murder!!

No one is trying to justify this horrific murder and crime, rather understand WHY it has happened rather than bury our heads in the sand. Obviously prevention is better than cure.

George as usual sums it up very well:

George Galloway is a ****

Gilly · 24 May 2013 at 22:18

C.R.A.Z.Y said:
No one is trying to justify this horrific murder and crime

Craterloads is doing his level best, and George Galloway is a ****.

[edit]Hahaha

Jokester · 24 May 2013 at 22:19

dave_beast said:
George Galloway is a ****

At least his Just for Men isn't quite so severe as it was, looked horrendous the other night on C4.

godinman · 24 May 2013 at 22:20

Castiel said:
They were not soldiers, they also were not following any specified RoE, there was no engagement or articles of war being followed by them. They are not members of a legitimate army or recognised opposing militant faction, they were not enemy combatants or militias, what they are is murderers, they unlawfully killed an innocent person who was no threat to them. They murdered someone, and attempted to justify it through an interpretation of foreign policy and radical Islamism. It really is as simple as that.

They didn't necessarily target him because he was a soldier, there is no evidence that they knew he was a soldier...they targeted him because he was wearing a Help for Heroes hoodie and suspected he might be, and they decided to murder him.

If a UK soldier killed a Afghan civilian (or a recognised enemy combatant not engaged in combat or an immediate threat) in a similar way, they would also be subject to the same arrest and justice as these men, possibly worse as a UK serviceman is expected to act in accordance with RoE and international law, and the services prison system is somewhat harsher than the civilian one.

What they did was wrong, there are no valid acceptable justification for their actions.

I agree with this man, shove it up your ass craterloads.

Robbo · 24 May 2013 at 22:23

Jokester said:
Craterloads is very much trying to argue a justification of it, that it was in some way a legitimate military attack.

Indeed, it's disgraceful what he's doing. He's done it before as well.

T345 · 24 May 2013 at 22:26

Robbo said:
Indeed, it's disgraceful what he's doing. He's done it before as well.

I'm not saying Craterloads is correct, but it is also disgraceful that people (in this thread) are saying deport ALL foreigners. They have done it before as well.

Janesy B · 24 May 2013 at 22:26

godinman said:
I agree with this man, shove it up your ass craterloads.

+1

Robbo · 24 May 2013 at 22:28

T345 said:
I'm not saying Craterloads is correct, but it is also disgraceful that people (in this thread) are saying deport ALL foreigners. They have done it before as well.

Who has said that? (That isn't suspended/banned)

T345 · 24 May 2013 at 22:29

Robbo said:
Who has said that? (That isn't suspended/banned)

No-one who hasn't had a holiday, as far as I know.

Gilly · 24 May 2013 at 22:30

T345 said:
I'm not saying Craterloads is correct, but...

That's a pretty awful way to start a post, even if you think you are confident of its validity, your point is blown out of the water by the inference that perhaps excusing these murders is OK.