Woolwich serious incident

[bitslice]

And yet Soldiers do it every single day.

Yes, but we sent them there knowing they will be damaged, and then when they mess up we put them on trial as just another person. Our expectations are too high I think, it's a dirty job that none of us would do.
Personally I don't expect anyone willing to die on my behalf to be squeaky clean for some ethical point I'm not overly bothered with, and certainly wouldn't be able to uphold myself 100%.

 

[Craterloads]

I think it's something to do with a culture of an eye for an eye, when really the only rational thing to do when faced with a Superpower is to do what the Superpower says so it will go home. France rolled over, preserved its culture and got it all back when Germany went home. Vietnam resisted, the US slaughtered some half million. France - win, Afghan/Iraq/Vietnam - retarded.
Fighting a Superpower is retarded unless you have some inherent cultural defect about martyrdom.

Interesting logic you have there So if a huge guy trained in martial arts broke into your house to rape one of your children you would just sit and watch, considering essentially this is a "super power" of a man and you are a peasant in comparison?

I agree, it appears to be only the West that doesn't understand that Islam is fundamentally incompatible with our concept of Democracy.
Just so long as they can vote in another backwards Theocratic Fascist state and go back to beheading Christians for giggles, that's all is required by these countries.

What does it say about western democracy when it literally blows people / families / children to smithereens because they don't want any part of it? Perhaps they are both backwards or do these actions seem like ones of good?

I'm not sure but were the Vietnamese Muslims too?

We probably need sources if you are going to say this position is proven, I couldn't point to anything reliable one way or another.

I assumed it was common knowledge, but it does not really matter in the context of what is being said, even if you take your figure of 50/50.

 

[Castiel]

Yes, but we sent them there knowing they will be damaged, and then when they mess up we put them on trail as just another person. Our expectations are too high I think, it's a dirty job that none of us would do.
Personally I don't expect anyone willing to die on my behalf to be squeaky clean for some ethical point I'm not overly bothered with, and certainly wouldn't be able to uphold myself 100%.

His sentence was passed taking those mitigations into account. Hence the ability for Marine A to gain parole after 10 years when the judge fixed the minimum term.

I do not think our expectations are too high in this regard at all, I would expect any soldier to understand that executing a wounded man in a field is wrong, particularly as the patrol was not under fire, in any immediate risk of being under attack and could have take more appropriate action. Thousands of soldiers are under the same pressures and responsibilities every day...they do not execute wounded enemy combatants in cold blood however. He is an absolute disgrace and deserved the sentence he received.

 

[bitslice]

So if a huge guy trained in martial arts

Ugh? Why compare my point to something silly? It doesn't appear to require further explanation

What does it say about western democracy when it literally blows people / families / children to smithereens because they don't want any part of it? Perhaps they are both backwards or do these actions seem like ones of good?

Agreed, we kill people to secure oil and then hope their country stays stable enough to continue doing so. This is not ethically ideal.
Fundamental religious cultures are frequently a thorn in the side of Western democracy as they don't behave rationally or consistently, they do however have the freedom to live in the dark ages or not. Islam isn't a naturally moderate or progressive religion so without the ability to evolve and adapt they are inevitably stuffed. If they want to resist this process because of cultural idiocy then that's their problem.
This is just history repeating, superpowers either win or destroy everything in the attempt.

 

[bitslice]

I do not think our expectations are too high in this regard at all

This thread is full of people pretending otherwise?
Like me they would all be a snivelling ball of snot if anyone actually shot at them, personally I don't feel so entitled as to condemn others.

I don't believe being under fire has that much bearing on impulsive behaviour in this context, plenty of soldiers come home and then kill themselves. Who gets to point the finger then? It's a massive failure of responsibility on our part, why doesn't the same lofty ethical concerns apply to us when care is required? We put them through an horrific meat grinder then let them die just as efficiently as shooting someone on the ground.

 

[Castiel]

This thread is full of people pretending otherwise?
Like me they would all be a snivelling ball of snot if anyone actually shot at them, personally I don't feel so entitled as to condemn others.

Perhaps, but I am not them. I feel I can judge his actions objectively and within a level of reasonable understanding as to the circumstances.

I don't believe being under fire has that much bearing on impulsive behaviour in this context, plenty of soldiers come home and then kill themselves. Who gets to point the finger then? It's a massive failure of responsibility on our part.

I do not see the relevance of what Marine A did to someone killing himself because he wasn't diagnosed with CSD or PTSD.

 

[[TW]Fox]

What does it say about western democracy when it literally blows people / families / children to smithereens because they don't want any part of it?

This is incredibly misleading - Western democracies do not 'blow' children and families up 'because they don't want any part of it' and I suspect you well know that.

Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of things like the Iraq war (FWIW, I do not support our action in Iraq and I beleive it was wrong (but then of course I have the benefit of hindsight in forming that view)), I think it's fairly obvious that the tragic and regrettable deaths of completely innocent civilians were not intentional. They might have been as a result of reckless actions, idiotic mistakes or plain incompetence but they were not deliberate and willful, IMHO.

 

[bitslice]

I feel I can judge his actions objectively and within a level of reasonable understanding as to the circumstances.

Isn't your position influenced by wanting to uphold a historic regimental history though?

I do not see the relevance of what Marine A did to someone killing himself because he wasn't diagnosed with CSD or PTSD.

I don't expect anything rational from someone who has seen someone die, whether soldier or not.

 

[bitslice]

I think it's fairly obvious that the tragic and regrettable deaths of completely innocent civilians were not intentional. They might have been as a result of reckless actions, idiotic mistakes or plain incompetence but they were not deliberate and willful, IMHO.

If you go to war knowing full well that civilians will die then one could say their deaths were intentional because we chose to act?
Collateral damage is just a nice way of saying they had to die in order to achieve our intent.

 

[Craterloads]

Ugh? Why compare my point to something silly? It doesn't appear to require further explanation

It's perfectly valid comparison. Your point was because someone/something is much stronger you should idly stand by and let them finish what they want to do regardless of how horrific it is what they want to do (which is what happened in Iraq and is happening in Afghanistan)

Agreed, we kill people to secure oil and then hope their country stays stable enough to continue doing so. This is not ethically ideal.

Is that it, all you can say about murder, torture, kidnapping causing pains to millions of people is it's "not ethically ideal" I can pretty much guarantee if the shoe was on the other foot you would have a lot more to say.

Fundamental religious cultures are frequently a thorn in the side of Western democracy as they don't behave rationally or consistently, they do however have the freedom to live in the dark ages or not. Islam isn't a naturally moderate or progressive religion so without the ability to evolve and adapt they are inevitably stuffed. If they want to resist this process because of cultural idiocy then that's their problem.
This is just history repeating, superpowers either win or destroy everything in the attempt.

What is rational? Who is being irrational here? Is it rational to want to change others by any means necessary, whether that be cold blooded murder, so they become more like you. Is it irrational to refuse this act of aggression and to stand up for yourself? Is it moderate or progressive to kill, torture and kidnap for oil and to force people to share your ideals (which would consist of the above) Like I said, perhaps western democracy isn't what you think it is, especially given the bar you set for other nations.

 

[bitslice]

It's perfectly valid comparison.

That replacing an 'country' with a 'person' and then hoping to derive something meaningful from the (obviously different) response? Why not just answer the original point instead of the strawman

Your point was because someone/something is much stronger you should idly stand by and let them finish what they want to do

Yes, history proves the weaker will get steamrolled. It is not rational to defy history just because your sky pixie say you can haz cheeseburger for getting shot in the face.

Is that it, all you can say about murder, torture, kidnapping causing pains to millions of people is it's "not ethically ideal"

Yes.
It's not my country, I've very little respect for their backwards culture and I need the oil. Now that Mandela is dead, Bono will have plenty of time to bleed his heart over the misfortunes of others, so it's sort of caring by proxy.

If possible I will however vote against getting involved in any international situation that has the word 'muslim' in it. Hindsight has taught me that getting involved in retarded peasant squabbles over goat marriage isn't worth the candle or the death of any of our armed services.

Is it irrational to refuse this act of aggression and to stand up for yourself?

Yes, even more so because their sky pixie told them to do it for teh lolz.
If Germany turned up tomorrow with Nazi Robot Dinosaurs with Space Lasers I would bend over and look forward to driving a BMW in ten years time.
I would not behave like retarded Afghan insurgents fighting for their right to continue subsistence living in a sandy toilet, I'd take the oppourtunity to evolve and trade my way out of the dark ages.

Is it moderate or progressive to kill, torture and kidnap for oil and to force people to share your ideals

No, it is however the side effect of capitalism and superior western culture, which has consistently provided a better standard of living than Fascist states based on sky pixie worship.

 

[Craterloads]

That replacing an 'country' with a 'person' and then hoping to derive something meaningful from the (obviously different) response? Why not just answer the original point instead of the strawman

It's perfectly fine example which you just refuse to see as it demonstrates how lacking your point is. A country is full of people and is one of the same thing.

Yes, history proves the weaker will get steamrolled. It is not rational to defy history just because your sky pixie say you can haz cheeseburger for getting shot in the face.

You do realise when you use terms like "sky pixie" it makes you look silly and immature and it makes it difficult to have an adult discussion with you?

Is that how you live your life? the weak should get steam rolled and not defend themselves? Thank god you're a minority or we would be speaking German. Guess disabled people should just shut up and go off and die somewhere quietly, well if it was up to you. And again my comparison earlier is perfect for this concept of yours, someone bigger stronger can do and take what they want from you as a scrawny peasant?

Yes.
It's not my country, I've very little respect for their backwards culture and I need the oil. Now that Mandela is dead, Bono will have plenty of time to bleed his heart over the misfortunes of others, so it's sort of caring by proxy.

My, you are a disgusting human being, surely you can see that. You would rather have oil instead of not having children/men/women families blown up by missiles into little chunks. Not having respect for a culture is one thing, not having respect for a life of a child for example is another. Perhaps you should revaluate what it is to being a "human" being considering it was you who was talking about being progressive and being stuck dark ages, ironic isn't it.

If possible I will however vote against getting involved in any international situation that has the word 'muslim' in it. Hindsight has taught me that getting involved in retarded peasant squabbles over goat marriage isn't worth the candle or the death of any of our armed services.

Not sure how that is relevant to any of this or where this happened rather than you just taking the opportunity to share your hatred and bile with us?

Yes, even more so because their sky pixie told them to do it for teh lolz.
If Germany turned up tomorrow with Nazi Robot Dinosaurs with Space Lasers I would bend over and look forward to driving a BMW in ten years time.
I would not behave like retarded Afghan insurgents fighting for their right to continue subsistence living in a sandy toilet, I'd take the oppourtunity to evolve and trade my way out of the dark ages.

Perhaps they are fighting for their freedom, their dignity and because they don't want to take part in a culture that freely murders/imprisons/tortures and kidnaps people of all ages/sexes and sizes for resources and influence. Surely that is a noble thing to do. Like I said earlier if more people were like you we would be speaking German as the situation you present is not so dissimilar to history.

No, it is however the side effect of capitalism and superior western culture, which has consistently provided a better standard of living than Fascist states based on sky pixie worship.

Better standard of living at the cost of the blood of innocents... You speak as if this is ok and a normal and morally just thing to do. And then in the same breath you call others backwards.

 

[bitslice]

You do realise when you use terms like "sky pixie"

I blame Dowie

the weak should get steam rolled and not defend themselves? Thank god you're a minority or we would be speaking German.

Germany wasn't a superpower hence it was rational to honour the treaty with Poland. Insurgent peasants are only fighting us because of cheeseburger.
And again with the strawman.

You would rather have oil instead of not having children/men/women families blown up by missiles into little chunks.

Pragmatic.
if it wasn't for Capitalism, the Romans, the Reformation and our ancestors butchering the smelly French then I'd be a peasant too, it would be disingenuous to pretend to care all that much when I'm the benificary of all that. That's for rich people like Bono to sing songs about poor people whilst getting richer (capitalism again).

That, and I've almost zero importance when it comes to influencing global events.
Actually if they gave a flying fig about the west then their primary export wouldn't be heroin would it?

not having respect for a life of a child for example is another

That's laughable from a culture still promoting genital mutilation and child rape

Not sure how that is relevant to any of this or where this happened rather than you just taking the opportunity to share your hatred and bile with us?

I don't hate goat marriage, I just find it odd. Besides, didn't you want me to vote against war?

they don't want to take part in a culture that freely murders/imprisons/tortures and kidnaps people of all ages/sexes and sizes for resources and influence.

Sorry which culture are we talking about again? Because that accurately describes what life was like under their beloved Taliban freedom fighters.

Better standard of living at the cost of the blood of innocents... You speak as if this is ok and a normal and morally just thing to do. And then in the same breath you call others backwards.

If you have a problem with all of human history then sorry I don't think there is a complaints department? Every culture has acted in the same fashion since year dot, we all benefit so why the crocodile tears? The west was never the guardian of the worlds morals, but then the middle east made a tidy profit from slaves before we even thought of the idea. And given the vast difference between what their religion says they should do and what they actually do, then they are as morally suspect as we are, we just don't pretend otherwise.

I get to call them backwards because they are. Thanks for the advances in mathematics, astronomy, surgery, chemistry and a massive cannon of other advances, but for the past 800 years they have been sat there with their thumb up their bum burning turds to keep warm at night, or starting holy wars over whether Mohammed meant the milk to go in first or the hot water. If there is a culture more retarded on this planet that doesn't eat the still beating hearts of its enemies*, then David Attenborough has yet to show it.




*sorry, I forgot about Abu Sakkar,
awkward


/

 

[Craterloads]

Germany wasn't a superpower hence it was rational to honour the treaty with Poland. Insurgent peasants are only fighting us because of cheeseburger.
And again with the strawman.

Still a vastly superior force to ours at the time. They are fighting or the same reasons we were. No strawman, perfectly valid comparison again. A country is made up of people, the same people that would be subjected to my example, which you refuse to answer.

And didn't you yourself just call them a super power

"faced with a Superpower is to do what the Superpower says so it will go home. France rolled over, preserved its culture and got it all back when Germany went home. " Ohh dear

Pragmatic.
if it wasn't for Capitalism, the Romans, the Reformation and our ancestors butchering the smelly French then I'd be a peasant too, it would be disingenuous to pretend to care all that much when I'm the benificary of all that. That's for rich people like Bono to sing songs about poor people whilst getting richer (capitalism again).

Didn't you mention something about being progressive and moving out of the dark ages or is that when it only suits you? So basically your answer is yes I would rather have resources at the costs of human blood. More to the point of this thread and my first comment regarding the beheading of this soldier, don't you think these people will want the inevitable retribution making us a target. Is that a risk you are happy to take, are you saying this soldiers beheading was worth the above as long as you are the beneficiary?

That, and I've almost zero importance when it comes to influencing global events.

As a voter you should stand up and make your voice heard if you think something is wrong, but given you have already stated you are fine with illegal wars and murder I guess not.

That's laughable from a culture still promoting genital mutilation and child rape

So your saying both are alike? Both cultures are backwards and evil considering they both do as bad evils. Why are you focusing on their culture and not your own, is it because you are saying it's ok we kill children/families because they do bad things too? Are we not supposed to be the superior culture but your willing to stoop to their level when it suits you.

I don't hate goat marriage, I just find it odd. Besides, didn't you want me to vote against war?

I'm not sure these wars were about goat marriage nor are we blowing up people over goat marriage.

Sorry which culture are we talking about again? Because that accurately describes what life was like under their beloved Taliban freedom fighters.

What does that tell you then about western culture when the description is the same as the culture of these backwards "peasants". (I hope you do stop referring to fellow human beings as worthless peasants though, surely you were raised better than that given you have been raised in the UK)

If you have a problem with all of human history then sorry I don't think there is a complaints department? Every culture has acted in the same fashion since year dot, we all benefit so why the crocodile tears?

I don't, I'm talking about the now and present. It's you bringing up the romans and like for whatever twisted reason. And again were suppose to be progressive and moving on from cultures of year dot.

I get to call them backwards because they are. Thanks for the advances in mathematics, astronomy, surgery, chemistry and a massive cannon of other advances, but for the past 800 years they have been sat there with their thumb up their bum burning turds to keep warm at night, or starting holy wars over whether Mohammed meant the milk to go in first or the hot water. If there is a culture more retarded on this planet that doesn't eat the still beating hearts of its enemies*, then David Attenborough has yet to show it.

You were calling them backwards because of their barbarism/violence among other things. Yet you call western culture progressive when they show equal levels of barbarism/violence. How is people using turds to provide heat bothering you? why do you wasn't to kill them for doing things differently to you? Finally your focus on their inferior Afghan culture has absolutely nothing to do with the topic on hand or the barbaric violence demonstrated by our nation on worthless "peasants" resulting in the inevitable and understandable backlash that results in the death of our soldiers here in the UK

 

[Craterloads]

Edit - And regarding the French rolling over you do remember the French Resistance? So not actually factually correct.

And Germany not being a super power, you did yourself say

faced with a Superpower is to do what the Superpower says so it will go home. France rolled over, preserved its culture and got it all back when Germany went home.

 

[Castiel]

Isn't your position influenced by wanting to uphold a historic regimental history though?

No..it is framed from experience and rational judgement.

I don't expect anything rational from someone who has seen someone die, whether soldier or not.

However, people stay rational all the time, in far worse circumstances that Marine A found himself in that day.

 

[Rroff]

Wow some majorly naive posts above (not talking about castiel's).

 

[bitslice]

Still a vastly superior force to ours at the time.

Not really, all sides about equal, France being slightly superior.
No point answering strawmen, phrase a proper point.

And didn't you yourself just call them a super power

You are mangling separate but related points by only quoting half of it
In current terms, US is a superpower. The second point illustrates what happens in such an unbalanced conflict, ie when Germany subverts France's defensive strategy and outmanoeuvres its armour, a weak France only has one rational option.
French resistance fought for France, Taliban are external and fight for their own interests. Not comparable.

So basically your answer is yes I would rather have resources at the costs of human blood.

I'm being pragmatic about what capitalism wants and my inability to influence it, likewise I don't wave my hands at the incoming tide, I just move my deckchair to suit.

regarding the beheading of this soldier, don't you think these people will want the inevitable retribution making us a target.

In one years time we will pull out of sandy ToiletStan, peasants will elect whichever religious nutjob bribes them the most, anything outside of the capital will fall back into Taliban/supporting warlord hands. Life back to normal.
Whatever terrorist act happens in the future will come from British born muslims, not from anyone in ToiletStan.

are you saying this soldiers beheading was worth the above as long as you are the beneficiary?

The only benefit from that was the continued association of Islam with violence which helps to counter insidious liberal fascist propaganda.

As a voter you should stand up and make your voice heard if you think something is wrong, but given you have already stated you are fine with illegal wars and murder I guess not.

I didn't say I was fine with the war, just that conflict was inevitable. You don't drop a plane into a superpowers capital and expect a Christmas card, so of course they are going to hunt down everyone connected and kill them. If peasants want to keep volunteering to be shot in the face for a holy cheeseburger from the prophet then that's fine too.

Both cultures are backwards and evil considering they both do as bad evils.

No, I'm saying that the US is aggressive and the Middle East is retarded. The ME doesn't have a counter to the US policy of regime change by force.
Besides, the US has put a robot on Mars, the only accomplishment of the entire Middle East and all its oil wealth is to rebuild Blackpool in Dubai.

I'm not sure these wars were about goat marriage nor are we blowing up people over goat marriage.

I'm pretty sure if we tried to ban goat marriage (or even just child marriage/rape) the war would flare up again. It's a diplomatic hot potato.

What does that tell you then about western culture when the description is the same as the culture of these backwards "peasants".

I didn't say they were the same, you did. The US has a mandate from the Afghan government to secure the country, the Taliban never has and tortures people to gain power. The US actively wants to relinquish power.

I hope you do stop referring to fellow human beings as worthless peasants

Didn't say they were worthless, but English shepherds were referred to as peasants in the middle ages, and their approximate equivalent is the Afghan goat tending peasant.

You were calling them backwards because of their barbarism/violence among other things. Yet you call western culture progressive when they show equal levels of barbarism/violence.

I can't find that comment myself, you'll have to quote it if it exists
The US intervention has a point (go in, kill nutters, stabilise country, go home). The Taliban just want to convert the world to Islam by force.
Historically violence with a political point has been subsequently justified, violence on behalf of your favourite sky pixie has been universally ridiculed (see Catholic history for previous attempts at this kind of fascist idiocy)

resulting in the inevitable and understandable backlash that results in the death of our soldiers here in the UK

The beheading of an unarmed soldier is only 'understandable' if you already subscribe to religion as being a reasonable inspiration to do something violent. In normal secular cultures it's called a psychotic fantasy, in multicultural Britain I think this was polled as being acceptable.
It's only 'inevitable' because liberal fascists can't see further than the end of their iPads and are oblivious to the obvious dangers of letting Islamists wander freely across borders whilst we were at war with a muslim country, and then stymie any attempt to do something about it.

 

[Craterloads]

Not really, all sides about equal, France being slightly superior.
No point answering strawmen, phrase a proper point.

In what fantasy were all sides equal? Germany were far superior and it took the might of many nations to defeat. It was your point, which doesn't add up to points you made earlier.

You are mangling separate but related points by only quoting half of it
In current terms, US is a superpower. The second point illustrates what happens in such an unbalanced conflict, ie when Germany subverts France's defensive strategy and outmanoeuvres its armour, a weak France only has one rational option.
French resistance fought for France, Taliban are external and fight for their own interests. Not comparable.

How about we look at the entire sentence then, as you clearly refer to Germany as being a super power and correctly so as they were, well militarily anyway.

"when really the only rational thing to do when faced with a Superpower is to do what the Superpower says so it will go home. France rolled over, preserved its culture and got it all back when Germany went home."

The French Resistance did not roll over and played a critical role. The Taliban have foreign members but are majority Afghanis (look it up if you have to) and if you go by the reports will retake power once the US leave, which cannot be done without popular support so the Taliban are fighting for Afghanistan. Like the French Resistance and to some extent they have been successful given the scheduled pull-out which barely any analysts agree with, when looked at to the stated goals.

You also stated "when Germany went home" hmme did the Germans just go home or were they defeated with the help of the French Resistance?

I'm being pragmatic about what capitalism wants and my inability to influence it, likewise I don't wave my hands at the incoming tide, I just move my deckchair to suit.

Capitalism wants the blood of innocents on it's hand, is this the same superior culture you have been referring to? Your vote is your ability by the way, and so is your voice.

In one years time we will pull out of sandy ToiletStan, peasants will elect whichever religious nutjob bribes them the most, anything outside of the capital will fall back into Taliban/supporting warlord hands. Life back to normal.
Whatever terrorist act happens in the future will come from British born muslims, not from anyone in ToiletStan.

Are you unable to put forward a coherent point without being overly aggressive and offensive, like I said it just makes you look silly and immature. We have "ToiletStan", "sky pixie", "peasants" and a raft of others.

Anyhow does pulling out make the pain and anger already caused disappear? How can you be sure the Taliban wont launch future attacks once back in control without the help of a crystal ball?

The only benefit from that was the continued association of Islam with violence which helps to counter insidious liberal fascist propaganda.

You could apply the same logic to our nations/militaries brutal wars around the world with the killings of thousands of innocents. The continued association of barbaric wars/kidnapping/torture and imprisonment helps counter notion of western culture being civilised and progressive.

I didn't say I was fine with the war, just that conflict was inevitable. You don't drop a plane into a superpowers capital and expect a Christmas card, so of course they are going to hunt down everyone connected and kill them. If peasants want to keep volunteering to be shot in the face for a holy cheeseburger from the prophet then that's fine too.

What plane did Iraq fly into the UK's capital? What crime did they commit against us at the time to deserve "shock & awe" which is compared to having similar effects of a nuclear strike. These are the things that fuel extremism and a back lash is nothing but expected.

No, I'm saying that the US is aggressive and the Middle East is retarded. The ME doesn't have a counter to the US policy of regime change by force.
Besides, the US has put a robot on Mars, the only accomplishment of the entire Middle East and all its oil wealth is to rebuild Blackpool in Dubai.

No you were responding to a point about respecting the value of a child's life by mentioning genital mutilation (lack of value for safety) in reply to point about the western nations killing innocents in barbaric wars fuelled for the need for resources. Hence my comparison of both being evil since they both do evils. What good is a robot on mars apart from being a distraction to the pain and misery you cause worldwide, including creating thousands of grieving mother like the parents of the fallen soldier in the UK. You keep going back to the US, but this is about the UK considering it was our soldier chopped up and the UK is involved in all these wars too.

I'm pretty sure if we tried to ban goat marriage (or even just child marriage/rape) the war would flare up again. It's a diplomatic hot potato.

Why would you want to ban goat marriage in Afghanistan? Especially given your stance on world affairs that don't effect you as long as you are the beneficiary. Not that Afghans marry goats but I guess this is your way of insulting the peasants, whilst they are already down and being brutalised by western nations. Talk about stooping low and kicking someone when they are down.

I didn't say they were the same, you did. The US has a mandate from the Afghan government to secure the country, the Taliban never has and tortures people to gain power. The US actively wants to relinquish power.

Your definition for one nation, is it only applicable to nations you don't like or does it apply to all? isn't it a little hypocritical you hold one nation to a set of rules and not to the one you support. You claim one culture/nation is backwards and barbaric for spreading violence and pain, yet are unable to accept it when pointed out the culture/nations you hold to such great heights to the same.

What about Iraq? What was the UK doing there? The Taliban are the rightful leaders of their country and backed by the majority of Afghanis. All reports suggest they will retake control from western installed fraudulent leaders once the occupations is over. you cant do that without popular support so their mandate is the Afghani people, like the French Resistance.

Didn't say they were worthless, but English shepherds were referred to as peasants in the middle ages, and their approximate equivalent is the Afghan goat tending peasant.

Not all Afghanis are shepherds and we, as you like to mention, are a progressive nation/people yet you choose to refer to phrases from the middle ages make up your dam mind.

I can't find that comment myself, you'll have to quote it if it exists
The US intervention has a point (go in, kill nutters, stabilise country, go home). The Taliban just want to convert the world to Islam by force.
Historically violence with a political point has been subsequently justified, violence on behalf of your favourite sky pixie has been universally ridiculed (see Catholic history for previous attempts at this kind of fascist idiocy)

Again, Iraq? How do you stabilise a country by removing the legitimate leaders and replacing them with people you can control to a nation that has a history of bowing to no one. As you said earlier, learn from history. The Taliban was in control for many years, I'm yet to hear them attempting to convert the world to Islam. What I have heard and witnessed is western nations including the UK forcing their ways of life onto to other nations by using violence, kidnapping, intimidation and murder. Ironic isn't it.

The beheading of an unarmed soldier is only 'understandable' if you already subscribe to religion as being a reasonable inspiration to do something violent. In normal secular cultures it's called a psychotic fantasy, in multicultural Britain I think this was polled as being acceptable.
It's only 'inevitable' because liberal fascists can't see further than the end of their iPads and are oblivious to the obvious dangers of letting Islamists wander freely across borders whilst we were at war with a muslim country, and then stymie any attempt to do something about it.

You can't see why these illegal wars, murder, kidnapping and torture could possibly cause some to retaliate in a unreasonable manner? perhaps you mistook or intentionally contorted "understandable" in the context it was used.

Yet earlier on regarding marine A you said

I don't expect anything rational from someone who has seen someone die, whether soldier or not.

You have witnessed this in this very normal and secular culture with two former soldiers fire bombing a mosque attempting to burn people alive including children, whom were within the building. All the result of the murder of lee rigby. Whilst I'm sure you would agree what they did was wrong, im sure you understand why these actions may be taken by some, potentially unstable characters.

 

[Craterloads]

db post