(Untitled)

[sethi]

"I saw an Asian guy run onto the train hotly pursued by three plain-clothes police officers. One of them was carrying a black handgun - it looked like an automatic - they pushed him to the floor, bundled on top of him and unloaded five shots into him

Comments

[red_jon]

It's never funny when someone is killed, no matter what they've done.

And do remember there's a reason the police have a reputation for getting the wrong guy.

[cave_gary]

no i utterly disagree there. there can and have been deaths which are inherently humourous (for example spreading yourself across the landscape doing something dumb ) and then there are deaths which are funny in a useful way, like l;ittle pieces of shit getting their commupance when attempting to murder multiple innocent people.

[red_jon]

Perhaps it would be more useful if we ask ourselves why people would do this, rather than just presume them evil and worthy of death.

We've killed tens of thousands in Iraq, who's to say we don't have a commupance then?

[sapphrine]

if it is a legitimate strategy to kill innocents in a war, then why do we have war crimes tribunals and a code of conduct?

[red_jon]

I never claimed it was an legitimate strategy, but if you'll never prevent terrorist attacks by demonising the enemy or pretending they did it for no good reason (Israel is obviously the best example of this).

[cave_gary]

Fuck that shit, bin laden and the jihady crew have been after our blood for a minimum of 8 years. Never make the mistake of regarding actions like this as part of a particular greivance reduction exercise. Everytime these scum commit and atrocity, they claim a different reason for it. The simple truth is that this is a war of annihalation between a small section of islam and the western world. The sooner people in general (and you seem to be one of them) realise this and stop making excuses for them, the better.

[red_jon]

There may be organisations which seek to further the fundamentalist cause (and not just with Islam) yet the atrocities we commit vastly add to those wishing to join them in the name of revenge.

If you're so enamoured with the idea of taking revenge upon those who killed people you don't even know (in London) think about those whose families and friends are killed by our military.

Very few people commit atrocities for no good reason, the leaders who will do so need enough followers to carry the acts through.

There's a difference between making excuses and not automatically taking an unthinking polar viewpoint. But forget that, obviously terrorism exists because some people are just evil. Isn't that the US administration's dogma?

[cave_gary]

i made a good long reply to this, but gmail died and lost it, so will try again tomorrow. in the mean time, try to ignore the lies of iraqbodycount.com,as the vast majority of those listed deaths are from arab terroists (if you read the independant you can lie to yourself and feel good as a traitor by calling them insurgents).

[red_jon]

A 'traitor'? I see someone's gone into gestapo mode...

[cave_gary]

No, if i was in gestapo mode people like you and the guardian and independant reading chattering classes would have been painfully re educated by now. Seriously, people really should stop degrading the real suffering cuased by various factiohns through history by comparing them with people who merely disagree with whatever you happen to be saying.

I stand by the traitor comment though. Every one of you who excuse the terrorists, everyone who talks in a way that gives credibility to the scum who suicide bomb crowds of iraqi children adds weight to the terrorists, gives more verbal ammunition to the fanaical imans in their war to subvert muslim youth. every such comment adds to the perception of the islamists that if they kill a few more of our soldiers we'll runway with our tails between our legs and leave them to set up a nice represive taleban style. That puts our men and women over there at greater risk.

[red_jon]

So you're saying that me making a comment on livejournal destabalises Iraq,whilst invading the country, removing the previous government and imposing martial law doesn't?

We entered a war, we got bombed. It happens.

[red_jon]

Actually I just read your bio and you sound pretty messed up if you don't mind me saying :)

Oh, and your 'pro-monachist' views would be more credible if you could actually spell that word.

[cave_gary]

you're excusing the scum who blow up your fellow countrymen and women and attempting to give them some sort of moral equivalency with proper people, and ii'm the messed up one?

I suggeswt you actually open up your eyes and look at the world as it actually exists, then maybe you'll start talkng some sense.

[red_jon]

LOL - what the hell is a 'proper person' then?

I don't give a shit if people being killed are from my country of not - it's dehumanising to suggest that Iraqi lives are worth less than British ones.

And in reference to 'seeing the world as it actually exists', I've studied history and politics to degree level, rather than just reading the Daily Mail a few too many times...

[cave_gary]

A proper person is one who can disagree with a system or place, and not feel the need to deliberatly target and kill innocent non-combatants. See, it wasnt so hard to figure out was it?

If you've been studying history and politics, you really should undersand the concept of a cumalative effect. Whereby one person sayying something one place means little on it's own, however with many people saying it in many places, and then those numbers being combined in various publication results in a real effect on the world.

Also, especially from the history side of things, you really should have learned just how important the perception of strengths and weaknesses are in any sort of conflict. Comments like yours give the terrorists the perception of a weak culture without the will to do what is neccessary to preerve itself. this emboldens them and helps drive them.

[red_jon]

If the London bombers' primary aim was to deliberately kill non-combatants they would have done so (such as by using nailbombs or finding more populated targets). They attacked our transport network - it could be argued that the 50 people killed are as much 'collatoral damage' as the civilians we kill in foreign occupations.

There are states which take a hard line - both amongst government and populace - against terrorist attacks, yet they often position themselves in greater danger by doing so (again see Israel). Britain and Spain did not get attacked because their peoples were against the Iraq war (as were people in most countries accross Europe), but because their governments were for it.

You suggest that the resolve of the terrorists is strengthened through perception of a 'weak culture' (how freedom of speech is weak is beyond me), yet you also state that they are fundamentalists whose resolve is unshakable and will stop at nothing regardless. Which is it?