:lol: I did actually laugh. Youre comprehension is so bad.
I type "I am in no way saying every Muslim is a a terrorist, don't confuse that"
You type "I'm not the one who is blaming Muslims indiscriminately. You are."
And then to round out the Lols you title me a racist even tho Islam isnt racial exclusive, merely a religion/cult.
Yeah, im the idiot.=d>

I don't agree with quickflick's view but that doesn't mean mistakes don't happen and it's accepted that some innocent people may die in the fight for the cause.

I don't agree with quickflick's view but that doesn't mean mistakes don't happen and it's accepted that some innocent people may die in the fight for the cause.

Yes mistakes happen. The difference is that we do not target civilians, terrorists do. Quickflick pretends the two are one and the same because he believes that Americans are murderous, but if you say that Islam is murderous he will call you a bigot.

And then there were the children. The airmen would be flying the Predators over a village in the tribal areas of Pakistan, say, when a series of smaller black shadows would appear across their screens – telling them that kids were at the scene.

They called them “fun-sized terrorists”.

This quickflick guy is trying to dilute this discussion by talking about drone warfare.
WTF is his point?

Fact is a terrorist attack happened in Brussels and it killed dozens of people and injured hundreds more innocent civilians.
It was carried out by a group of people who identify with Islamic State.

What does talking about drone warfare bring to the table for this topic?

The fact is the western world, which we are a part of in culture is under attack and the current policy of open door immigration to incompatible ideologies as well as overthrowing of secular dictators that kept these extremists under control is making it worse every day.

Something has to change and we need to listen to those who warned us that this day would come.

This quickflick guy is trying to dilute this discussion by talking about drone warfare.
WTF is his point?

Fact is a terrorist attack happened in Brussels and it killed dozens of people and injured hundreds more innocent civilians.
It was carried out by a group of people who identify with Islamic State.

What does talking about drone warfare bring to the table for this topic?

The fact is the western world, which we are a part of in culture is under attack and the current policy of open door immigration to incompatible ideologies as well as overthrowing of secular dictators that kept these extremists under control is making it worse every day.

Something has to change and we need to listen to those who warned us that this day would come.

Quickflick will use any historical wartime event to draw parallels with Brussels...and to somehow justify what happened as a biproduct of western imperialism

The difference is that Islamic terrorists dont target anyone BUT innocent civilians.

I think we've had enough feigned grief, it solves nothing.

Its time for a policy change on a grand scale.

I was accused of making excuses for the Brussels attack. I pointed out that I did no such thing. I say it's unacceptable. I said that there's a difference between making an excuse and providing an explanation.

I then provided an analogy. This is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. It helps illustrate a point to people who are a bit thick. The analogy is this... Drone warfare ,when it results in civilian casualties (foreseen civilian casualties), is also immoral, illegal and evil, just like the Brussels attack. And just like the Brussels attack, I have not excused it, but I can provide an explanation for why it happens. I.e. there is usually a target in amongst the innocents

Simple as that. Perfectly reasonable point. It's an especially pertinent analogy given that drone warfare has created many martyrs and acts as a banner for ISIS. Without these kind of banners and the marginalisation of ordinary Muslims, extremist clerics cannot induce susceptible Muslims to carry out terrorist attacks.

Do you want to see terrorist activity curtailed or not? I do.

You're quite right that toppling of secular dictators has not helped things. Distasteful though they were, they provided a degree of stability. I don't like to compromise my principles. But that is an aspect of realpolitik which ought to have been given far greater consideration.

None of this post or any others detract from the suffering of the innocent people killed in Brussels. That is something we are, I hope, all grieving.

Quickflick will use any historical wartime event to draw parallels with Brussels...and to somehow justify what happened as a biproduct of western imperialism.

Maybe the Arab spring will refresh your memory...that was not caused by the West but by the citizens of the Arab states that went feral and thought overthrowing the dictator was a good idea... well look how that turned out....life was worse than it was before because Islamic State seized on this collective sentiment and used it to its own advantage....somehow quickflick will find a way to point this as a conspiracy from the West

Edited by Socawho: 24/3/2016 12:57:01 AM

Edited by Socawho: 24/3/2016 12:58:17 AM

Edited by Socawho: 24/3/2016 12:59:35 AM

Indeed. And we're actually past the age of western imperialism. That ship has sailed.
We're now in the age of islamic imperialism and its time to push back.

How has toppling secular dictators provided any ounce of stability....?

We have a situation where IS are looting towns and ascertaining stolen US military hardware.

How is that stable?


Edited by Socawho: 24/3/2016 01:04:19 AM

I don't pretend the two are one and the same. I suggest that attacks are carried out with full knowledge of of the probability of civilian casualties (disproportionately high) and if/when that happens, the two are just as bad. Do you refute the notion that if knowledge of the probability of civilian casualties exists, then the two are just as bad?


At a guess, you do. You were quick to insist that drone strikes aren't carried out when there is knowledge that civilians will be taken out too.

This is not something anybody should take for granted. Based on the mass of evidence.

Not all Americans are murderous, some are fine. There is definitely a trend though.

I also believe that, even if it's uncommon, civilians have been deliberate targets in attack. What Michael Haas has said suggests it's entirely plausible. We know from his evidence that many drone operators had no compunction about children dying in drone strikes and that strikes were made with full knowledge of the likelihood of disproportionate numbers of civilian casualties.



http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/life-as-a-drone-pilot-creech-air-force-base-nevada

Do you understand the distinction between civilian casualties which are accidental, proportionate and of which the likelihood was not foreseen and civilian casualties which are disproportionate and foreseen as highly probably before the attack?


You understand that while one is inevitable in war, the other is immoral, illegal and every bit as foul as this attack in Brussels.

Edited by quickflick: 24/3/2016 12:14:12 AM

Yes I refute it, the alternative is that our soldiers can only fight when they are certain that there is no chance of civilian casualties whatsoever. That is just plain stupid, as is your attempt to equate the deliberate murder of people at an airport with collateral damage in a military operation. You are an idiot and amoral.

11.mvfc.11

I don't have any problem with you (or anyone really). I respect your right to have the opinion that you do. Quite simply, where I see fit, I'll engage in a debate with you and draw attention to things which I think are incorrect. This is civilised. I enjoy discussing football and cricket with you. Based on that football tipping thing you've set up, I think you're probably a sound bloke in real life.

But that cartoon is beyond the pale. I'm not too fussed that it misrepresents my opinion utterly. Distorts would perhaps be a better verb. But do you understand how distasteful a cartoon like that is in the wake of these poor people being slaughtered?

Imagine having friends who were the victims of this atrocity and then catching sight of that cartoon.

Out of everything I've read on this thread (and it hasn't made for pleasant reading), this is the first time I've genuinely winced.

You miss the point of the cartoon...hes alluding to the assertion that your current point of view would be somewhat tested if you happen to find yourself caught in a middle of a terrorist act.
it doesnt have any notion of insulting the dead whatsoever

Quickflick is somewhere between the axle and the mudflaps



Edited by 11.mvfc.11: 24/3/2016 01:58:51 AM

:lol: poor Quickflick

Murder Indictment for joyride
PUBLISHED 2003-07-11
The driver of the car that mowed down a large number of people on Western Street in Stockholm was indicted on Friday for intentionally killing two people and attempted to kill fifteen others.
2
Print notify Article Bookmark
The driver keeps insist that he is innocent and that the car remote ruled by someone else.

On May 31, 50-year-old mowed down pedestrians on Sweden's most famous tourist street, Western Street in Old Town. The driver drove at high speed on the pedestrian street, which was packed full of strolling tourists. He zigzagged across the street in the direction of the Iron Market and drove in a large number of people until the car stopped.

AD:

50-year-old was charged on Friday in Stockholm District Court for the murder of a 54 year old woman and a 21-year old man. 50-year-old was also charged with attempted murder of fifteen other people, as he drove on and on and damaged.

According to prosecutor Britt-Marie Hägglund 50-year-old intentionally deprived the two life by running at them. He has, according to her also intentionally tried to deprive the fifteen second life.

50-year-old has been questioned by the police said he drove very slowly on a street that crosses Västerlånggatan. Suddenly he saw a man who previously had persecuted him. The man was holding a black remote control and started running towards the 50-year-old car. In connection with the "car got very high speed."

50-year-old said he thought the man with the remote control caused the car's high speed. 50-year-old tried to run straight ahead, he said, but the car turned onto Western Street. This was also due to the man with the remote control steered the car. 50-year-old could not stop, control or steer the car. It just went forward, he said.

But according to the technical investigation to the police with the help of experts has revealed no evidence of any additional equipment would be mounted on the car, or any other changes were made ​​to the car that could affect the operation. It has not come to any errors or defects on the car, which can be assumed to have caused the accident.

The 54-year-old woman died on Västerlånggatan due to massive damage to the trunk and internal organs in the body. The 21-year-old man got so severe head injuries that he died two days later at the Karolinska Hospital.

The other fifteen got injuries ranging from bruises and swellings on the legs and feet to fatal fractures of the pelvis, ribs, arms and legs, punctured lung and bleeding in the liver, bleeding in the brain, basilar skull fracture, contusions in the back of the head and skeletal injuries.

Prosecutor Britt-Marie Hägglund would not comment on the indictment before trial. 50-year-old defender, lawyer Tomas Rothpfeffer, told DN that the 50-year-old denies that he would be guilty of any crime:

- He is so convinced that you can be that what he has told also, it has happened. But I think that if he has been in a very serious psychotic condition or state of confusion so maybe he can not be convicted of any intentional crime, says Tomas Rothpfeffer

adrtho

I'm not the one who ought be the object of sympathy. The people whose lives have been ended or ripped apart by this terrorist outrage deserve our undiluted sympathy and should live on in our memory forever. And the many peace-loving Muslims throughout Europe who have been and will continue to be tarred by the same brush as extremists and thus marginalised are the others for whom we should have sympathy.

What to you call a Left Winger that decides to get a job based on merit and become a valued member of society?









A Right Winger.

Hahahahhahaha.

You say that you are "in no way saying every Muslims is a terrorist, don't confuse".

I accepted that point. It doesn't change the fact that throughout this thread you have been "blaming Muslims indiscriminately". You're most welcome to trawl through the thread. You don't seem to understand the most basic distinctions in phrasing. You constantly conflate separate ideas.

And your intense and indiscriminate dislike of Muslims is most likely based on racism. Apologies for making a strawman.

Most peasant bogans who hate Muslims usually do so, largely, for reasons of racism. I'm inclined to believe this is the case with you, too.

Nail on the head.

Tasteless comic posted that's disrespectful to terrorist victims with a comment that can easily be construed by as a personal attack (and the subject of the attack took offence to it). 11.mvfc.11 is always trying to push the boundaries yet I don't think I've ever seen him get reprimanded.

Pretty pathetic all round really.

Yes I refute it, the alternative is that our soldiers can only fight when they are certain that there is no chance of civilian casualties whatsoever. That is just plain stupid, as is your attempt to equate the deliberate murder of people at an airport with collateral damage in a military operation. You are an idiot and amoral.