Park Life 71 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Yes but, you're aware that our strikes hit civilians as well, right? We will have killed far more Arab civilians than ISIS have killed ours. The US blew up a Red Cross hospital earlier this year ffs... The fact that our military are choosing military targets who happen to be based in civilian areas does make it more difficult, but make no mistake that our governments have weighed it up and decided that civilian deaths on their side are firstly inevitable, and secondly worth it. If we retaliate to this, again, what is the consequence likely to be? Do you think that it will be more or less likely to result in another massacre in one of our capital cities in a few months time? It's a cycle of utter stupidity, the cost of which is borne by civilians on both sides. At the same time, as Gloom has said, France HAs to retaliate. It's cizitenry will demand no less, even if it only leads to more pain - which it will. Such a sad state of affairs. It's why the French have labelled it ' an act of war'. That pretty much tells you that Isis would feel the full force. Everything is on the table now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 7025 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 France has to retaliate, doesn't it? According to the law or war or something? It doesn't HAVE to do anything. I can understand why it is retaliating. Just like Isis will retaliate in kind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 The views of everyone who has discussed Paris in the Taxi since Thursday ranges from close the borders, nuke em, send them home etc etc. All age ranges / average working class. I guess all the lefties are using Uber You have to remember that 99% of people will just nod along with a cab driver and think of something else until it's over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 7025 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 You have to remember that 99% of people will just nod along with a cab driver and think of something else until it's over. Mrs CT, is that you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toonotl 2978 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Yes but, you're aware that our strikes hit civilians as well, right? If we retaliate to this, again, what is the consequence likely to be? Do you think that it will be more or less likely to result in another massacre in one of our capital cities in a few months time? Yes. I am aware that civilians are hit by Western aggression. Not deliberately. Not specifically. Not arbitrarily for the fulfilment of some religious notion of Jihad. That's the difference. Islamic aggression against the civilians in French was deliberate. There is a difference. Don't pretend there isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toonotl 2978 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 I thought you were differentiating between muslims that support violence (dangerous because of their religion) and non-muslims (just sociopaths on Twitter). If that's not the case and you're just comparing numbers, How are you quantifying that? Gut feeling? Renton has provided numbers about the (larrge) minority of muslims sympathising earlier, The only numbers I can find that might provide some indication on non-muslims are that a two thirds majority of UK/US public support drone attacks that we know kill innocent civilians in 90% of fatalities. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-air-strikes-on-syria-public-back-bombing-campaign-by-margin-of-two-to-one-says-poll-10428064.html Happy to be shown a more indicative poll than that though, as it's clearly not representing exactly what you're talking about. There are plenty of statistics available that show the alarming number of Muslims living in Western countries who support the mode of operation of terrorist organisations. Somewhere between 10%-20% depending. That's in Western society. Do you suggest that that percentage is less in the Middle East? There is no way even 10% of Westerners support violence against civilians. Sorry mate. It's just not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Gut feeling then. Not sure whether to quote you or CTs cab poll in future debates. They seem contradictory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toonotl 2978 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Should we start a poll? I don't want to encourage the guy in his delusion, but it might be for the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toonotl 2978 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Gut feeling then. Not sure whether to quote you or CTs cab poll in future debates. They seem contradictory. Says the guy who was just using a half-dozen tweets as the basis for the Western approval of the deaths of Middle Eastern civilians. You are being deliberately disingenuous. I'm getting tired of calling you out on it to be honest. It's a bit of a waste of my time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Targeting packages from U.S. surveillance. The same that they denied Russia 3 weeks ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 7025 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Yes. I am aware that civilians are hit by Western aggression. Not deliberately. Not specifically. Not arbitrarily for the fulfilment of some religious notion of Jihad. That's the difference. Islamic aggression against the civilians in French was deliberate. There is a difference. Don't pretend there isn't. If you're a moderate Muslim whose kid dies in one of the bombings I'm not sure that's much consolation. 'They were collateral damage, it wasn't deliberate'. It's not that long ago we invaded Iraq on false pretences looking for WMDs that we knew didn't exist. Between 2003-2013 120k civilians died. Not soldiers, not terrorists. Men, women and children just trying to go to work and pay their bills. Do they have the right to retaliate? Drop bombs on the uk as an act of war? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toonotl 2978 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 If you're a moderate Muslim whose kid dies in one of the bombings I'm not sure that's much consolation. 'They were collateral damage, it wasn't deliberate'. I'm not saying its consolation. It's horrible. There is no consolation for the death of a child. Are Western civilians to blame? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 (edited) There's clearly a disconnect in our state apparatus. Million people marched against the war. It's almost like they serve other masters. Edited November 15, 2015 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 7025 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 I'm not saying its consolation. It's horrible. There is no consolation for the death of a child. Are Western civilians to blame? No, the governments are. I already said that 48 hours ago, some people had a fit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 (edited) I don' think any sane person can deny the West is hooked on Geo-political mischief with or without public support. Only today some Labour bloke was saying he would back action without the U.N. Ok let's start by sending you and everyone you know. Edited November 15, 2015 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toonotl 2978 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 No, the governments are. I already said that 48 hours ago, some people had a fit What if it's an accident? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 7025 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 120,000 accidents? Unlikely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 21915 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 According to the law or war or something? It doesn't HAVE to do anything. I can understand why it is retaliating. Just like Isis will retaliate in kind. Of course it has to retaliate. The attacks on Paris were an act of war, Hollande said it himself. The French public wouldn't stand for anything else and neither would the British if it happened here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 (edited) 120,000 accidents? Unlikely It's half a million btw. And inc sanctions it went on for ages and ages and Iraq ran out of basic medicines after 3 months. If you factor in depleted Uranium shells and bullets the death and handicapped births will go on for decades. What happened in Iraq is a war crime and there is no two ways about it. I see it on the same scale as Vietnam. They bombed Fallujah for 3 full days with all the civilians in it. It was clear after the opening few days that Iraq couldn't defend itself. Even the BBC says over 400,000. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24547256 Lancet 650,000 The second household survey, conducted by the Hopkins scientists again, was completed in June 2006 and published four months later in The Lancet. Its findings: 650,000 people (civilians and fighters) died as a result of the war in Iraq. Read Edited November 15, 2015 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toonotl 2978 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 120,000 accidents? Unlikely I didn't realise you were the arbiter of the borderline between war casualties and genocide. Disclaimer: I'm not supporting violence. I'm simply noting the difference between the horrible and unfortunate casualties of war in the Middle East and indiscriminate violence against Western civilians. I feel I have to keep doing this now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 21915 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 No, the governments are. I already said that 48 hours ago, some people had a fit And you were just as wrong then as you are now. Western government intervention in the Middle East is simply not to blame for twisted individuals blowing themselves up in attempt to try to kill as many civilians as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 7025 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Isis claim the 2003 invasion of Iraq was an act of war and this is their retaliation. I'm not an Isis sympathiser, or a terrorist sympathiser. I can just see the irony in the whole fucked up situation. Both sides are arguing the same point and they will keep going until there's none of either side left to argue We bombed Iraq to kill Sadam We bombed Afghanistan to defeat Al Qaeda/Bin Laden We bombed Syria to defeat Isis/Jihadi John Now to do with oil or setting up a puppet government Give it a few years and we will have an new enemy and a new country in the Middle East to bomb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4378 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 There are plenty of statistics available that show the alarming number of Muslims living in Western countries who support the mode of operation of terrorist organisations. Somewhere between 10%-20% depending. That's in Western society. Do you suggest that that percentage is less in the Middle East? There is no way even 10% of Westerners support violence against civilians. Sorry mate. It's just not the case. 27% of UK Muslims felt "some sympathy" with the motives behind the Hebdo attacks. 11% said that any magazine which depicts the prophet deserves to be attacked. Those percentages of 2m people are quite scary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 7025 Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 And you were just as wrong then as you are now. Western government intervention in the Middle East is simply not to blame for twisted individuals blowing themselves up in attempt to try to kill as many civilians as possible. That's the great thing about opinions, everyone can have one. I remember when I was a teenager on here telling everyone their opinions were wrong. I've grown up a bit since then fortunately Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.403f4a475ac3bb53997c2626c09ef800.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now