So not a terrorist then (1 Viewer)

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
Just a deeply confused man who wanted to take the lives of those around him
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
Good question sky blue kid. No links whatsoever to them. Can't think why they'd claim credit though. Let me think
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
Is this a random game show?
No genuinely. What is a terrorist? I suppose someone who wants to cause terror. But that's not the reason the media use the term is it? Or is it?

The media coverage seems to have encouraged Isis to claim the attack. Seems strange
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
No genuinely. What is a terrorist? I suppose someone who wants to cause terror. But that's not the reason the media use the term is it? Or is it?

The media coverage seems to have encouraged Isis to claim the attack. Seems strange

As other people are currently being held in custody can we confirm this is an individual acting alone? The person killed spent two years in Saudi so is it cut and dry?
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member

Sky Blue Kid

Well-Known Member
what about the coalition airstrike on Mosul which killed 150 civilians last week - was that an act of terror?

Airstrike is being investigated so is not confirmed as the reason for civilian deaths. Some local eye witnesses say ISIS blew up a house where 150 people were hiding. This also has not been confirmed. Which do you believe?
 

Sky Blue Kid

Well-Known Member
I think absolutely it was an act of terror


Bystanders in Mosul spoke of carnage in the immediate aftermath of the 17 March blast, with more than 50 bodies being dug out from beneath one home alone.


The World Health Organisation (WHO) has confirmed at least 100 deaths. Bashar al-Kiki, the head of the provincial council for Nineveh, of which Mosul is the capital, said "dozens" of bodies were still buried under rubble in the city.

Yet in its statement, the Iraqi military said just 61 people had been killed, contradicting those leading rescue efforts. It also cited witnesses saying that the building was booby-trapped and militants had forced residents inside basements to use them as shields.

Sources on the ground confirmed a sharp increase in the number of large car bombs being deployed by Isil in the battle for western Mosul.
 
Last edited:

Sky Blue Kid

Well-Known Member
what about the coalition airstrike on Mosul which killed 150 civilians last week - was that an act of terror?

You were there watching the US and British Jets bombing civilians then?.... You saw first hand every one of those people being killed at the hands of the coalition?
You choose to blame it all on the coalition.... I'm sceptical about that, and tend to believe that there is always two sides to a coin.
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
NOT if it's premeditated murder I don't!
Ok I agree with that pre-meditated acts that are done to murder and maim are acts of terror. So any pre meditated murder should really be referred to as a terrorist act.

Therefore, I suppose that where the aim is not to take life you could say it's not an act of terror.

It's probably far more nuanced than that especially where by using force or deadly weapons that it is clear your action will cause death or maiming despite this not being your aim.

I also suppose it's why it's important to have an agreement on what constitutes war. Although this probably works both ways.

You seem really angry sbk. We can have these discussions in our country it's ok
 
Last edited:

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Terrorists aren't just those that are affiliated to a known group. What that scumbag did was an act of terror, he deliberately targeted innocent people.

It's unfortunate that innocent people can be caught up in attempts to target terrorists as happened in Mosul. What would your solution be, Pete?
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
You were there watching the US and British Jets bombing civilians then?.... You saw first hand every one of those people being killed at the hands of the coalition?
You choose to blame it all on the coalition.... I'm sceptical about that, and tend to believe that there is always two sides to a coin.

it's been acknowledged that it was coalition forces, that's why they suspended operations. I'm interested to hear what people think of that.

To me it's a symptom of an age old problem. Whether it's paramilitary groups, radicalised religious groups or state sponsored war, it's always the little people trying to go about their business who suffer.
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
Terrorists aren't just those that are affiliated to a known group. What that scumbag did was an act of terror, he deliberately targeted innocent people.

It's unfortunate that innocent people can be caught up in attempts to target terrorists as happened in Mosul. What would your solution be, Pete?
I'm sorry I'm just at the stage of understanding our corporate understanding. Solution to what? Terrorism? Human justice, repentance, forgiveness, reconciliation and peace is the only answer.

If you mean evil. The way of Jesus is the answer. Choosing to love not hate in the face of provocation is the way of transformation. An answer is found in the hearts of those that, when safe, they tried to save the life of the person that chose to take theirs

Sorry didn't mean preachy a shared humanity is the answer. Where one life means the same as another throughout the world.
 
Last edited:

Sky Blue Kid

Well-Known Member
Ok I agree with that pre-meditated acts that are done to murder and maim are acts of terror. So any pre meditated murder should really be referred to as a terrorist act.

Therefore, I suppose that where the aim is not to take life you could say it's not an act of terror.

It's probably far more nuanced than that especially where my using force or deadly weapons that it is clear your action will cause death or maiming despite this not being your aim.

I also suppose it's why it's important to have an agreement on what constitutes war. Although this probably works both ways.

You seem really angry sbk. We can have these discussions in our country it's ok

Not in the least bit angry SBP. Just disagree that people seem to think everything is Black or White.
 

Sky Blue Kid

Well-Known Member
it's been acknowledged that it was coalition forces, that's why they suspended operations. I'm interested to hear what people think of that.

To me it's a symptom of an age old problem. Whether it's paramilitary groups, radicalised religious groups or state sponsored war, it's always the little people trying to go about their business who suffer.


I think you should read my post #15 as well mate ;) Raids have been suspended whilst investigations are carried out. At no point do coalition forces accept any responsibilties. A bit of a "Witch Hunt" is what I'm seeing here.
 
Last edited:

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
I think you should read my post #15 as well mate ;) Raids have been suspended whilst investigations are carried out. At no point do coalition forces accept any responsibilties. A bit of a "Witch Hunt" is what I'm seeing here.

to be honest my point still stands, if you're a normal citizen going trying to go about your lawful business and you're caught up in an act of violence such as this then to me you're going to see it an act of terror whoever the perpetrator or whatever the justification.
No need for a witch hunt, our foreign policy has been a disaster which has lead to the deaths of millions of citizens.
 

Sky Blue Kid

Well-Known Member
to be honest my point still stands, if you're a normal citizen going trying to go about your lawful business and you're caught up in an act of violence such as this then to me you're going to see it an act of terror whoever the perpetrator or whatever the justification.
No need for a witch hunt, our foreign policy has been a disaster which has lead to the deaths of millions of citizens.

You mean "Guilty till proven innocent"..... I wonder..What is the ISIS foreign policy:jawdrop:
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top