Barbaric attack in the U.K.

[G Huxley]

No, Kristallnacht was engineered by the Nazi government with the party goon squad instigating and participating (SA) while the police stood still and watched. This is nothing like it.

As I said:

"When its the Exact same as Kristalnacht its already too late. Things begin small and if they aren't controlled they get out of hand and snowball, then you have all on Kristalnacht domestically (abroad its already happened)."

To say its nothing like what happened with the nazis you have to ignore that its far right neo-nazi and neo-nazi-like extremists and their ilk who are behind this. They are modern equivalents of the early SA and Freikorps.

Edited May 28, 2013 by G Huxley

[Wilber]

As I said:

"When its the Exact same as Kristalnacht its already too late. Things begin small and if they aren't controlled they get out of hand and snowball, then you have all on Kristalnacht domestically (abroad its already happened)."

To say its nothing like what happened with the nazis you have to ignore that its far right neo-nazi and neo-nazi-like extremists and their ilk who are behind this. They are modern equivalents of the early SA and Freikorps.

Having to put up with people with extremist views is part of living in a free society. It's what you do about them when they cross the line and put their extremism into action which is important. Extremists are extremists, regardless of their particular fanaticism. Trying to justify the actions of the people who hacked that soldier to death is no different than trying to justify the actions of neo nazis when they start attacking people. They are all the same to me.

[G Huxley]

Only westerners have the arrogance that they consider it shocking that soldier gets attacked after declaring war on and attacking several countries.

A soldier (especially one who served in Afghanistan) is actually a legitimate target in war believe it or not.

The people who worship at the mosques were simply the target of bigotry and actual terrorism.

In the end its just a language game. Anyone who has the gall to fight back from the Islamic world is called a terrorist. Any westerner who occupies invades and kills islamic peoples are branded heros.

Its called propaganda. Its the same stuff that was used in the newspapers on the Native Americans to justify American expansion at their cost.

Any time the natives successfully fought back it was branded a 'savage massacre,' everytime the west slaughtered natives or forced them from their homelands it was branded a 'heroic victory.'

Edited May 28, 2013 by G Huxley

[Army Guy]

First of all, soldiers do not declare anything, they are the tools that our government uses to sort out foreign policy.....This government is elected by Canadian citizens every 4 years....but you know that, we Canadian citizens are responable for all thier decisions, good and bad, whether you elected them or not........so it's not just soldiers who ,you can piont the finger at ....it's all of us Canadian citizens.....so now the target gets a little larger....it includes all of us....how does it feel to become one of those targeted by scumbags that could and will , end your life in a blink of the eye.....because they feel used or want to avenge a Muslim not even from the same country.....but that is cool to you atleast.....

No what is shocking is that you have the gall to sit there in your chair and mumble on about something you know nothing about....I am a soldier who has done 3 tours in Afghanistan....once i leave that country take my uniform off..... i cease to become a legimate target....it say so in inter national law, our countries law, and the genva convention.....despite what you think is right or not....

Those that fight back know the rules of the game better than i do....in Afghanistan you pick up a wpn and use it on government troops your going to die.....thats right NATO will send his ass to hell, where there are no virgins, just lots a flames....

because if that was the case i would be legally covered when killing these scumbags in our streets, when ever it suited me, ......our streets, in front of Canadian citizens....I mean if it's OK for them to do it why not us........because we understand that a british immigrant might get upset and decide to take someones life....and we really won't make a fuss because he was a soldier who actually served his nation in Afghanistan......and not some white guy who just decided to go to afghanistan to kill muslims by himself....

It's you thats needs to find out what this war is all about, educate your self on what these scumbags are doing to thier own people.....cutting the hands off little girls, sawing heads off with dull knifes., stripping the entire skin off old men and leaving them to die in the hot sun.....killing men for allowing their girls going to schools.....acid in the faces of little girls, shooting little girls in the head because they talk out against these little bastards you seem to be defending now....YA they are fuc*ing hero's .....and we should turn the other cheek.....Because we the west have did some meddling....that gives them the legal / moral right to kill when they want...does that give some guy in Iceland the moral right to kill a muslim because this man killed a white man in london.....thats what your saying...

we won't let they them do that in their own country.....and will should not allow them to do it in ours....I just hope the rest of them involved get a night vist by the British SAS.....and that a clear message is recieved...fuc* with the Bull and you get both horns....

[G Huxley]

First of all, soldiers do not declare anything, they are the tools that our government uses to sort out foreign policy.....

Indeed, but as such being the military, they are a military target.

.This government is elected by Canadian citizens every 4 years....but you know that, we Canadian citizens are responable for all thier decisions, good and bad, whether you elected them or not........so it's not just soldiers who ,you can piont the finger at ....it's all of us Canadian citizens.....so now the target gets a little larger....it includes all of us....

I won't disagree with that.

how does it feel to become one of those targeted by scumbags that could and will , end your life in a blink of the eye.....because they feel used or want to avenge a Muslim not even from the same country.....but that is cool to you atleast.....

Very much like it must feel to be living in the Muslim world and being the target of western aggression.

No what is shocking is that you have the gall to sit there in your chair and mumble on about something you know nothing about....I am a soldier who has done 3 tours in Afghanistan....once i leave that country take my uniform off..... i cease to become a legimate target....it say so in inter national law, our countries law, and the genva convention.....despite what you think is right or not....

Let's talk about legitimate targets. The Obama admin signed off on targeting funerals and rescuers with drone attacks. Those are international war crimes. There is no higher ground here.

Those that fight back know the rules of the game better than i do....in Afghanistan you pick up a wpn and use it on government troops your going to die.....thats right NATO will send his ass to hell, where there are no virgins, just lots a flames....

So its fine to invade their country and 'send their asses to hell' then you are shocked when they fight back in a manner different than getting lined up and shot like it was the Napoleonic wars.

As for the rest of your post ranting about the 'scumbags' you are invading and occupying, it is obvious that you disrespect the people, their culture and that you are openly belligerent and militant to them. If you're not welcomed with open armed hospitality, but instead hostility, what's the big surprise here really? Could it be that you're puffed up with arrogance, belligerence and bravado?

Edited May 28, 2013 by G Huxley

[g_bambino]

If you're not welcomed with open armed hospitality, but instead hostility, what's the big surprise here really? Could it be that you're puffed up with arrogance, belligerence and bravado?

Well, there you go Army Guy: Your opposition to slicing off hands, sawing heads off with dull knifes, stripping the entire skin off old men and leaving them to die in the hot sun, killing men for allowing their girls to go to school, throwing acid in the faces of girls, shooting girls in the head because they talk out against like to the aforementioned, it's all puffed up arrogance, belligerence, and bravado. Naughty you. Thank goodness G Huxley was there to let you know you're all ass-backwards.

[ed.: c/e]

Edited May 28, 2013 by g_bambino

[G Huxley]

Yes, because that's what all Muslims do.

And all Canadians are cannibals who sacrifice babies on the altar of Baal.

Let's be real here.

[G Huxley]

You realize that the British used that same type of propaganda to justify their colonization of the Indian subcontinent right?

Look some Indian widows are jumping in bonfires so we have the right to conquer, 'civilize,' and rule over the savages.

History moves at such a snail's pace, because people ignore it and just keep on repeating the same old tired cycle of arrogance, violence, hubris, drama etc. etc.

Edited May 28, 2013 by G Huxley

[Guest]

A soldier (especially one who served in Afghanistan) is actually a legitimate target in war believe it or not.

The two men who committed the attack in the OP were just Muslims. Does that mean that all Muslims are legitimate targets?

I would say no, but your reasoning seems to imply they would be.

[G Huxley]

The two men who committed the attack in the OP were just Muslims. Does that mean that all Muslims are legitimate targets?

No, but if a Muslim country (not a handful of individuals) actually attacked it would be fair to retaliate against those responsible.

[G Huxley]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/28/woolwich-murder-200-islamophobic-incidences

[Michael Hardner]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/28/woolwich-murder-200-islamophobic-incidences

G Huxley - please do more to advance the argument than just posting a link. Thanks.

[Guest]

No, but if a Muslim country (not a handful of individuals) actually attacked it would be fair to retaliate against those responsible.

Well, you're saying that a representative of the group that did the attacking is a legitimate target. I admit that "Muslims" is a large group, so how about, British based Muslim males between the ages of 25 -45?

[Guest]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/28/woolwich-murder-200-islamophobic-incidences

I respectfully disagree with MH that a link does not forward the argument. Yours did, and so does this comment. A reply regarding the type of incidents that have been occurring.

Not in any way defendable, but for the most part, not as bad as the Guardian would have us believe. The worst incident mentioned in the article was not even islamophobia. It was infidelophobia.

http://www.spiked-online.com/site/article/13658/

Edit> Can I just add here, that if an incident were to occur that inflicted upon innocent Muslims the kind of treatment that was meted out to the victim in the OP, I would not defend it. I would not believe they had it coming, based on the actions of others. I would want the perpetrators punished equally with the two gentlemen who are currently in custody.

Edited May 29, 2013 by bcsapper

[Army Guy]

Indeed, but as such being the military, they are a military target.

I won't disagree with that.

Very much like it must feel to be living in the Muslim world and being the target of western aggression.

Let's talk about legitimate targets. The Obama admin signed off on targeting funerals and rescuers with drone attacks. Those are international war crimes. There is no higher ground here.

So its fine to invade their country and 'send their asses to hell' then you are shocked when they fight back in a manner different than getting lined up and shot like it was the Napoleonic wars.

As for the rest of your post ranting about the 'scumbags' you are invading and occupying, it is obvious that you disrespect the people, their culture and that you are openly belligerent and militant to them. If you're not welcomed with open armed hospitality, but instead hostility, what's the big surprise here really? Could it be that you're puffed up with arrogance, belligerence and bravado?

Yes the Military is the target, when on the battlefield, but this soldier was not on any battlefields was he , no he was down town London, in his own nation....All of which is agains't all the rules, and is a form of terrorism.....but then again they knew that did they not....

Can you show me in any of the laws that i mentioned already where it states that drone attcks can not target high valued targets be it at a funeral or attempting to give aid to the injured....it would make your claim as a inter national war crime hold some water....

Afghanistan was invaded in early 2000 by a coalition of forces to take down those responsable for sept 11 ...later on the legitamate government of Afghanistan asked NATO to help with rebuiling the nation and to assist with control terrorists....they are terrorist because that is what the UN , Inter national law, and the genva convention label them as....I'm not shocked at anything these scumbags do, and you'll note that i'm not labeling all muslims scumbags , just those that use terror as a wpn to regain control over the people....How many Afghanis have you talked to, how many want the taliban back in control.....not very many....

Invading and occuping.....you forgot that the legitimate government of Afghanistan ASK NATO....that is not an invasion nor is it an occupation.....

Me disrepect the people, I meet thousands of local people in dozens of towns and villages not once did i or any of my troops disrepect anyone. in fact we were welcomed with open arms, and achieved many peaceful initiatives. such as building wells, building dike systems for there crops, providing medical assistance, having meetings with the local elders....making their lives that much better....does that sound like disrepecting their culture.....

Now for the dozens of terrorist groups that plagued the country , those scumbags sir were treated as per the genva convention,but if you asked me did i hold back from using deadly force when i could the answer would be no, not because of what they did to us , we as soldiers excepted the fact that is why we were there....that little girl who had her hands cut off, her mother serverally beaten to death, her father was beheaded all in front of her , for the grand crime of going to school she was 5 years old at the time.....i had the honor of sharing my lunch with her at age 8...she is still going to school , and had wanted to talk and thank NATO soldiers because we were the ones that made that happen.... I meet her on my first tour, and she was the reason i went back for the second time....

The old man who had all his skin striped off his body, a common taliban practice, his crime was he talked to us, our patrol had asked directions to the next town, the next morning when we came back, he was laided out on the ground , at that time of day it was 55 degrees , and the sun was cooking him alive...we had called in a medic vac helo, but he had passed before it came....

I got thousands of stories of death and destruction that you won't here in the media, on just how well these terrorist scumbags treat their own people....Nice guys , fuc*ing heros in everones books......all except mine, had Canada decided to stay in Afghanistan i would be going back over on my forth tour...why, because nobody else wanted to stand up for a people that has been at war for over 30 years.....i as a Canadian citizen whom has so much wanted to share some of it with a people that have very little....

The taliban don't want it's people to be free, to improve their live or standards of living ....it wants the freedom to terrorise it's own people to treat them they way they want....i ask you are these the people you want to stand behind.....or is it that little girl, or old man....

Before you judge me and other soldiers perhaps you should do alittle research.....goggle is a wonderful thing

Edited May 29, 2013 by Army Guy

[Army Guy]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/28/woolwich-murder-200-islamophobic-incidences

Here is how muslims react to the burning of the koran. add them up over 100 dead in just one country. There are more Iraq , and so on.......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Afghanistan_Quran_burning_protests

Here is some more friendly muslims , and how they treat there niebors or non muslim brothers.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/ChristianAttacks.htm

Young girl shot by taliban for viocing opinion......

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/09/pakistan-girl-shot-activism-swat-taliban

Terrorist responsable for 81 % of the civilian deaths.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/02/afghanistan-civilians/

Taliban how they treat their women.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban_treatment_of_women

[G Huxley]

Well, you're saying that a representative of the group that did the attacking is a legitimate target. I admit that "Muslims" is a large group, so how about, British based Muslim males between the ages of 25 -45?

No that's not what I"m saying, I'm saying that those responsible or taking part in war are legitimate targets in war.

[Wilber]

No that's not what I"m saying, I'm saying that those responsible or taking part in war are legitimate targets in war.

Then those who take part in warlike acts should be identifiable. All of them, not just NATO soldiers. No double standards.

[G Huxley]

Yes the Military is the target, when on the battlefield, but this soldier was not on any battlefields was he , no he was down town London, in his own nation....All of which is agains't all the rules, and is a form of terrorism.....but then again they knew that did they not....

NATO regularly attacks military and non-military people who are not on the battlefield. Most of its bombs fall on non-battlefield targets.

Can you show me in any of the laws that i mentioned already where it states that drone attcks can not target high valued targets be it at a funeral or attempting to give aid to the injured....it would make your claim as a inter national war crime hold some water....

Case in point. You just completely contradicted your previous point.

Afghanistan was invaded in early 2000 by a coalition of forces to take down those responsable for sept 11 ...later on the legitamate government of Afghanistan asked NATO to help with rebuiling the nation and to assist with control terrorists....they are terrorist because that is what the UN , Inter national law, and the genva convention label them as....I'm not shocked at anything these scumbags do, and you'll note that i'm not labeling all muslims scumbags , just those that use terror as a wpn to regain control over the people....How many Afghanis have you talked to, how many want the taliban back in control.....not very many....

Afghanistan and its people never attacked the US. All the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

I agree that AQ, Bin Laden should have been taken out by a series of diplomatic maneuvers and with special forces, but the Afghan war was unnecessary and counterproductive imo.

Invading and occuping.....you forgot that the legitimate government of Afghanistan ASK NATO....that is not an invasion nor is it an occupation.....

You can get a Quisling government to ask anything you want it to ask. The Karzai regime is ultra corrupt, is held together by paying off warlords, and for a time was not even democratically elected.

Me disrepect the people, I meet thousands of local people in dozens of towns and villages not once did i or any of my troops disrepect anyone. in fact we were welcomed with open arms, and achieved many peaceful initiatives. such as building wells, building dike systems for there crops, providing medical assistance, having meetings with the local elders....making their lives that much better....does that sound like disrepecting their culture.....

I will give you guys credit where credit is due. I met an Afghani refugee once who said that they like the Canadian soldiers, because they help the people as you said, unlike the Americans which he said are dangerous and just go around shooting people. However not every Afghani is going to see things the same way. When a people are invaded a signficant portion of them are likely to fight back, and that was Bin Laden's trap of luring the west into Afghanistan in a conflict that could only be damaging to it in the long term.

Don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not calling the Taliban angels, and am well aware of their heinous human rights abuses, but the victims of the Taliban are certainly not the only victims in this conflict. In fact the greatest refugee exodus, perhaps up to two million followed the NATO attack on Afghanistan, thousands have died in the conflict on all sides, and the country is still torn apart, and fractured.

"Before you judge me and other soldiers perhaps you should do alittle research.....goggle is a wonderful thing"

Forget google, I've read excellent books on the history of Afghanistan, and seen excellent documentaries.

If you haven't read it, I'd recommend the book "The Great Game," by Peter Hopkirk, and also the 2 part series called "The Great Game" by Rory Stewart (former governor of Southern Iraq), which you can watch on youtube. Another excellent book I read on Afghanistan was called The punishment of virtue by Sarah Chayes.

Edited May 29, 2013 by G Huxley

[G Huxley]

Then those who take part in warlike acts should be identifiable. All of them, not just NATO soldiers. No double standards.

That completely ignores the reality of asymettrical warfare, geurillas are never going to line up in a field and get mowed down with big signs saying shoot me!

Following that rule then NATO must not be allowed to use STEALTH technology. It goes both ways.

[Guest]

No that's not what I"m saying, I'm saying that those responsible or taking part in war are legitimate targets in war.

Those who committed the act in the OP are responsible, and are taking part in war. They belong to a group, of which all members should be legitimate targets. (Using the same logic)

I'm just asking how we identify that group. I thought that, as they had no idea whether or not their victim had ever done anything worthy of their ire, should a group of, as I said, Muslim men of roughly the same age and geographical location, be considered legitimate targets for reprisal?

[eyeball]

It's only really in a democracy where citizens are responsible for the government's actions that everyone becomes a legitimate target, especially according to the logic that follows our side's willingness to accept a 10:1 kill ratio of innocent to guilty Muslims when we target the guilty one in a drone attack.

Assuming the terrorists wanted to focus their attacks on people who are guilty of voting for imperialists how would they be able to tell them from those of us who aren't? In any case, given a lot of western nation's voting preferences terrorists can often hope for a 50:50 ratio which seems better, if such a word applies, than anything we can hope to achieve. In those democracies where parties from across the political spectrum happily commit imperialism, the terrorists can be assured of even 'better' ratios.

Edited May 29, 2013 by eyeball

[G Huxley]

Those who committed the act in the OP are responsible, and are taking part in war. They belong to a group, of which all members should be legitimate targets. (Using the same logic)

I don't follow.

I'm just asking how we identify that group. I thought that, as they had no idea whether or not their victim had ever done anything worthy of their ire, should a group of, as I said, Muslim men of roughly the same age and geographical location, be considered legitimate targets for reprisal?

If a Muslim country (rather than a handful of individuals) attacked you or another country, you and others have the right to fight back against that country.

Edited May 30, 2013 by G Huxley

[G Huxley]

Eyeball sardonically well put.

[G Huxley]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/10815047 Soldier to admit Afghan massacre.