Shamima Begum

[Waldo 96]

7 hours ago, Halibut said:

Call me a disgrace by all means, but I stand behind everything I said and I'll restate it.

 

'The army who helped defend Europe' used 'area bombing' against German cities, knowingly killing hundreds of thousands of civilians. Many were burnt alive, including children.

This was not a good thing. 

 

IS also use bombs to kill people, including children. They behead people and burn people alive.(They've killed a much smaller number, but that really is beside the point.)

This is also not a good thing.

 

That the motives are different in these two cases, is undoubtedly true. The morality though is no different - intentionally killing civilians is bang out of order.  They're doing it now, we did it then. It goes against my grain when I see people mouthing off as if our country were somehow morally unimpeachable - it isn't.  I think people have a very mixed up attitude to violence. In my view it's a bad thing, full stop. There might be times when it becomes necessary, but there's no such thing as good violence (when we do it) and bad violence (when they do it).

Absolutely agree with you here Halibut.

 

 

[Halibut 12]

1 hour ago, danot said:

And I suppose the opposite of narrow, reductive thinking is the style of thinking that you're using here?  - Applying your own sentiment to someone else's post before attaching then attacking unsubstantiated points that you try to pass off as theirs. 

 

 

No ideas to share with us about how you would deal with her then (apart from the stock response 'leave her there?')?

[bendix 10]

Total respect for halibut for standing his or her ground on this one and for bringing in some thoughtful thinking - in total contrast to the Daily Mail inspired kneejerk pat cliches from the usual suspects. 

 

I believe I’m miles apart from Halibut in my political philosophy - a Ken Clarkian liberal conservatism - but I’d rather be on his or side of this discussion than some of the despicable and lazy group think that infects the vast majority of SF posters.  

Edited February 23, 2019 by bendix

[WiseOwl182 10]

9 hours ago, Halibut said:

Call me a disgrace by all means, but I stand behind everything I said and I'll restate it.

 

'The army who helped defend Europe' used 'area bombing' against German cities, knowingly killing hundreds of thousands of civilians. Many were burnt alive, including children.

This was not a good thing. 

 

IS also use bombs to kill people, including children. They behead people and burn people alive.(They've killed a much smaller number, but that really is beside the point.)

This is also not a good thing.

 

That the motives are different in these two cases, is undoubtedly true. The morality though is no different - intentionally killing civilians is bang out of order.  They're doing it now, we did it then. It goes against my grain when I see people mouthing off as if our country were somehow morally unimpeachable - it isn't.  I think people have a very mixed up attitude to violence. In my view it's a bad thing, full stop. There might be times when it becomes necessary, but there's no such thing as good violence (when we do it) and bad violence (when they do it).

Of course the motivation matters. Defending Europe against the Nazis Vs enforcing a death cult and slaughtering innocents. There is a huge difference. If it wasn't for the former, you wouldn't be able to spout your apologist drivel on here day in, day out. The latter would quite happily slice your head off slowly with a sharp knife.

 

 

Ps. If motivation is irrelevant, why have laws been shaped around it? E.g. a murder is now less of a crime than a racist murder.

Edited February 23, 2019 by WiseOwl182

[Waldo 96]

Except, the Nazi's were not the entire German population, and no doubt many German people would have resisted Nazi tyranny and many would have been persecuted (murdered) for doing so; and then we bombed the crap out of them.

[WiseOwl182 10]

6 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Except, the Nazi's were not the entire German population, and no doubt many German people would have resisted Nazi tyranny and many would have been persecuted (murdered) for doing so; and then we bombed the crap out of them.

I'm not saying bombing civilians was right, but it was retaliatory and in defence against the Nazis. The motivation is not irrelevant. Halibut is equalling our grand fathers and great grand fathers who defended our country and Europe with a murderous death cult who knife people's heads off on camera. I find that insulting and offensive. I find it disturbing he has a few patting him on his back too. I knew this forum was left wing but some of this is becoming a parody. 

Edited February 23, 2019 by WiseOwl182

[Halibut 12]

1 minute ago, WiseOwl182 said:

Of course the motivation matters. Defending Europe against the Nazis Vs enforcing a death cult and slaughtering innocents. There is a huge difference. If it wasn't for the former, you wouldn't be able to spout your apologist drivel on here day in, day out. The latter would quite happily slice your head off slowly with a sharp knife.

You seem to have missed the point rather, so I've highlighted a key phrase for you. Slaughtering innocents. We did it too, knowingly.

Of course I'm glad that the Allies prevailed in WW2 and that I live in a country where I'm free to speak my mind. I wish we hadn't killed hundreds of thousands of civilians in the process though. You might well respond with a 'necessary evil' argument - 'we had to do it or we wouldn't have won' - but you'd be wrong; most historians agree that it was not a major influence on the outcome.

      Killing innocent civilians is either a bad thing, or it isn't. Most people would agree that it is. That's why I don't think we have a great deal of moral high ground to stand on - I don't know how many civilians we killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, the estimates vary, but it's somewhere in the order of a hundred thousand or so. We're still selling weapons to the Saudis - somewhere in the region of five billions pounds worth since 2015 - in the full knowledge that they kill entirely innocent people by the thousands and have led to what the UN have described as ''the worst humanitarian crisis on earth''.

       So where does Shamina Begum fit into all this? I think it ill becomes us to talk about her as if she were the epitome of evil, when we're complicit and acquiescent in the mass killing of civilians ourselves. It doesn't mean that she's without reproach or that she doesn't need investigation, or that she shouldn't face the consequences of her actions. She's one of us and we should be the ones who take her back and sort her out.

3 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

I'm not saying bombing civilians was right, but it was retaliatory and in defence against the Nazis. The motivation is not irrelevant. Halibut is equalling our grand fathers and great grand fathers who defended our country and Europe with a murderous death cult who knife people's heads off on camera. I find that insulting and offensive. I find it disturbing he has a few patting him on his back too. I knew this forum was left wing but some of this is becoming a parody. 

Being retaliatory is neither here nor there. If you murder my mother and I murder yours, does that make my crime any the less? I think not.

Defence against the Nazis? Is killing men women and children who probably aren't Nazis in their beds really defending us against Nazis?

 

[danot 10]

2 minutes ago, Halibut said:

No ideas to share with us about how you would deal with her then (apart from the stock response 'leave her there?')?

Hasn't  the dye been cast?  She turned against Britain in spite of her British roots.  Isis propaganda brought to her attention the hypocrisy of none Islamic nations. Radicalisation is in direct correlation with an inherent flaw within western societies and the double standards of western leaders, which you yourself raised issues with yesterday.  What's the solution? Perhaps there isn't one.  Perhaps the hypocrisy of western leaders is preventing a solution.

 

With regard to Shamima Begrum and the like- The path she chose cant take her any further which is why she wants to come back, "home",  laying the responsibility of containing any potential threat she may pose at Britain's door, so, yeah, she'll return to face justice or whatever form of punishment awaits her.  I'm afraid I have no sympathy or compassion for any of these people. Harsh, but there you have it.  

 

 

[WiseOwl182 10]

21 minutes ago, Halibut said:

You seem to have missed the point rather, so I've highlighted a key phrase for you. Slaughtering innocents. We did it too, knowingly.

Of course I'm glad that the Allies prevailed in WW2 and that I live in a country where I'm free to speak my mind. I wish we hadn't killed hundreds of thousands of civilians in the process though. You might well respond with a 'necessary evil' argument - 'we had to do it or we wouldn't have won' - but you'd be wrong; most historians agree that it was not a major influence on the outcome.

      Killing innocent civilians is either a bad thing, or it isn't. Most people would agree that it is. That's why I don't think we have a great deal of moral high ground to stand on - I don't know how many civilians we killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, the estimates vary, but it's somewhere in the order of a hundred thousand or so. We're still selling weapons to the Saudis - somewhere in the region of five billions pounds worth since 2015 - in the full knowledge that they kill entirely innocent people by the thousands and have led to what the UN have described as ''the worst humanitarian crisis on earth''.

       So where does Shamina Begum fit into all this? I think it ill becomes us to talk about her as if she were the epitome of evil, when we're complicit and acquiescent in the mass killing of civilians ourselves. It doesn't mean that she's without reproach or that she doesn't need investigation, or that she shouldn't face the consequences of her actions. She's one of us and we should be the ones who take her back and sort her out.

Being retaliatory is neither here nor there. If you murder my mother and I murder yours, does that make my crime any the less? I think not.

Defence against the Nazis? Is killing men women and children who probably aren't Nazis in their beds really defending us against Nazis?

 

Is an assault less worse or the same as a racist assault?

[willman 10]

As far as i'm concerned (and i don't give two hoots about anyone elses opinion on it)ISIS is  a terrorist organisation not a country trying for world domination and subjugation.

Similar if i remember to the IRA  and even Nelson Mandella - now just remind me what the current state of affairs is with views on Nelson Mandella and that of the Sinn Fein commanders who almost certainly were complicit if not the driving force behind terrorist mail bombs and anthrax  letters on UK mainland. They're accepted into society and did far more than she has done.

 

[katekate 15]

I think comparing the war to Isis is disgraceful.  Yes, a hell of a lot of innocent people were killed but these men HAD to defend our country.  Going off and joining Isis is a choice, Begum made that choice.  At 15 years old she knew what she was doing.  We are all entitled to have our own opinion as to what should happen to her.  She is a teenager who went off to Syria and now wants to come back and be able to bring her son up quietly.  Well i'm sorry but how many parents of the girls killed in the Manchester bombing would have liked to have seen their daughters have a baby and watch their daughters and their grandchildren live a nice quiet life here.  They have been robbed and will have to tend to their graves and think of them 24/7 for the rest of their lives.  Personally I would take the child away from her, bring him back here and have a nice family adopt him, he has done nothing wrong and she does not deserve to have him and he does not deserve a mother like her.  Leave her there to rot, she made her bed, let her lie in it.  If people are offended or do not like my opinion then I don't care, would you feel the same if your child had been killed in the Manchester bombing.  I don't think so!  If I really said what I would like to happen to her i'd be banned from sf forever.

Edited February 23, 2019 by katekate

[mafya 250]

It seems jihadi jack would also like to come back and he misses his mum bless him! 😂= https://www.itv.com/news/2019-02-22/jihadi-jack-interview-jack-letts-itv-news-syria/