Acid attack on child

[Halibut]

But, how much evil in this world is fuelled by an us v them attitude? Quite a bit I would suggest. I have no doubt that many horrible actions are fully understood to be horrible by the perpetrators, but justified by the twisted logic that it's no worse than them others, or revenge for what them others did.

 

Uppercut's opening remarks were less than helpful.

 

I absolutely agree Quisquose, which in part explains my attitude to posts which I believe are more about creating and stoking the 'us and them' mentality than genuinely seeking to understand and deal with the issues positively.

 

The 'it's no worse than them others, or revenge for what them others did' attitude is massively prevalent on here, sadly.

[boyfriday]

I've heard some horrific stories of systematic mass rape during the Yugoslavian conflict. It just further bolsters the generally widely accepted view that rape is about power and hate and not sex.

 

Absolutely, rape is rarely about sexual pleasure and usually about feeble minded men seeking to impose their superior physical power on women. I wonder given the history and experiences of women, whether they could ever turn to rape if they were in a position to do so or its anathema to them?

 

Sorry to digress from the OP, but it's slightly relevant given it's one human being exercising their power over another because they're in a physical position to do so.

[boyfriday]

Here's a link to a schools charity that operates in Afghanistan, and where girls outnumber boys-obviously not all people in that region believe girls shouldn't attend school.

 

http://www.afghanschools.org/afghan-schools.html

[Suffragette1]

Absolutely, rape is rarely about sexual pleasure and usually about feeble minded men seeking to impose their superior physical power on women. I wonder given the history and experiences of women, whether they could ever turn to rape if they were in a position to do so or its anathema to them?

 

Sorry to digress from the OP, but it's slightly relevant given it's one human being exercising their power over another because they're in a physical position to do so.

 

I'm digressing big time - for the record, I condemn the actions of those sickos who did this to the girl in the link in the OP.

 

I wonder if there is something about the state of conflict that gives rise to our most primitive and primal behaviours, which civilisation has sought to temper. Adrenalin must give rise to a very different mindset where one's moral compass (assuming that one had one in the first place) skews beyond all recognition. It's the survival of the fittest at its most animalistic (for example, in the animal kingdom, some species eat their young and some female species eat their mates!).

 

I'm sure that there are theories about this out there. If one's life is in danger and you basically have no idea if you'll live to see another day, then I imagine that many do throw caution to the wind. I'm sure that there are plenty of women who are capable of such behaviours under a given set of circumstances too.

[hard2miss]

uppercut and hard to miss

Who is justifing it ?

I am stating that it happens and is not just happening in Afghanistan so re read my post before you type your lies.

 

At what point do I say it is ok to do it ?

[s.hawkins]

Who is justifing it ?

I am stating that it happens and is not just happening in Afghanistan so re read my post before you type your lies.

 

At what point do I say it is ok to do it ?

 

you are right, i was wrong, i have much to be forgiven for. peace be upon you.

[hard2miss]

You seem unaware that even if America and Britain did have the moral high ground before the Iraq war they have subsequently lost it. In facy in most of the East including China and Russia America and Britain have never had the moral high ground.

 

Anyway has Bush Blair Cheney Rumsvelt Wolferwitz Cambell been tried for war crimes? The standards powerful nations set themselves is they can get away with whatever they like you seem to be totally unaware of the glaringly obviouse.

I don't care to get dragged into what you think of any war, I am mearly stating that we have rules of engagement which others, our enemies, do not. Now if you care to deny that then you are talking out of your top hat and suggest you not try making that claim to the families of the American soldiers who's heads were chopped off and put on poles on display in Baghdad.

[hard2miss]

you are right, i was wrong, i have much to be forgiven for. peace be upon you.

Thanks for that, its not often people admit making mistakes on here, they usually will fight to the death trying to prove that blue is green.

 

Cheers

[boyfriday]

I'm digressing big time

Wouldn't worry about it Suff, seems the OP has lost the plot-big time

I wonder if there is something about the state of conflict that gives rise to our most primitive and primal behaviours, which civilisation has sought to temper. Adrenalin must give rise to a very different mindset where one's moral compass (assuming that one had one in the first place) skews beyond all recognition. It's the survival of the fittest at its most animalistic (for example, in the animal kingdom, some species eat their young and some female species eat their mates!).

Totally agree, we have a basic set of parameters that we conform to, but I believe ultimately our behaviour is only moderated by the boundaries the state imposes.

 

If you read the vigilante thread-normal, I guess law abiding people are describing acts of violence that they would enact on their fellow citizens for committing various crimes-no judge, no jury..just summary justice.

 

If rational people can think like that in the cold light of day, the mind boggles at what those less constrained could do in the heat of the moment or if they believed justice hadn't been done.

[hard2miss]

Of course it is and that's my point. I think it's utterly reasonable to assume that you won't find anyone on here who would say otherwise, nor indeed believe otherwise. It's implicit that people would condemn such actions.

 

So, and I address this to the OP, what?

If a thread is nothing more than people queuing up to say 'I agree' it's pretty useless isn't it?

What further comment does the OP have to make? What does he suggest?

What next - a thread entitled 'Buggering kittens and roasting them alive over a fire made of babies - dreadful?'

Totally agree.

 

No one is saying that they condone it but if all they wanted was people saying its wrong then the topic would be a waist of time and be more like a petition. What is wrong with looking at the wider issue and getting past the innitial emotion reaction.

 

I stated that the Taliban are not the only ones doing such atrocities and I got people saying that I was condoning it, people having a go at me as if I am backing Bush and Blairs wars. This forum has turned into an assylem.

 

Its horrible, its wrong, but if everyone has to put that comment at the start of their posts and its not taken for granted that people think like that then its sadder than what we thought.