FatDave Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 ...the murder victim is a total git? Don't you think that's a massive oversimplification? You don't think the Americans, the world even, deserve some revenge for what this man has done? For what his followers have done, and continue to do in his name, he deserves death as much as almost anybody in history. I have hoped on many occasions that he would be roasted over a slow fire over a series of days. You think his wife deserves compassion, do you think she is an innocent bystander? Do you also believe Hitler should have been given a counciller as he was suicidal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Salo Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 so cold. I feel so cold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted May 6, 2011 Author Share Posted May 6, 2011 Define "terrorist".. A group who attack unarmed people without caring who gets hurt will do for the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyOwl Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 Now the brave Yanks have killed OBL in a vicious and dangerous firefight...... Hang on....Now the brave Yanks have killed OBL who was shooting at them......hang on. Now the brave Yanks have killed the unarmed OBL in front of his 12 year old daughter after bravely shooting his unarmed wife....... Hang on a last time. I thought shooting unarmed people was a crime. Is it still so if you're American and the murder victim is a total git? I thought organising to kill thousands of innocent people by crashing planes into skyscrapers was a crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 So a terrorist group attacking and killing Obama would be OK? No. Back to you, prove 'they' were deliberately intending to deceive rather than muddled, or mistaken, or incompetent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 A group who attack unarmed people without caring who gets hurt will do for the moment. Knowingly unarmed or suspecting they are armed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 A cop at the G20 slightly pushed a man and look at the outrage. They blokes went in on a kill mission, guns blazing and it's fine. I think that maybe you need to consider the context of each situation. One man, who has been found by inquest to be no threat at all to anybody, compared to one man who brags to the world that he's organised the deaths of thousands? Don't you think that both men need to treated a little bit differently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted May 6, 2011 Author Share Posted May 6, 2011 Do you also believe Hitler should have been given a counciller as he was suicidal? We are led to believe Hitler extinguished his own light but many of his top people were put on trial and executed for their many crimes. Should they have just been shot without trial? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xfox3x Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 So killing an unarmed man is OK if he's a killer? Yes it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted May 6, 2011 Author Share Posted May 6, 2011 compared to one man who brags to the world that he's organised the deaths of thousands? Was that about OBL or Bush? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.