Woolwich suspects DENY they murdered Lee Rigby

Rigby wasn't some innocent civilian, he was a soldier. Under the laws of war, he was an acceptable target for combatants such as these guys. The fact that they managed to kill him before he killed some of their people is irrelevant. Do we call british soldiers murderers and terrorists every time they kill legitimate enemy combatants in war?

All that happened here is that one side in war killed a combatant from the other side. Is it illegal to kill a legitimate target such as a soldier in the course of war?

This is poor justification for killing off duty soldiers as it can be twisted into an excuse for killing pretty much anyone as eventually their actions are likely to result in somebody some where's death. With little extrapolation it could justify killing these two murderers (not that I condone that) as their is a risk of them killing again. It could equally justify killing all prisoners of war and civilians who may support a group you happen to be at war with.

There is a difference between an active combatant who by choosing to involve themselves in war making themselves a valid target and an individual who has fought but at that time has put down their weapons and is an immediate to no body. At best all the "we are at war" claims justify are them subduing Rigby and give us exactly the same right to lock them up as enemy soldiers.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 61

james22

16

Original post by Bart1331

Rigby wasn't some innocent civilian, he was a soldier. Under the laws of war, he was an acceptable target for combatants such as these guys. The fact that they managed to kill him before he killed some of their people is irrelevant. Do we call british soldiers murderers and terrorists every time they kill legitimate enemy combatants in war?

All that happened here is that one side in war killed a combatant from the other side. Is it illegal to kill a legitimate target such as a soldier in the course of war?

The attackers where not uniformed and in enemy land, under the rules of war they do not need to be considered enemy combatants and could instead be considered spies (which would lead to them being lcoked up for life anyway). There is no practical difference even if we do accept your view.

Reply 62

james22

16

Original post by Bart1331

Just like British agents and special forces on covert operations are not uniformed?

Yes, they would be counted as spies and the Taliban would treat them far worse than we treat them.

Reply 63

DanieleRosato

2

Bottom line is, they are both mentally insane. Forget the whole Islam debate, there is obviously something mentally wrong with them, and they should be sent to a mental asylum.

Religion has nothing to do with it, they are just sick people who are milking the media for attention. Anyone with half a mind knows that they are guilty, and the fact they pleaded not guilty just makes it a whole lot worse, not just for those two idiots, but for the poor women who is now widowed.

Reply 64

Psyk

16

Original post by Bart1331

I don't think they align with any group specifically, it's more a case that they have friends/relatives in Afghanistan that the British military are killing. And they felt that by killing a soldier, that was one less threat to their family and friends. True it won't achieve much in the long run, but if you push people to the point of desperation don't be surprised if they bite back. This is the cost of war - If we don't want our troops to be attacked, we shouldn't be at war. The second we enter one we agree that our troops may from this point on be attacked at any point, and that will probably be when they least expect it. This is the cold and harsh reality of war.

So surely that means they don't count as enemy combatants participating in a war?

Reply 65

Snagprophet

17

Original post by Bart1331

Rigby wasn't some innocent civilian, he was a soldier. Under the laws of war, he was an acceptable target for combatants such as these guys. The fact that they managed to kill him before he killed some of their people is irrelevant. Do we call british soldiers murderers and terrorists every time they kill legitimate enemy combatants in war?

All that happened here is that one side in war killed a combatant from the other side. Is it illegal to kill a legitimate target such as a soldier in the course of war?

This isn't a warzone though, Lee wasn't required to follow any kind of protocol in this instance and was not on duty. I've never heard of killing in advance as legitimate, else we'd simply firebomb all nurseries to prevent people becoming criminals when they grow up. Even if that logic wasn't the sort of thing a dumb moron would comment, the chances of Lee being involved in any combat with taliban are slim vs patrolling areas with no signs of the terrorist bastards and getting into no combat.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 66

joey11223

20

Original post by Bart1331

It doesn't matter that it wasn't a warzone,.

Surely using your sort of logic, our government should have the right to assassinate extremist preachers here? After all if they're telling thousands of Muslims to slay the infidels etc, they are very likely to cause some to become militants/enemy soldiers?

Reply 67

Fullofsurprises

20

Original post by DanieleRosato

Bottom line is, they are both mentally insane. Forget the whole Islam debate, there is obviously something mentally wrong with them, and they should be sent to a mental asylum.

Religion has nothing to do with it, they are just sick people who are milking the media for attention. Anyone with half a mind knows that they are guilty, and the fact they pleaded not guilty just makes it a whole lot worse, not just for those two idiots, but for the poor women who is now widowed.

It's sometimes a fine line between religiously-inspired extremism and insanity. One can look very much like the other. However, in this case, I imagine there is a significant element of mental instability involved.

It's depressing to see Muslims in these threads appropriating the actions of someone who was clearly deranged as a marker for the cause. Apparently anything goes.

Even more depressing is that it is all based on propaganda and lies about the motives of the West in Afghanistan and the complete indifference Muslims repeatedly show towards dictatorship, cruelty and oppression within Muslim lands and with regard to Muslim extremist attacks on others.

Apparently, once you have swallowed the Salafist line, anything goes and reason flies out of the window.

Reply 68

Drewski

19

Original post by Bart1331

Who defines what "extremist" preaching is - You? The difference is that these people are simply preaching some beliefs, whereas soldiers are part of an organization that is universally recognized as a legitimate target for combatants. You'd be hard pushed to find anyone who considers preachers to be legitimate targets in any war.

Well, since inciting racial hatred is a recognised crime now, I'm guessing he's suggesting that the Government defines what it is.

Reply 69

CTCRM

They don't deserve the time being wasted on them......just take them out the back and put a bullet in the back of their heads like the animals they are.

Reply 70

the bear

20

Original post by Al-Mudaari

I wouldn't be surprised if they now end up getting tortured into admitting it. Feel sorry for them, they ended up being hounded by MI5, and tortured in places like Kenyan, which eventually lead to their current psychological state.

Many others should take the blame here. Hopefully, they get a light sentencing and instead receive medical help and compensation.

i have to disagree with you

Reply 71

utr

18

They have denied it to draw it out and get more publicity for themselves, thats what it boils down to. The jury will give a guilty verdict anyway, just worsens their sentence that they have pleaded not guilty. Should be stuck in the electric chair.

Reply 72

username521617

17

Prison isn't harsh enough. To the tower with them.

And for the repugnant, moronic users defending their abhorrent crime, how about you 'jihad' your way over to Syria and become a pair of martyrs, hmm?

Reply 73

MrSuavetopia

19

It was a shocking crime, and to hear they're now pleading not guilty to all of their charges is equally as disgusting. Hope they rot in prison for the rest of their lowly lives.

Reply 74

x-pixie-x

8

Original post by Al-Mudaari

I wouldn't be surprised if they now end up getting tortured into admitting it. Feel sorry for them, they ended up being hounded by MI5, and tortured in places like Kenyan, which eventually lead to their current psychological state.

Many others should take the blame here. Hopefully, they get a light sentencing and instead receive medical help and compensation.

Trollolol I feel sorry for you sometimes,
mustn't be easy basing your whole life on a bunch of fairy tales. You've done well in brainwashing yourself, your comments are laughable if you actually believe in them.

Reply 75

CryptoidAlien

3

They just don't want to spend their lives in prison. They have no shame or honour to deny this. Yet, they'll probably claim their faith teaches truth and integrity. We can see here it does not.

Reply 76

CryptoidAlien

3

Original post by x-pixie-x

Trollolol I feel sorry for you sometimes,
mustn't be easy basing your whole life on a bunch of fairy tales. You've done well in brainwashing yourself, your comments are laughable if you actually believe in them.

Plenty of his fellow followers will actually sympathize/personalize a 'fellows' point of view and defend his corner. It's called 'understanding other cultures'.

Reply 77

GreatGalahad

Original post by CryptoidAlien

They just don't want to spend their lives in prison. They have no shame or honour to deny this. Yet, they'll probably claim their faith teaches truth and integrity. We can see here it does not.

Poor logic. Maths teaches 1+1=2. Child works out 1+1=3. ∴ Maths teaches 1+1=3.

Reply 78

x-pixie-x

8

Original post by CryptoidAlien

Plenty of his fellow followers will actually sympathize/personalize a 'fellows' point of view and defend his corner. It's called 'understanding other cultures'.