Russia air strikes 'killed 200 Syrian civilians'

Watch
FlavaFlav
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
Why are people not outraged? When 200 people are killed by terrorists the whole world mourns, but when 200 people are killed by a government?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-35162523
1
reply
Jebedee
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
(Original post by FlavaFlav)
Why are people not outraged? When 200 people are killed by terrorists the whole world mourns, but when 200 people are killed by a government?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-35162523
Because the 200 people killed by terrorists were not inside a warzone.
0
reply
FlavaFlav
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#3
(Original post by Jebedee)
Because the 200 people killed by terrorists were not inside a warzone.
And? Innocent people are innocent people. If the terrorists are terrible people for killing 200 people, what are Russian government for killing 200 people? They are guilty of the exact same crime.
3
reply
Jebedee
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#4
Report 4 years ago
#4
(Original post by FlavaFlav)
And? Innocent people are innocent people. If the terrorists are terrible people for killing 200 people, what are Russian government for killing 200 people? They are guilty of the exact same crime.
What makes their crime different in terms of blame is that innocent people in Paris were the targets, whereas the ones killed by bombing Syria were not the intended target, they were however within close proximity to the target.
0
reply
HucktheForde
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 years ago
#5
Bullocks. Those 200 killed were terrorist. Just because they are not isis doesn't mean they are civilians. There are terrorists that are not aligned with isis.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
desi boyy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 years ago
#6
here you go again with stupid and vastly ignored thread questions


terrorists are not trying to kill terrorists

the government is

please

Image
0
reply
FlavaFlav
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#7
(Original post by Jebedee)
What makes their crime different in terms of blame is that innocent people in Paris were the targets, whereas the ones killed by bombing Syria were not the intended target, they were however within close proximity to the target.
And if the Russian air forces had the ability to launch an air strike on the target, they had the ability to see that there would be casualties. If you accept civillians as casualties they might as-well be the target. Anyone who kills has blood on their hands, it doesn't matter how indirect the desire to kill is, if you accept as a consequence of your actions, you are guilty, and the Russian Government are collectively guilty and responsible for the deaths of 200 Syrian citizens.
0
reply
Jebedee
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
(Original post by FlavaFlav)
And if the Russian air forces had the ability to launch an air strike on the target, they had the ability to see that there would be casualties. If you accept civillians as casualties they might as-well be the target. Anyone who kills has blood on their hands, it doesn't matter how indirect the desire to kill is, if you accept as a consequence of your actions, you are guilty, and the Russian Government are collectively guilty and responsible for the deaths of 200 Syrian citizens.
Combatants who abide with the rules of war attempt to minimise casualties. Unfortunately, ISIS want to play dirty and fight amongst civilians. So any strike on important ISIS targets will harm civilians. Ergo, any harm to civilians is the blame of ISIS in this case.

Some would argue that every country is responsible for its own national security. You can bet that in the case of an UK invasion, 200 civilians is NOT going to deter a strike and neither should we expect it to. If a country falls short of its duty to national security then others have to step in and do the job for them...which often is going to involve some unfortunate casualties.

Jesus, you'd swear some people haven't seen 24.
0
reply
FlavaFlav
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#9
(Original post by Jebedee)
Combatants who abide with the rules of war attempt to minimise casualties. Unfortunately, ISIS want to play dirty and fight amongst civilians. So any strike on important ISIS targets will harm civilians. Ergo, any harm to civilians is the blame of ISIS in this case.

Some would argue that every country is responsible for its own national security. You can bet that in the case of an UK invasion, 200 civilians is NOT going to deter a strike and neither should we expect it to. If a country falls short of its duty to national security then others have to step in and do the job for them...which often is going to involve some unfortunate casualties.

Jesus, you'd swear some people haven't seen 24.
I can't justify killing 200 people, in the pretence that it kills an ideology. Hundreds of thousands of civilians were killed in Iraq as a result of the war we declared there also, and for what.. I don't believe in the end goal, I don't believe killing innocent people with end the ideology of ISIS, I don't believe in killing innocent people full stop, and I don't believe that when our country is finished in Syria the world will be in a better position.

The last 20 years has proved, that the more we invade and kill civilians, the worse it gets.
1
reply
Jebedee
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
(Original post by FlavaFlav)
I can't justify killing 200 people, in the pretence that it kills an ideology. Hundreds of thousands of civilians were killed in Iraq as a result of the war we declared there also, and for what.. I don't believe in the end goal, I don't believe killing innocent people with end the ideology of ISIS, I don't believe in killing innocent people full stop, and I don't believe that when our country is finished in Syria the world will be in a better position.

The last 20 years has proved, that the more we invade and kill civilians, the worse it gets.
Perhaps you prefer the notion of leaving ISIS there permanently. It will undoubtedly result in more deaths but hey at least your conscience is clear right?
It's an easy thing to do and say as a civilian, you'll never be in a position where you need to make calls that result in ending life either way. But it's so easy to sit back and criticise the ones in power for their action or inaction.

Clearly it's important to you to attempt to maintain moral high ground which is your right, but I personally value my safety and the safety of others over such intangible concepts.
1
reply
FedoraTheExplora
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 years ago
#11
And I care because?
0
reply
hejraat
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
(Original post by Jebedee)
What makes their crime different in terms of blame is that innocent people in Paris were the targets, whereas the ones killed by bombing Syria were not the intended target, they were however within close proximity to the target.
What a ******^
0
reply
Carpe Diem Jay
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
Not surprising in the least bit. Of course innocent people are going to die. No will care enough to do something about it because they're collateral damage.
0
reply
Jebedee
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 years ago
#14
(Original post by hejraat)
What a ******^
Bravo, you weave a compelling tapestry of an argument there.
0
reply
hejraat
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 years ago
#15
(Original post by Jebedee)
Bravo, you weave a compelling tapestry of an argument there.
Sorry to argue with me you need to have a minimal level of intelligence, the bar is really low but sorry you don't qualify
0
reply
iamthetruth
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 years ago
#16
The governments are terrorists no difference to me
2
reply
Cato the Elder
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 years ago
#17
Imagine if this was a Western air force...
1
reply
...imrah
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 years ago
#18
(Original post by iamthetruth)
The governments are terrorists no difference to me
precisely
0
reply
Jebedee
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#19
Report 4 years ago
#19
(Original post by hejraat)
Sorry to argue with me you need to have a minimal level of intelligence, the bar is really low but sorry you don't qualify
Forfeit accepted. Please come again.
0
reply
KimKallstrom
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#20
Report 4 years ago
#20
(Original post by hejraat)
Sorry to argue with me you need to have a minimal level of intelligence, the bar is really low but sorry you don't qualify
Well what is it exactly you object to in his post? He made the distinction between targeting as many civilians as possible and targeting military entities. What's wrong with that point?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Current uni students - are you thinking of dropping out of university?

Yes, I'm seriously considering dropping out (143)
14.29%
I'm not sure (42)
4.2%
No, I'm going to stick it out for now (302)
30.17%
I have already dropped out (26)
2.6%
I'm not a current university student (488)
48.75%

Watched Threads

View All