US Diplomats killed in Benghazi over amateur's film (8 Viewers)

Apr 15, 2006
56,640
why do some people in the ghetto shoot and kill others for being 'disrespected'?
Why do you have to answer a question with another question? Why can't you give a straightforward answer like Martin does here?

Because it's not just an abstract idea to them like it is to you and me. It's an identity. They perceive it as an attack on them personally.
I understand that people hold some things in high regard. But so high that murder becomes an acceptable response? MURDER?

Those aren't muslims, they are just using Religion to achieve some goals, using the ignorance, poverty to achieve personnal goals.
Your argument is fallacious.
 

Martin

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2000
56,913
I understand that people hold some things in high regard. But so high that murder becomes an acceptable response? MURDER?
Deneb actually made a good point with the whole honor thing. Imagine a value system in which there is such a high premium on honor that dishonor deserves death. It's not just these guys either, traditional Japanese culture has a good slice of it too.
 

ALC

Ohaulick
Oct 28, 2010
46,545
I choose death before dishonor
I'd rather die than live down on my knees
Bury me like a soldier, with my dignity!
 

Cheesio

**********
Jul 11, 2006
22,514
Why do you have to answer a question with another question? Why can't you give a straightforward answer like Martin does here?



I understand that people hold some things in high regard. But so high that murder becomes an acceptable response? MURDER?



Your argument is fallacious.
Who said it was acceptable, it wasn't acceptable, even if we found those actions offensive, provocative and weak, this isn't the right response. Violence was never a response to such idiotic actions.

My arguments is fallacious, tell me why then a Christian kills dozens of people, he's labelled mentally sick, ignorant...But when its a muslim, it's terrorism, you don't want to go to the roots of the problem.
 

Nzoric

Grazie Mirko
Jan 16, 2011
37,877
what was there before the creating brits and frogs got there?
Similar movements as Europe in that time, nation building. They were a few years behind and more than a few years behind in technology, but the social movements were definitely leaning towards nation building. Then the brits and frogs got there and stopped the entire process, the trails of their presence there is still felt today.
 

Bisco

Senior Member
Nov 21, 2005
14,420
another idiot. and i dont know he can 'order'
:tup:

puppet president and i mean it. i cant stand this guy nor his supporters who idolize him as a god and refuse to accept his mistakes. funny as usual he is slow, where was this from the start, instead it comes after yet another embassy has been attacked!! as if its normal to attack embassies now a day.
 

Martin

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2000
56,913
:tup:

puppet president and i mean it. i cant stand this guy nor his supporters who idolize him as a god and refuse to accept his mistakes. funny as usual he is slow, where was this from the start, instead it comes after yet another embassy has been attacked!! as if its normal to attack embassies now a day.
Ever since Assange is in an embassy embassies are apparently "not necessarily sacrosanct".
 

GordoDeCentral

Diez
Moderator
Apr 14, 2005
70,877
Similar movements as Europe in that time, nation building. They were a few years behind and more than a few years behind in technology, but the social movements were definitely leaning towards nation building. Then the brits and frogs got there and stopped the entire process, the trails of their presence there is still felt today.
you're basing this on the movie 'lawrence of arabia' :D
 

Nzoric

Grazie Mirko
Jan 16, 2011
37,877
My arguments is fallacious, tell me why then a Christian kills dozens of people, he's labelled mentally sick, ignorant...But when its a muslim, it's terrorism, you don't want to go to the roots of the problem.
Cheesio I get where you're coming from but you really need to think these posts through. If the Westboro Baptist Church decided to do something ala "Red State" they would most definitely be labelled terrorists and extremists. The main difference is that the majority of crimes, crimes which can be compared to blowing away an ambassador because of a D-movie, in Western Europe and America are either caused by mental illnesses or ideological zeal. (For a case which has both these elements just look at Breivik). Fanatical religion is very marginalized in Western Europe, a bit less in the States but still nowhere near the level in the Middle East.
 
Apr 15, 2006
56,640
Who said it was acceptable, it wasn't acceptable, even if we found those actions offensive, provocative and weak, this isn't the right response. Violence was never a response to such idiotic actions.

My arguments is fallacious, tell me why then a Christian kills dozens of people, he's labelled mentally sick, ignorant...But when its a muslim, it's terrorism, you don't want to go to the roots of the problem.
Clearly the people who attacked the diplomat thought it was acceptable. :rolleyes:

That's just the media being biased towards Christians. I don't think their portrayal is correct either. Doesn't change the fallacy in your point.
 

Nzoric

Grazie Mirko
Jan 16, 2011
37,877
Clearly the people who attacked the diplomat thought it was acceptable. :rolleyes:

That's just the media being biased towards Christians. I don't think their portrayal is correct either. Doesn't change the fallacy in your point.
What fallacy? Cheesio and Bisco are both Muslims who feel completely detached from any justification for this incident - it's a fair point to say that the perps are either Muslims who do not get the religion or not Muslims at all. Why would the negative actions from the minority (yes, extremist muslims are a minority) be used to generalize on a religion all together?
 

Bisco

Senior Member
Nov 21, 2005
14,420
Ever since Assange is in an embassy embassies are apparently "not necessarily sacrosanct".
:D you cant say he attacked them to be honest martin. i'm a bit hazy as to how wikileaks got access to the amount of info they un-covered but i mean attacking embassies as in trespassing physically.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 8)