By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Breaking News on Osama Bin Laden (necrobump)

thismeintiel on 02 May 2011
Beuli2 said:
osamanobama said:
Beuli2 said:

I care not.


you dont care that the someone who slaughtered 1000's in the name of islam, was brought to justice? 

No. And who are you to determinate someone's justice?

And who was he to end the lives of 1000's before their time? 



 

Around the Network
osamanobama on 02 May 2011
Beuli2 said:
osamanobama said:
Beuli2 said:

I care not.


you dont care that the someone who slaughtered 1000's in the name of islam, was brought to justice? 

No. And who are you to determinate someone's justice?

well when a religion tells you to kill nonbelievers and hypocrits, which you do in spades.

by killing 1000'2 upon 1000's of innocents, you deserve to die. do you not agree with the Nuremburg trials that put to death lots of Hitlers men. would you not have wanted hitler to die, how about stalin, he killed twice as much as Hitler, or even Mao, he killed twice as much as Stalin. or did Bin laden's death count not reach an adequate number, for you to think that he deserved to die



The_vagabond7 on 02 May 2011

Honestly, I think he should've been brought back alive and made to face trial and sentenced. Ideally anyway, I certainly won't condemn the brave soldiers for doing what they did. I just don't think descending into barbarism is the way to go about showing the world how advanced of a culture we can and should be. It's a difficult dichotomy, weeding out evil without becoming the sort of thing you're fighting against. But ultimately if we got the bad guys, but we did so by means of torture, illegal imprisonment, and killing innocent people, did we really reduce the net evil in the world, or did we just transfer it to ourselves in the name of retribution, and then called it justice? Dancing over the death of our enemies never serves as a good example to anyone. Food for thought.



You can find me on facebook as Markus Van Rijn, if you friend me just mention you're from VGchartz and who you are here.

vlad321 on 02 May 2011
The_vagabond7 said:

Honestly, I think he should've been brought back alive and made to face trial and sentenced. Ideally anyway, I certainly won't condemn the brave soldiers for doing what they did. I just don't think descending into barbarism is the way to go about showing the world how advanced of a culture we can and should be. It's a difficult dichotomy, weeding out evil without becoming the sort of thing you're fighting against. But ultimately if we got the bad guys, but we did so by means of torture, illegal imprisonment, and killing innocent people, did we really reduce the net evil in the world, or did we just transfer it to ourselves in the name of retribution, and then called it justice? Dancing over the death of our enemies never serves as a good example to anyone. Food for thought.


Each action has two parts to it, intent and consequences. In this case you are saying that the consequences of what we did are the same, murder. However, the intent is completely different and therefore the actions are very much different.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

osamanobama on 03 May 2011
The_vagabond7 said:

Honestly, I think he should've been brought back alive and made to face trial and sentenced. Ideally anyway, I certainly won't condemn the brave soldiers for doing what they did. I just don't think descending into barbarism is the way to go about showing the world how advanced of a culture we can and should be. It's a difficult dichotomy, weeding out evil without becoming the sort of thing you're fighting against. But ultimately if we got the bad guys, but we did so by means of torture, illegal imprisonment, and killing innocent people, did we really reduce the net evil in the world, or did we just transfer it to ourselves in the name of retribution, and then called it justice? Dancing over the death of our enemies never serves as a good example to anyone. Food for thought.

when did we do this?

also innocent people always die in war, its inevitable.

but no one is better than the United States at going out of our way to avoid civilian casualties. much at the expense of the saftey of our soldiers, who daily have to show tremendious restraint



Around the Network
Beuli2 on 03 May 2011
osamanobama said:
Beuli2 said:
osamanobama said:
Beuli2 said:

I care not.


you dont care that the someone who slaughtered 1000's in the name of islam, was brought to justice? 

No. And who are you to determinate someone's justice?

well when a religion tells you to kill nonbelievers and hypocrits, which you do in spades.

by killing 1000'2 upon 1000's of innocents, you deserve to die. do you not agree with the Nuremburg trials that put to death lots of Hitlers men. would you not have wanted hitler to die, how about stalin, he killed twice as much as Hitler, or even Mao, he killed twice as much as Stalin. or did Bin laden's death count not reach an adequate number, for you to think that he deserved to die

So you are counting someone's guilt by how many people they kill?



Above: still the best game of the year.

Beuli2 on 03 May 2011
thismeintiel said:
Beuli2 said:
osamanobama said:
Beuli2 said:

I care not.


you dont care that the someone who slaughtered 1000's in the name of islam, was brought to justice? 

No. And who are you to determinate someone's justice?

And who was he to end the lives of 1000's before their time? 

What this has to do with what I said? I think you're thinking wrong of who I am. I am not defending Osama, nor I don't think what he did wasn't good. What I'm talking here who are we to judge others, if we ourselves are sinners as well.



Above: still the best game of the year.

Beuli2 on 03 May 2011
vlad321 said:
The_vagabond7 said:

Honestly, I think he should've been brought back alive and made to face trial and sentenced. Ideally anyway, I certainly won't condemn the brave soldiers for doing what they did. I just don't think descending into barbarism is the way to go about showing the world how advanced of a culture we can and should be. It's a difficult dichotomy, weeding out evil without becoming the sort of thing you're fighting against. But ultimately if we got the bad guys, but we did so by means of torture, illegal imprisonment, and killing innocent people, did we really reduce the net evil in the world, or did we just transfer it to ourselves in the name of retribution, and then called it justice? Dancing over the death of our enemies never serves as a good example to anyone. Food for thought.


Each action has two parts to it, intent and consequences. In this case you are saying that the consequences of what we did are the same, murder. However, the intent is completely different and therefore the actions are very much different.

How so? Both the soldiers and him fought and killed for what they defended. The thing is, the soldiers are seen as the "good guys", while Osama is, according to us, just an heartless evil bastard. Their intent was the same: kill the other for "justice", whatever you think it is.



Above: still the best game of the year.

vlad321 on 03 May 2011
Beuli2 said:
vlad321 said:
The_vagabond7 said:

Honestly, I think he should've been brought back alive and made to face trial and sentenced. Ideally anyway, I certainly won't condemn the brave soldiers for doing what they did. I just don't think descending into barbarism is the way to go about showing the world how advanced of a culture we can and should be. It's a difficult dichotomy, weeding out evil without becoming the sort of thing you're fighting against. But ultimately if we got the bad guys, but we did so by means of torture, illegal imprisonment, and killing innocent people, did we really reduce the net evil in the world, or did we just transfer it to ourselves in the name of retribution, and then called it justice? Dancing over the death of our enemies never serves as a good example to anyone. Food for thought.


Each action has two parts to it, intent and consequences. In this case you are saying that the consequences of what we did are the same, murder. However, the intent is completely different and therefore the actions are very much different.

How so? Both the soldiers and him fought and killed for what they defended. The thing is, the soldiers are seen as the "good guys", while Osama is, according to us, just an heartless evil bastard. Their intent was the same: kill the other for "justice", whatever you think it is.

He killed civilians, and his purpose was to kill civilians. The goal of the soldiers wasn't to kill civilians, but a retaliation to the murder of civilians. One is the action, the other is the reaction. If you can't see the difference, then there is nothing more for us to talk about.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

Beuli2 on 03 May 2011
vlad321 said:
Beuli2 said:
vlad321 said:
The_vagabond7 said:

Honestly, I think he should've been brought back alive and made to face trial and sentenced. Ideally anyway, I certainly won't condemn the brave soldiers for doing what they did. I just don't think descending into barbarism is the way to go about showing the world how advanced of a culture we can and should be. It's a difficult dichotomy, weeding out evil without becoming the sort of thing you're fighting against. But ultimately if we got the bad guys, but we did so by means of torture, illegal imprisonment, and killing innocent people, did we really reduce the net evil in the world, or did we just transfer it to ourselves in the name of retribution, and then called it justice? Dancing over the death of our enemies never serves as a good example to anyone. Food for thought.


Each action has two parts to it, intent and consequences. In this case you are saying that the consequences of what we did are the same, murder. However, the intent is completely different and therefore the actions are very much different.

How so? Both the soldiers and him fought and killed for what they defended. The thing is, the soldiers are seen as the "good guys", while Osama is, according to us, just an heartless evil bastard. Their intent was the same: kill the other for "justice", whatever you think it is.

He killed civilians, and his purpose was to kill civilians. The goal of the soldiers wasn't to kill civilians, but a retaliation to the murder of civilians. One is the action, the other is the reaction. If you can't see the difference, then there is nothing more for us to talk about.

I didn't want to talk to you anyway. Not that I couldn't counter-reply your reply and shatter all your dreams and illusions you have been living since you were 15.



Above: still the best game of the year.