Why is beheading someone worse than dropping a bomb on someone?

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

By "collateral damage" you mean dead civilians. "collateral damage" is a dehumanising term. Using drones also dehumanises the people they wipe out. These are not fellow humans but terrorists/potential terrorists, not civilians but collateral damage, not women, children and the elderly, but potential combatants. The "enemy" becomes nothing more than a fly to be swatted, a worm to be stepped on. If you were there to witness the aftermath of a drone strike you might re-think how much "cleaner" you think they are.

Witnessed many drone strikes up close,

4000+ terrorist permanently removed

300+ collateral death's a lot are unvarified or propaganda linked

Beats having to carpet bomb mile after mile of an area to get one or two bad guys

Grayson wrote: »

But these guys weren't Al-Qaeda members. To be so they would have to have contact with some others or have a membership card
Seriously though, stating that they were violent muslims and there fore Al-Qaeda is a bit of a streach.

They were just nutjobs who had an islamic agenda.

Honestly, I think classifying it as a "terrorist" attack and convening a cobra meeting is giving it more power than it had. 9/11 was a terrorist attack. The mumbai shootings were a terrorist attack. warrington was a terrorish attack. Each was designed to strike terror into the public at large.
This was two psychotic individuals.

without the evidence there am personaly being cautious on believing these guys are pyschotic, psychosis is a hell of a ride,if they had this they woud not be functioning in society at the level they have been doing.
at a severe enough level to cause religeous delusions they woud have been recognised as being in some kind of mental distress long ago,in that case woud be asking where were the friends and family around them if they really were vulnerable?

if anything they woud be in the personality disorder spectrum which in court/legal terms woud not have them labeled under 'insanity' as far as aware.
the younger one didnt seem to have a strong identity of his own.
its possible he coud have been easily led and manipulated into copying the mentality and behavior of the more unstable one who was a drug dealer and had been in prison for it,theres a number of possibilities tbh.
the english courts will come out with it alright they always try to get to the bottom of a crims behavior and environment to give them lashings of understanding,unlike in afghanistan and siria et al where they will get lashings of cat o nine tail whips and beheadings.

Scruffles wrote: »

without the evidence there am personaly being cautious on believing these guys are pyschotic, psychosis is a hell of a ride,if they had this they woud not be functioning in society at the level they have been doing.
at a severe enough level to cause religeous delusions they woud have been recognised as being in some kind of mental distress long ago,in that case woud be asking where were the friends and family around them if they really were vulnerable?

if anything they woud be in the personality disorder spectrum which in court/legal terms woud not have them labeled under 'insanity' as far as aware.
the younger one didnt seem to have a strong identity of his own.
its possible he coud have been easily led and manipulated into copying the mentality and behavior of the more unstable one who was a drug dealer and had been in prison for it,theres a number of possibilities tbh.
the english courts will come out with it alright they always try to get to the bottom of a crims behavior and environment to give them lashings of understanding,unlike in afghanistan and siria et al where they will get lashings of cat o nine tail whips and beheadings.

Well, i did see this.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/24/woolwich-adebowale-witnessed-murder-knife

It's a bit nuts. A guy who was the victim of a frenzied knife attack becomes a frenzied knife killer.

Like I said, we don't really know what was at the root of their actions. But I don't think it's way off the mark to suspect some kind of psychosis etc..,.

lightspeed wrote: »

The people getting bombed and killed are mostly brutal islamist terrorists who despise democracy and demand that people live under devout islamic law.

any evidence to back that up or do you just believe what the western media tells you? i'd suggest that a lot more civilians are being killed by western bombing campaigns and drone strikes then were being told

lightspeed wrote: »

The innocent muslim civilians killed are mostly killed from bombs and attacks from the islamist terrorists themselves and the rest are caught in the crossfire of this Jihad that these animals continue to pursue.

and many many others are being killed by drones and western troops

lightspeed wrote: »

Did you see when the islamists took over Mali a few months ago and the videos of them cutting peoples arms off who they felt had not been abiding by islamic law?

i'm sure it was horriffic, but the west is no better

lightspeed wrote: »

These people have vowed to continue to bomb and slaughter anybody who opposes adopting islamic law and will accept nothing else in the middle east

and wasting billions fighting them won't stop them, their a determined bunch sadly

lightspeed wrote: »

and will also continue to unleash war upon israel

who deliberately sets out to provoke these extremists

lightspeed wrote: »

and any other western allies.

well in fairness if the "western allies" bomb their countries can you be surprised?

lightspeed wrote: »

So as these islamist groups continue to spread like a disease and bomb places like pakistan as they try and establish democracy, and occupy Afghanistan and elsewhere should the western world standby and watch?

they might be best off, they probably supported these terrorist groups at some stage or even created them and armed them in past conflicts, the west isn't this little innocent entity you like to make it out to be

On a similar note. Obama was saying using chemical weapons in Syria would cross a line. What is the difference between shooting, stabbing, beheading, nuclear bombing, poisoning, etc ?

They are all terrible in my mind and it's usually more innocent people than terrorists that are killed or injured.

This post has been deleted.