The Political Thread

[Yakamaru]

What are your political affiliations and/or views, ideology, if you have any?

Personally I am a Centrist. A mix of Liberal, Conservative, Collectivist and Authoritarian, though I prefer the term Liberal Conservative if we HAVE to put me on the spectrum. All sides on the spectrum have good and bad ideas, which is why I ended up basically in the middle.

Quite frankly I've been thinking about buying and/or reading Mein Kampf and shit by Karl Marx, just so get a notion of where the bastards come from in terms of views and ideology.

 

Follow the forum Rules: No insulting, personal attacks based upon personal beliefs/opinions/ideologies, no degrading language. This thread follows the rules, as it does not say you cannot talk about politics.

[anonyme0273]

Leaning towards the right wing, as I dislike sitting and talking, when action could be done. Had I lived in America during the presidental elections, I would have voted for Donald Trump as the lesser evil.
I do believe in equal rights for everyone, I don't think I am racist in any way, nor am I sexist or a homophobe, I think everyone can make their own decisions based on their beliefs, as forcing someone your ideology is limiting you both from advancing further, or just pushes you away from what you would truly want. 

No, terrorists are NOT to be discussed with, but killed and punished more. Security is of my highest concern and living in fear is wrong. F*ck political correctness, say whatever you want, whoever is insulted by your words can insult you back and if you want to talk sh*t, expect consequences - that goes both sides. 

There can't be a right without a left, so don't get triggered now. This is all just my brief opinion, not going in depth at all, and I am willing to discuss anything with anyone who talks in reason and logic.

[veryhasted]

I'm kind of right-wing, agree with the points anonyme has said. However, I do live in Sweden so being right-wing here is left-wing in the US.. ^^

[Asraiel]

im more center to the left but diffrent country diffrent governement. its for me that everyone has the same right but at the moment most of the worlds habitants doesnt have them thats includes the right to live where they want. country are for me only lines that some peoples draw on a map if i walk to germany or an other country i dont see those lines. and for exapmle the air we breath doesnt belong to countrys 

[Yakamaru]

3 hours ago, anonyme0273 said:

Leaning towards the right wing, as I dislike sitting and talking, when action could be done. Had I lived in America during the presidental elections, I would have voted for Donald Trump as the lesser evil.

The thing is, Donald Trump is NOT evil. At worst, he's only going to be able to do very little during his 8 years of Presidency. At BEST, he can really turn America into what America once was: The best country on the planet, with the second not even being able to keep up. He has already delivered on 5 of his promises, as according to his campaign and what he campaigned for. If it weren't for both Democrats AND Republicans being utter assholes and deluded, in the Senate, Congress and other places, shit would'be been done real fuckin' quick, I can tell you.

3 hours ago, veryhasted said:

I'm kind of right-wing, agree with the points anonyme has said. However, I do live in Sweden so being right-wing here is left-wing in the US.. ^^

Sweden from all the statistics, evidence and all the other crap coming out of it(Angry Foreigner is on point on all of this), I would say is looking very dire, unfortunately. Sweden's a great country and a god damn awesome neighbor for us directly in the West. Although we throw shit at each other daily, we get along just fine as far as countries are concerned.

3 hours ago, anonyme0273 said:

There can't be a right without a left, so don't get triggered now. This is all just my brief opinion, not going in depth at all, and I am willing to discuss anything with anyone who talks in reason and logic.

For every action there is an equal and opposite REaction. The Left does stupid shit, the Right responds. The Right does stupid shit, the Left responds.

All this nationalism, patriotism, anti-globalism and just sheer non-political correctness rise and the rise in populism is a direct reaction to the Left's moronic policies, words and actions. Or rather, lack there of, to be honest.

im more center to the left but diffrent country diffrent governement. its for me that everyone has the same right but at the moment most of the worlds habitants doesnt have them thats includes the right to live where they want. country are for me only lines that some peoples draw on a map if i walk to germany or an other country i dont see those lines. and for exapmle the air we breath doesnt belong to countrys 

And it's fine having those views, mate. Unfortunately, we do not have the luxury to be a globalized population. Not yet, anyway. Until we ALL actually get along, we can't become a global community.

One problem is the idea of "multiculturalism". The idea itself is fine. However, if you import people whose cultures, values, social norms, freedoms, opinions, etc, are sometimes vastly different, sometimes opposite, you're going to have deal with it in some way. However, throwing your ethics, morals, opinions, ideologies and principles out the window is NOT the answer. *cough*Angela Merkel and the EU*cough*

Things such as freedoms, liberties, rights, freedom of speech, etc, are things western cultures and countries are based and founded upon. These are things you just can't find a middle-ground on, as they are founding principles which leads to individual freedom and rights. The individual is the focus of our society.

Edited March 25, 2017 by Yakamaru

[Eddio]

2 hours ago, Yakamaru said:

At worst, he's only going to be able to do very little during his 8 years of Presidency.

Only 8 if he gets re-elected  He might do good we just have to wait and see and hope he turns out to be a good president.  

2 hours ago, Yakamaru said:

The best country on the planet, with the second not even being able to keep up.

That is really relative to what you find important in a country.

 

Just saying  

[Asraiel]

2 hours ago, Yakamaru said:

Things such as freedoms, liberties, rights, freedom of speech, etc, are things western cultures and countries are based and founded upon. These are things you just can't find a middle-ground on, as they are founding principles which leads to individual freedom and rights. The individual is the focus of our society.

siuts in there:

 

[Yakamaru]

22 minutes ago, Eddio said:

Only 8 if he gets re-elected  He might do good we just have to wait and see and hope he turns out to be a good president. 

With how the Left, those who don't like him, and how the MSM acts and behaves, which frankly can be considered utterly childish and insulting to human intellectual honesty, him delivering on his promises and giving America hope again, trolling the everliving FUCK out of the MSM(MSNBC's Maddow and Trump's tax returns is one such awesome troll. Looking back at all of this shit, I am really starting to think that his IQ is at least 130, if not higher, going by how he intentionally is being vague on some things. I think he leaked his own tax returns just troll the media), not being politically correct and being a businessman who creates actual, tangible results, I'd say he's almost guaranteed 8 years.

I say almost, as he might end up being not what I expected of him in these first 4 years of his Presidency.

But yes, I agree. If or when he does stupid shit, I will not ignore it. I will openly criticize him and his actions. Him as a POTUS have a looooot of potential, especially considering his background and personal experience and knowledge.

For now, he's doing what he promised: Put America and Americans first. His actions and promises thus far at least, are in sync.

But gotta give him just a little credit for trolling the everliving fuck out of the media, no?

22 minutes ago, Eddio said:

That is really relative to what you find important in a country.

Just saying  

Indeed. My response to that would be rights, liberties, freedoms, equality. No other country on the planet have anything like the First Amendment, let alone the Second Amendment. America have 27 Amendments. Several more are actually being suggested, to give Americans the means to truly control their own life and immediate surroundings.

Our societies and countries here in the west were in fact heading towards a racially and sexuality blind society. We were heading towards a much truer society based on equality, where who and what you were did not matter, with a few exceptions. Then identity politics happened, and everyone is grouped into all kinds of crap, and it's dividing us even more than Adolf Hitler ever managed to. Sexuality, gender, race, religion, past experiences, traumas, opinions, views, political views, +++. Now, I am not against labels in general. They are extremely useful. But we have WAY too many of them. If we are to be approaching true equality, identity politics needs to go.

 

When you are to give you arguments, I am a firm believer that the moment you go and insult, throw ad hominems and/or do name-calling, your arguments, no matter how reasonable and/or good, are to be thrown out the window. Not because of intellectual dishonesty, but by how you act. You can convince a person much better, or the very least, let them understand your viewpoint, by being friendly, concise on your arguments, and giving good sources. In short, it's a matter of respect. And whether you're there just to argue, or listen and learn.

Edited March 25, 2017 by Yakamaru

[Prokae]

4 hours ago, anonyme0273 said:

Leaning towards the right wing, as I dislike sitting and talking, when action could be done. Had I lived in America during the presidental elections, I would have voted for Donald Trump as the lesser evil.
I do believe in equal rights for everyone, I don't think I am racist in any way, nor am I sexist or a homophobe, I think everyone can make their own decisions based on their beliefs, as forcing someone your ideology is limiting you both from advancing further, or just pushes you away from what you would truly want. 

No, terrorists are NOT to be discussed with, but killed and punished more. Security is of my highest concern and living in fear is wrong. F*ck political correctness, say whatever you want, whoever is insulted by your words can insult you back and if you want to talk sh*t, expect consequences - that goes both sides. 

There can't be a right without a left, so don't get triggered now. This is all just my brief opinion, not going in depth at all, and I am willing to discuss anything with anyone who talks in reason and logic.

^---- this 

[veryhasted]

4 hours ago, Yakamaru said:

Sweden from all the statistics, evidence and all the other crap coming out of it(Angry Foreigner is on point on all of this), I would say is looking very dire, unfortunately. Sweden's a great country and a god damn awesome neighbor for us directly in the West. Although we throw shit at each other daily, we get along just fine as far as countries are concerned.

Yeah, shit has really been going south the last years, however I think that things will turn in the upcoming years (Been noticing that the flow has started to change a little bit). The government have been doing immigration completely wrong, hell even I would do it atleast x100 times better. I have high hopes for SD (Sverige demokraterna, whom are the opposition party) in the election 2018, the change is needed. I love Angry Foreigner's videos. 

Edited March 25, 2017 by veryhasted

[BionicReaper]

5 hours ago, anonyme0273 said:

No, terrorists are NOT to be discussed with, but killed and punished more

If I understood that right, I think that's a little bit of twisted justice. So basically your logic is that anyone that goes against the system should be violently shutdown? Against your system to say. I believe that's basically oppressive, denying the person's freedom. It's saying you have autority over all and that if you don't obey, you get erased. I believe putting them in prison is right though, because if they have killed people or disturbed the daily lives of citizens, it will be to prevent the incident from happening again.

1 hour ago, Asraiel said:

siuts in there:

I personally don't believe in a god, but I outright disagree with this video's ideas. Let's just assume that there exists a god to have this argument. Personally I believe there a lot of "plot holes" in christian history, which makes me believe they were nothing but a fabricated history about their past. People weren't really bright back then so it would make sense they would buy almost anything. Also if said in a way that could be considered true by the majority of the world, the rest would never convince them of the true facts. So basically I'm driving that history out the window. But I believe, if there exists a god, he is doing good by not messing with our free will. I mean yeah the act of the 2 men in the video is evil, I trully do believe that. But still trampling with free will can't be justified by preventing evil. If you looked at the situation, setting aside your bias for your own beliefs, you would understand that the woman's and the child's free will, ain't worth any more than that of the perpetrators. Surely there will be occassions like these that are prevented and some that are not, but that's it. If we humans can't decide for ourselves then would we really be free. Oppressing what we consider evil, basically eradicating it, will actually also obliterate free will, because, no matter how you look at it, whether you used whatever "authority" or "noble cause" you think you had, doesn't that mean that you forced your moral ideas on these people? Also god has never actually interfered. If you ask for something from god he never interferes. It's just you that will think afterwards "God didn't help me, he must have a reason" or "Thank you god for helping me" based on the outcome of the situation. Everything in this world is decided by things in this world. It's the same as people giving responsibility or praise for things, to a person that was just chilling in his bedroom all the time and watching TV. "You can't appreciate good without evil" or "You can't have one without the other" are ideologies that I believe in. Also if you had a test, I could give you all the answers, but would you be really satisfied with yourself? I have put much thought in why I would believe them but put simply, if all you had known is white you would have only white, if all you had known is black you would only black, but a combination of the two, can form amazing pictures don't you think? Wouldn't you enjoy a picture with many colors more than a plain white picture? Some people never think outside the box, and accept whatever truth they want to be true, but that doesn't mean it is always true.

 

Basically my ideology is that there should be one rule: "Everyone can do whatever they want"

I know what you're thinking: So Bionic you are an anarchist that doesn't give a s**t about people's rights.

Well truth is that's only scratching the surface of my idea, but there's more to it. If everyone should be able to do whatever they want that means that whatever anyone does shouldn't infringe anyone else's right on doing whatever they want. And yes I can understand there are some flaws like:

1: I want to build a house there.

2: But I want to make a farm there.

I believe most of those matters could be resolved quickly through some discussion, by reaching some kind of win-win agreement, and I have a solution for this argument as well. That basically is all for me ^^.

 

 

 

 

Edit: On the video I forgot to add the same could be argued in some occassions that god favors good, but really now who gives a shit about that really? Everyone cares about someone NOT SUPPORTING them, but doesn't care about SUPPORTING them 

Edited March 25, 2017 by BionicReaper

[Yakamaru]

19 minutes ago, veryhasted said:

Yeah, shit has really been going south the last years, however I think that things will turn in the upcoming years (Been noticing that the flow has started to change a little bit). The government have been doing immigration completely wrong, hell even I would do it atleast x100 times better. I have high hopes for SD (Sverige demokraterna, whom are the opposition party) in the election 2018, the change is needed. I love Angry Foreigner's videos. 

Waaaaait. What is this? Someone who's a fan of the Sweden Democrats too? Holy crap! Yeah, SD really needs to kick off. Last time I heard they were like 2nd in the polls? They are kicking ass over here, despite the government being full SJW feminists.

Angry Foreigner's awesome. I've watched a lot of his videos.

18 minutes ago, BionicReaper said:

If I understood that right, I think that's a little bit of twisted justice. So basically your logic is that anyone that goes against the system should be violently shutdown? Against your system to say. I believe that's basically oppressive, denying the person's freedom. It's saying you have autority over all and that if you don't obey, you get erased. I believe putting them in prison is right though, because if they have killed people or disturbed the daily lives of citizens, it will be to prevent the incident from happening again.

Terrorists, per definition, are going against not only the laws in the country, but also the population. They can't be negotiated with, and sure as hell won't step down. The IRA(and are the exception to this rule) were terrorists, but they at the very least knew when they went too far. They were terrorists because they believed they had no other choice, and were also only politically motivated. These Islamic terrorists are religiously and politically motivated. They WANT to die, taking us, the kufars, with them. They are not afraid of death, so I say give it to them. Kicking them out of your country and don't let them back in also works.

Sending them to prison I personally find retarded. You give them a chance to convince other inmates to follow your same radical views. No, prison is not the answer. Deportation and a perma-ban on their visa is the answer.

The London terrorist 2 days ago were in fact radicalized in prison, where a lot of radicalization is in fact happening. Sending them to prison is basically just creating more radicals.

18 minutes ago, BionicReaper said:

Snip snip.

This is also not a religious thread, mate, no offense. If you want to talk about religion that badly, I'd recommend you create a new thread.

18 minutes ago, BionicReaper said:

Basically my ideology is that there should be one rule: "Everyone can do whatever they want"

Do whatever you want as long as you follow the laws of the land and respect the culture, people and country you live in. Pretty simple thing to live by, but a good one.

Edited March 25, 2017 by Yakamaru

[veryhasted]

3 minutes ago, Yakamaru said:

Waaaaait. What is this? Someone who's a fan of the Sweden Democrats too? Holy crap! Yeah, SD really needs to kick off. Last time I heard they were like 2nd in the polls? They are kicking ass over here, despite the government being full SJW feminists.

Angry Foreigner's awesome. I've watched a lot of his videos.

Haha, yeah  Correct, they are currently 2:nd( https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinionsmätningar_inför_riksdagsvalet_i_Sverige_2018 ). I hope they can come to some kind of agreement with another party. I do believe that they will increase further later this year and hopefully even more until 2018.

Edited March 25, 2017 by veryhasted

[BionicReaper]

@Yakamaru I was just replying to that guy on religious side. Also I feel like you should take into consideration all of my perspective. From that idea also comes "Do not kill" because you infringe on that person's right on doing whtever he wants. Truly I think sending them to prison might be the wrong option as you said, but I would like to avoid killing someone unless there really is no other way to prevent affecting the rest of the population that are neutral.

Edit: In the prison they might create radicals but if you just keep them in, no one will get hurt. As long as someone doesn't take action, then you don't really have to kill them. Keeping them in prison therefore is just fine.

Edited March 25, 2017 by BionicReaper

[Yakamaru]

36 minutes ago, veryhasted said:

Haha, yeah  Correct, they are currently 2:nd( https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinionsmätningar_inför_riksdagsvalet_i_Sverige_2018 ). I hope they can come to some kind of agreement with another party. I do believe that they will increase further later this year and hopefully even more until 2018.

Ooo, nice. SD's really catching up to the SocialRats, I mean Socialdemocrats.

Yeah, lets cross our fingers for SD. 

34 minutes ago, BionicReaper said:

@Yakamaru I was just replying to that guy on religious side. Also I feel like you should take into consideration all of my perspective. From that idea also comes "Do not kill" because you infringe on that person's right on doing whtever he wants. Truly I think sending them to prison might be the wrong option as you said, but I would like to avoid killing someone unless there really is no other way to prevent affecting the rest of the population.

I do take it into consideration. I just disagree with it, mate, as I've seen first-hand what these asswits are doing in prison, radicalizing inmates. Two good friends of mine died in the Orlando shooting, and another one in Nice, France, last year. I have a bit of a grudge against Islam, as they took 3 good friends away from me.

Some people you just can't negotiate with, and if they had the chance, would kill you without remorse. They would kill as many as possible if they were given the chance. Sending them to prison for life is not an option. The Islamic world, or rather, a lot of imams, have openly called for the death of western culture, and that anyone that doesn't throw themselves under Islamic rule(dhimmi), will be purged and/or enslaved. ISIS and other terror cells, all Islamic in nature, have openly called for a "Holy War" with the western world. This is a war, not some random criminal who have been radicalized.

Erdogan of Turkey's a prime example. Using "refugees" as a weapon. Should read up on some of his quotes. Makes you wanna vomit.

And unless Islam and Muslims are in fact dealt with, these terrorist attacks are only going to escalate more and more until we are seeing one a day in Europe. We are already seeing several day across the planet. Statistics all over, with some few variations in them, show time and time again that a lot of Muslims either don't condemn the actions of ISIS/Hamas, etc, hate the west despite living there, homosexuality should be criminalized, etc.

https://carm.org/islamic-muslim-statistics-on-violence-rape-terror-sharia-isis-welfare

^ These numbers are popping up all over the place, time and time again.

Some cultures you just can't get along with. 1400 years of hostility towards anyone and anything they don't like is proof of this.

Killing someone who is an extremely dangerous individual is doing the rest of the population a favor. It's a form of self-defense where you take the initiative.

Edited March 25, 2017 by Yakamaru

[Secvndvs]

Gonna risk myself on this, but who cares i can make a new account if anything happends. I'm not being disrespectfull anyway.

Im a fascist. One that read the Fascist Manifesto of Mussolini and Gentile, not a Hollywood fascist.

More of a traditionalist fascist than a futurist one. I respect the futurist idea of fascism, but the futurist fanatic ones are just degenerates that end forgetting the basics of the Fascist Manifesto.

[Yakamaru]

5 minutes ago, Secvndvs said:

Gonna risk myself on this, but who cares i can make a new account if anything happends. I'm not being disrespectfull anyway.

Im a fascist. One that read the Fascist Manifesto of Mussolini and Gentile, not a Hollywood fascist.

More of a traditionalist fascist than a futurist one. I respect the futurist idea of fascism, but the futurist fanatic ones are just degenerates that end forgetting the basics of the Fascist Manifesto.

Oh, cool. An actual fascist. Been wanting to actually talking with one for a while, and hear about their ideology and political views.

Do you think you could go into a bit more detail? What you believe in? What you don't believe in? What you oppose? What you stand for?

[anonyme0273]

6 hours ago, BionicReaper said:

If I understood that right, I think that's a little bit of twisted justice. So basically your logic is that anyone that goes against the system should be violently shutdown? Against your system to say. I believe that's basically oppressive, denying the person's freedom.

No, I am not trying to limit anyone here. I should probably explain who I mean by "terrorist". For example, getting in a car and driving people over, killing them - that for me is terrorism. Blowing yourself up in order to kill people, that for me is terrorism. Kidnapping people and then cutting their throats, that for me is terrorism. These people, that do inhuman things to prove their point, to scare others and whose actions are rejeccted by 99% of sensible people, these people should know that no matter what, even if they die during their crazy spree of idiotism, they will suffer. Not only them, but their families and dear ones, for in my opinion, tougher punishment DOES lower crime like this. Stealing and demonstrating is not a crime in my opinion that would be worthy of death, no way. Jail is not a bad thing. But killing people and then expecting to walk amongst them again in a few years, or being seen as a martyr to boost others into doing so - that is so fundamentaly broken, rotten to the core and disgusting, I would not think a second about making a judgement here. Peoples freedom has limits. It's not other peoples feelings, but lives and well being. What I said can be interpreted in different ways, but I believe you understand now a bit more what I tried to say. 

Terrorists are not worthy of a second chance. They took lives and nothing will give these back, and for me, that is a point of no return. 

[BionicReaper]

7 hours ago, anonyme0273 said:

No, I am not trying to limit anyone here. I should probably explain who I mean by "terrorist". For example, getting in a car and driving people over, killing them - that for me is terrorism. Blowing yourself up in order to kill people, that for me is terrorism. Kidnapping people and then cutting their throats, that for me is terrorism. These people, that do inhuman things to prove their point, to scare others and whose actions are rejeccted by 99% of sensible people, these people should know that no matter what, even if they die during their crazy spree of idiotism, they will suffer. Not only them, but their families and dear ones, for in my opinion, tougher punishment DOES lower crime like this. Stealing and demonstrating is not a crime in my opinion that would be worthy of death, no way. Jail is not a bad thing. But killing people and then expecting to walk amongst them again in a few years, or being seen as a martyr to boost others into doing so - that is so fundamentaly broken, rotten to the core and disgusting, I would not think a second about making a judgement here. Peoples freedom has limits. It's not other peoples feelings, but lives and well being. What I said can be interpreted in different ways, but I believe you understand now a bit more what I tried to say. 

Terrorists are not worthy of a second chance. They took lives and nothing will give these back, and for me, that is a point of no return. 

That sounds better, but I was thinking about being in prison until they die. Anyway, I just had a wrong idea of your viewpoint.

Edited March 26, 2017 by BionicReaper

[Yakamaru]

1 hour ago, BionicReaper said:

That sounds better, but I was thinking about being in prison until they die. Anyway, I just had a wrong idea of your viewpoint.

I have to apologize if I seemed a bit.. Snarky in my earlier post. I forgot that some people may not be good at explaining their opinion properly the first time around, and calling myself an intellectual, I am ashamed. Good thing that's clearing up.

How would you personally deal with a terrorist, if I may ask? Lets say a terrorist kills 5-10 people in a shopping mall with a small bomb. He run across you, and you had the chance to take him/her out. Would you take them out, or how would you try and deal with him? If the latter, how would you deal with them?

It may sound like a bit of petty justice, but personally, I would kill him. He's already made the lives of at least 10 other people a living hell, having lost loved ones and friends. And as a terrorist, should be dealt with accordingly. If the terrorist were to escape, they would just do the same shit over again.

Edited March 26, 2017 by Yakamaru

[BionicReaper]

On 26/3/2017 at 11:15 AM, Yakamaru said:

I have to apologize if I seemed a bit.. Snarky in my earlier post. I forgot that some people may not be good at explaining their opinion properly the first time around, and calling myself an intellectual, I am ashamed. Good thing that's clearing up.

How would you personally deal with a terrorist, if I may ask? Lets say a terrorist kills 5-10 people in a shopping mall with a small bomb. He run across you, and you had the chance to take him/her out. Would you take them out, or how would you try and deal with him? If the latter, how would you deal with them?

It may sound like a bit of petty justice, but personally, I would kill him. He's already made the lives of at least 10 other people a living hell, having lost loved ones and friends. And as a terrorist, should be dealt with accordingly. If the terrorist were to escape, they would just do the same shit over again.

@Yakamaru Well its based on the situation. Literally who the people were, why he killed them, why he used a bomb in the first place. I really need the details to decide but supposing all I have is that information... I guess I would try to disable him without killing him if I had the chance, but taking no risks, I would kill him if I had no other option. Can't risk anybody's life for my ideals.

 

I'd like to expand a bit on how I think the only rule that should exist is: "Everyone should be able to do what they want"

You see what keeps spinning on my mind is that there's no "real" reason for anything. I mean yeah humans talk to each other because it makes them feel better, but why really? You say because they have to, but it matters to them, it doesn't really matter, nothing really matters. It's just a feeling I get when I ask why. You might be a mafia leader, you might be a charity supporter, the way the world sees it, you're both worth the same. It's really hard to explain with words but you get my idea. So the only way to decide on a true fair ruleset is to use a moral code EVERYONE agrees on. And what does everyone want to do? Whatever they want, right? Well I guess that's what should happen. Should a group of people agree on forming a society with more rules, so be it, but not affect the ones that don't want the extra rules.

 

Finally you should think twice before killing most of the time. It's a choice that won't turn left, ever. Maybe you kill someone that actually did the right thing, because you and the world are blinded by anger from whatever ways he utilized, but if one day you understand that, you shouldn't have killed the good guy? You won't be able to say sorry, that's for sure. Maybe a person bombed a public speech of a president killing more than 1000 people, including the president. Well fuck that guy, is what most people would think. But what if that president was planning to secretly nuke another country, potentially starting a war and killing way lots more people? Well if your opinion still hasn't changed, think of it like this: Do you watch out for ants when you are walking? That's surely sounds like you just don't care about the ants, but to be honest, shouldn't the ants know where it is a bad idea to go to? In this occassion I believe it was the people's attending the speech fault for failing to actually read the vibe, or because they simply wouldn't care. And I can't even use ants as an example, because ants always have a way to survive being stepped on. These people would be more like a mouse walking among a crowd.

 

Edit: I mean that terrorist you mentioned might've been good behind the scenes and the others just got caught up in the mess. In a normal person's eyes he looks like a unjustifiable killer, but there might be some deeper meaning.

Edit 2: Ik its not always but there's that 1% that might actually fuck you up. Chances mean nothing, it's just about discouraging or encouraging people, imo at least.

Edited March 28, 2017 by BionicReaper

[Yakamaru]

2 hours ago, BionicReaper said:

@Yakamaru Well its based on the situation. Literally who the people were, why he killed them, why he used a bomb in the first place. I really need the details to decide but supposing all I have is that information... I guess I would try to disable him without killing him if I had the chance, but taking no risks, I would kill him if I had no other option. Can't risk anybody's life for my ideals.

 

I'd like to expand a bit on how I think the only rule that should exist is: "Everyone should be able to do what they want"

You see what keeps spinning on my mind is that there's no "real" reason for anything. I mean yeah humans talk to each other because it makes them feel better, but why really? You say because they have to, but it matters to them, it doesn't really matter, nothing really matters. It's just a feeling I get when I ask why. You might be a mafia leader, you might be a charity supporter, the way the world sees it, you're both worth the same. It's really hard to explain with words but you get my idea. So the only way to decide on a true fair ruleset is to use a moral code EVERYONE agrees on. And what does everyone want to do? Whatever they want, right? Well I guess that's what should happen. Should a group of people agree on forming a society with more rules, so be it, but not affect the ones that don't want the extra rules.

 

Finally you should think twice before killing most of the time. It's a choice that won't turn left, ever. Maybe you kill someone that actually did the right thing, because you and the world are blinded by anger from whatever ways he utilized, but if one day you understand that, you shouldn't have killed the good guy? You won't be able to say sorry, that's for sure. Maybe a person bombed a public speech of a president killing more than 1000 people, including the president. Well fuck that guy, is what most people would think. But what if that president was planning to secretly nuke another country, potentially starting a war and killing way lots more people? Well if your opinion still hasn't changed, think of it like this: Do you watch out for ants when you are walking? That's surely sounds like you just don't care about the ants, but to be honest, shouldn't the ants know where it is a bad idea to go to? In this occassion I believe it was the people's attending the speech fault for failing to actually read the vibe, or because they simply wouldn't care. And I can't even use ants as an example, because ants always have a way to survive being stepped on. These people would be more like a mouse walking among a crowd.

 

Edit: I mean that terrorist you mentioned might've been good behind the scenes and the others just got caught up in the mess. In a normal person's eyes he looks like a unjustifiable killer, but there might be some deeper meaning.

Edit 2: Ik its not always but there's that 1% that might actually fuck you up. Chances mean nothing, it's just about discouraging or encouraging people, imo at least.

The question should've been kinda simple to answer..

What is right and wrong are subjective up to a certain point for the majority of people. Moral and ethical relativism is a fact up until a certain point. And that point is the law, and the majority decide those laws, and empathy/sympathy, and putting yourself in someone elses shoes. If you do not follow the laws, you are, per definition, a criminal. In some cases, depending on what you do, you are a terrorist. "Treat others as you want them to treat you". If someone intends to bomb the everliving shit out of you, your job is not to sit still and let it happen. If you even remotely like living, take action and stop the terrorist, by any means necessary.

Terrorists does not deserve any sympathy, as they wouldn't give you any in the first place. They may have done something they believed to be good, but their ACTIONS themselves are atrocities, and are directly contradictory to what they claim to believe. The ends does not justify the means, the same way the thought behind an action does not justify said action.

As for the President question: I'd try and only get the President, leaving the civilians out of it. It's a matter of numbers. It's ethically right to kill one or several people to save millions. Is it morally right? Questionable, at best. You can't come and say, after those nukes have been dropped, that you NOW should kill the President, AFTER the fact, when that atrocity could have been avoided in the first place. The core idea behind countering terrorism is to PREVENT it from happening in the first place. If an atrocity can be avoided by killing one person, you should take that step.

A terrorist does not abide by the law, and you should set yourself up to follow those same principles and standards: Which are non-existent to begin with. If you manage to give the terrorist the slip, then you are responsible for any action they may do afterwards. You could have prevented further deaths by taking someone out, who does not value the lives of others in the first place.

And yes, I would've shot that terrorist. I do not give a single fuck if he's "good", when his ACTIONS, by bombing and killing people, say the complete opposite. If your beliefs/thoughts are not in sync with your actions, you have some serious problems. Actions speak a million times louder than words. 

As far as terrorists and violent criminals are concerned, if you think twice about shooting you may end up dead yourself the next moment. A moment's hesitation can and will kill you, as seen too often by videos all over, especially police videos. I will not think twice about shooting someone who is about to attack me. That clearly goes for terrorists, as well.

You cannot have tolerance over the intolerant. That is only going to cause problems, as the repeated terrorist attacks keep showing.

Edited March 28, 2017 by Yakamaru

[Eddio]

This fierce debate though 

[sylvix95]

Whatever you guys opinions is, I'll let you know that I disagree.

Edited March 29, 2017 by sylvix95

[Eddio]

26 minutes ago, sylvix95 said:

Whatever you guys opinions is, I'll let you know that I disagree.

Good argument