Iran Shot Down Ukrainian Airiner

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Again Surtur, can we just forget my feelings on the matter. Im asking you to justify why a guy who was fighting against ISIS and was a military commander for his country suddenly comes under the definition of terrorist. Especially when you yourself admitted that you did not even know who this guy was until he was killed. And given ive seen no evidence he was on any terror watch list (I have asked you to correct me if Im wrong on that)

So what exactly have you learned about him in the last few days that makes you certain he was a terrorist? Please explain.

As for why im questioning this? Well.... it doesnt appear he was ever targeting non-combatants. And in terms of it being lawful, whose law is that? U.S. law? International law?

Because it seems to me the definition of terrorist here is anyone on the opposing side to the U.S.

I had this argument with PVS (Bashar) already.

You're not super far off with that last sentence in your post. But there is much more nuance to it than just "opposes the US."

This is the definition of a terrorist according to the FBI:

International terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups who are inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations (state-sponsored).

(1) the term “international terrorism” means activities that—

(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;

(B) appear to be intended—

(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum;

Full text:

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2009-title18/html/USCODE-2009-title18-partI-chap113B-sec2331.htm

^ Interesting. So its not limited to terrorising a civilian population.

At the very least I think there should be a clear distinction between those like ISIS who do terrorise Civilian populations, and those who are targeting more military facilities and even have been shown to try to minimise casualties of non-combatants.

Otherwise just throwing around terms like “Worlds most dangerous Terrorists” seems like a misuse for propaganda purposes.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Again Surtur, can we just forget my feelings on the matter. Im asking you to justify why a guy who was fighting against ISIS and was a military commander for his country suddenly comes under the definition of terrorist. Especially when you yourself admitted that you did not even know who this guy was until he was killed. And given ive seen no evidence he was on any terror watch list (I have asked you to correct me if Im wrong on that)

So what exactly have you learned about him in the last few days that makes you certain he was a terrorist? Please explain.

As for why im questioning this? Well.... it doesnt appear he was ever targeting non-combatants. And in terms of it being lawful, whose law is that? U.S. law? International law?

Because it seems to me the definition of terrorist here is anyone on the opposing side to the U.S.

Because killing an "enemy combatant" doesn't have the same ring as saying "killing a terrorist". The latter hits the emotional cords much harder, especially in America post 9/11.

Originally posted by Robtard
Because killing an "enemy combatant" doesn't have the same ring as saying "killing a terrorist". The latter hits the emotional cords much harder, especially in America post 9/11.

So yeah to help justify it.

You know I never really made such an evil association with the word terrorist. And no thats not due to being Muslim lol, but because I watched every episode of Deep Space Nine back in the 90s, and it was literally slapped in our faces every other episode that Kira used to be a terrorist. Basically Freedom fighters usually do wind up being labelled as terrorists, and sometimes they just flat out have to be.

Very smart show DS9.

Killing Soleimani was just a distraction, everything that Trumpco has said afterwards has been to cover up that the killing was just a distraction.

As Gandhi said: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."

(That wasn't Gandhi)

He's called a terrorist because he is a terrorist. I don't care if he's also murdered other terrorists. Mobsters kill the competition too.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
^ Interesting. So its not limited to terrorising a civilian population.

At the very least I think there should be a clear distinction between those like ISIS who do terrorise Civilian populations, and those who are targeting more military facilities and even have been shown to try to minimise casualties of non-combatants.

Otherwise just throwing around terms like “Worlds most dangerous Terrorists” seems like a misuse for propaganda purposes.

*smh* I already posted the definition that showed it wasn't limited to civilians. Dude was a terrorist and I'm sorry if it bugs you he is being labeled one, condolences 👆

Originally posted by Robtard
Killing Soleimani was just a distraction, everything that Trumpco has said afterwards has been to cover up that the killing was just a distraction.

As Gandhi said: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."

(That wasn't Gandhi)

I wonder if good ole Soleimani helped to "manage" these protesters:

1,500 protesters killed during Iran Uprising, 29 women confirmed dead

https://women.ncr-iran.org/2019/12/16/1500-protesters-killed-during-iran-uprising-29-women-confirmed-dead/

As Mel Gibson said: " They may take our lives but they cannot take our FREEEEEDDDDOOOOM!"

Until they actually do.

This happened in November 2019.

Originally posted by Surtur
*smh* I already posted the definition that showed it wasn't limited to civilians.

You still havent explained why/how he is a terrorist.

I'm sure he was quietly praying to Allah during that period and had no idea what was going on. It's not like he is the head of a group we deemed a terrorist org *and* that he falls under pretty much every definition of terrorist...we're calling him a terrorist cuz truuump

Originally posted by Darth Thor
You still havent explained why/how he is a terrorist.

So before I indulge these games, you are saying this post was in no way a concession that he was a terrorist under the terms DDM laid out? Cuz it sure as hell sounds like one

Originally posted by Darth Thor
^ Interesting. So its not limited to terrorising a civilian population.

At the very least I think there should be a clear distinction between those like ISIS who do terrorise Civilian populations, and those who are targeting more military facilities and even have been shown to try to minimise casualties of non-combatants.

Otherwise just throwing around terms like “Worlds most dangerous Terrorists” seems like a misuse for propaganda purposes.

Originally posted by Surtur
I'm sure he was quietly praying to Allah during that period and had no idea what was going on. It's not like he is the head of a group we deemed a terrorist org *and* that he falls under pretty much every definition of terrorist...we're calling him a terrorist cuz truuump

Again can you explain how he is a terrorist and not just and enemy combatant like Robtard puts it. Whats the difference?

See above before I indulge in your games, cuz I just can't figure out your lament over making sure we note different types of terrorists unless you were in agreement he fell under the definition DDM posted that you responded to.

Originally posted by Surtur
See above before I indulge in your games, cuz I just can't figure out your lament over making sure we note different types of terrorists unless you were in agreement he fell under the definition DDM posted that you responded to.

Are you incapable of explaining yourself?

This is like the other day when I asked you where in your article it showed a civilian was killed and you refused to answer accusing me of trolling and having hidden agendas.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Are you incapable of explaining yourself?

This is like the other day when I asked you where in your article it showed a civilian was killed and you refused to answer accusing me of trolling and having hidden agendas.

Who knew you were just another triggered dumb leftist

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Are you incapable of explaining yourself?

This is like the other day when I asked you where in your article it showed a civilian was killed and you refused to answer accusing me of trolling and having hidden agendas.

You give a response that makes it pretty clear you that you, begrudgingly, clearly agree he falls under the definition of terrorist posted. Then you ask me to explain why he's a terrorist.

How is this not you playing games?

Originally posted by Surtur
You give a response that makes it pretty clear you that you, begrudgingly, clearly agree he falls under the definition of terrorist posted. Then you ask me to explain why he's a terrorist.

How is this not you playing games?

That’s all he does, he is a certified retard.

Originally posted by Surtur
You give a response that makes it pretty clear you that you, begrudgingly, clearly agree he falls under the definition of terrorist posted. Then you ask me to explain why he's a terrorist.

How is this not you playing games?

I mean the Vietnamese fall into that broad definition as well, so were they also terrorists?

Originally posted by snowdragon
I wonder if good ole Soleimani helped to "manage" these protesters:

1,500 protesters killed during Iran Uprising, 29 women confirmed dead

https://women.ncr-iran.org/2019/12/16/1500-protesters-killed-during-iran-uprising-29-women-confirmed-dead/

As Mel Gibson said: " They may take our lives but they cannot take our FREEEEEDDDDOOOOM!"

Until they actually do.

He might have, as I could see quelling civil unrest as being part of his job. Or maybe the Ayatollah has someone else for internal affairs.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
I mean the Vietnamese fall into that broad definition as well, so were they also terrorists?

Anything that falls under the definition...falls under the definition.

Dude I get you have this weird obsession with a dead terrorist, but let it go 👆