It has been said he would have been safer in Afghanistan.

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail....Cyprus-nightclub.html

What a tragic story, a teenage British soldier, waiting in Cyprus for deployment to Afghanistan, allegedly stabbed to death by three British pass-port holders.

He and his fellow soldiers may have been disobeying military rules, but did this young man deserve to be killed?

[Mick-Talbot]

O' dear , it looks like there has bee some tit for tat reporting. I didn't think any of it was that bad.

[andy-hughes]

"... did this young man deserve to be killed?"

Well, since of the top of my head I can't think of any person, youg or old who ever 'deserves' to be killled, i guess the short answer to your Question is No.

[andy-hughes]

"It has been said he would have been safer in Afghanistan." - well to be accurate, he would have been safer in his barrackes, where he was supposed to be. There is no guarentee what so ever that this soldier would have been 'safer in Afghanistan', that is the sort of hysterical headlining that The Mail adores - mainly because it is meaningless when thought about for a moment, but it hits the spot with the Self-Righteous Brothers who are not over-impressed with foreign types holding British passports.

[Zeuhl]

Well aog if you want to 'get real' perhaps you can explain how 'really' you would have described this incident any differently if the poor chap 'really' had been stabbed by three knife wielding assaillants

I suggest even more confidently now that you used that misleading description (consciously or subconsciously) because it implied the guy was outnumbered by three armed assaillants and made it seem even more ugly than it already was.

And btw

<<For example, when one says a British soldier was gunned down by a group of insurgents, one does not necessarily mean that they all shot one bullet from each of their own individual guns, and all of the insurgents bullets killed the British soldier at the same time. >>

I'm afraid that is a nonsense excuse;

A) because it would only be used in the most confused of circumstances when one doesn't know how many attackers landed shots - in the Cyprus case it is already very clear who was stabbed by how many
B) anyone who can actually write English would put something like <a British soldier was gunned down in an attack by a group of insurgents>

As in this case-

<allegedly stabbed to death in a fight with three British pass-port holders.>

It's not difficult, it's not pedantic - it's just a matter of being accurate, honest and truthful

[sp1814]

AOG

Are you really asking whether this young chap 'deserved to die'?

I'm sorry, but I have to take issue with that.

This is truly a truly strange post, and I am really disappointed in the way you've phrased the question. Imagine if you were one of the relatives of this young man coming across this page. Seriously...I want you to put yourself in this young man's mum's position. Don't you think you could've worded the question with a little more sensitivity?

'Deserve to be killed'

Seriously, how could you justify that as a question?

I cannot tell you how sad this story makes me feel, and how utterly disappointed I am in your clumsy choice of words.

Do you think any of us would respond with, "Yeah...he deserved to die".

Or was there an ulterior motive to your post?

Did you want to alert us to the story because the accused are of Pakistani/Somali descent?

You have NO idea how much I want to believe you had a higher motive for posting this question, and I honestly, honestly, honestly hope you can prove my suspicions wrong.

Because if you are using the death of this young man to score race points, then my estimation of you will take an almighty battering.

Please prove me wrong...I really want you to.

[Mick-Talbot]

Good luck with that, sp

[Booldawg]

it just yet another sad tale of a drunken argument getting out of hand. I think the victims profession or the murderers ethnicity is purely incidental.

[FredPuli43]

Oh,yes. The three arrested had Pakistani and Somali backgrounds and are 'passport holders'. That's obviously material, or the Daily Mail would not have mentioned it. We await people who are Scots born and bred over generations, of the Campbells, say, being described by the Daily Mail as 'British passport holders with Scottish backgrounds'.

Of course the assailants thought he deserved to die, aog. The alleged assailants were plainly Muslims and they were offended, so he was killed. Isn't that how Islam works, aog? Is that your thinking, in asking why he deserved to die? If not, whatever was it that prompted that question?

[anotheoldgit]

I am getting rather sick and tired with your self righteous condemnation of my posts.

Am I the only one on this site who must ask not only on what news stories I post, but also which news source I get them from, and now how they should be worded?

You dare to ask " Imagine if you were one of the relatives of this young man coming across this page. Seriously...I want you to put yourself in this young man's mum's position".

Well I tell you what if I was a relative of this late young man, I would have been disgusted at those on here and that includes yourself, that you and others have not equally condemned whoever killed their son or relative, but have instead just took the opportunity to have a cheap dig and criticism at the person (myself) who posted this story.

But I am not naive enough to think that that is the only reason for your actions, the real reason is because, (although I have never mentioned the fact) the suspected attackers and consequent killer, happened to be of Pakistani/Somali descent, and we all know that they and similar, should never be shown to be the 'bad boys'

But what the hell does that matter? it was bad enough he had to face the hell hole of Afghanistan, and perhaps was spending those last few precious hours so as to perhaps have a drink and a little relaxation before embarking on a tour where he could face death 24/7.

So know I repeat (and make no excuses for it) he didn't deserve to be killed, and I would have said the same if he had been killed in Afghanistan, just like I always post when one of our Service Personnel is killed, unlike some who generally take the opportunity once more to turn it into some form of anti-AOG/ anti-British post.

[anotheoldgit]

That was primary addressed to sp1814, but also to all those others and you know who you are.

[sandyRoe]

I wonder if he would have been censored if he had posted a contrary opinion here in AB?

[andy-hughes]

"That was primary addressed to sp1814, but also to all those others and you know who you are."

That will be me then - plus any others who are condedmned by AOG as 'self-righteous' - fine, I have no problem with what I have posted.

"So know I repeat (and make no excuses for it) he didn't deserve to be killed,"

and I repeat, and I make no exuses for it either - i can't think of anyone who does 'deserve' to be killed.

Obviously you have some sort of crieteria in mind whereby some sections of humanity deserve a violent death, and others do not. How else can you differentiate, and single out this young man as not deserving of such a fate? Ergo, you must have decided that others do.

What a cold hard place your logic lives in.

[anotheoldgit]

andy-hughes

/// "So know I repeat (and make no excuses for it) he didn't deserve to be killed," ///

/// and I repeat, and I make no exuses for it either - i can't think of anyone who does 'deserve' to be killed. ///

Don't play with words Andy, especially when it is you who have regularly stated that the typed word can put on an entirely different meaning to a statement than the spoken word.

/// What a cold hard place your logic lives in. ///

I could also say the same regarding your logic, especially when your logic only reads into something that you yourself only agrees with and also what you choose to read into it.

[andy-hughes]

"Don't play with words Andy" - who'se playing? You have chosen to use the phrase 'did this young mandeserve to be killed' and I and others have picked you up on that, because you obviously infer that there must be people in the world who do 'deserve to be killed' and that is an appalling moral position to adopt - and quite rightly you have been robustly tackled for it.

As toi my logic agreeing with what i think and read into things - how else would it work> To work any other way would mean it would cease to be my logic, it would be someone else's, or god forbid, yours.

[sp1814]

You have not explained yourself.

Your wording was disgraceful, and I am very disappointed in you.

You asked 'did this an deserve to be killed'.

That is disgusting.

No more to say on the subject really.

I'm very disappointed in you. I thought you had standards.

You posted this question because you wanted to do some race point scoring,and you used a dead lad to do it.

It is the lowest you have sunk, and believe me - that's up against some pretty strong competition.

Actually...I am going to tell you why your post is disgusting because you can't see what so many others can.

There is no reason to ask "did this young man deserve to be killed?"

The reason there is no need to ask it, is because it will receive a unanimous answer of 'No'.

The question was raised because you wanted to introduce the race of his attackers.

I know this, you know this and everyone else does. Thes no point trying to deny is because it's the big purple elephant in the room.

I really don't know what's happening to you lately AOG. You used to be entertaining, but I sense a really nasty streak entering your threads.

Perhaps you should think less of volume and more of quality, because recently you're all over the place.

You may choose to ignore this lengthy response, or you may wish to respond. Either way, I won't be returning to this thread because it's singularly distasteful and quite unpleasant.

One day you may looks back on this unfortunate episode and see what I can see.

I hope in future you are a little more considered in the inflammatory way you use the deaths of soldiers. None of the rest of us do it...

[anotheoldgit]

andy-hughes

/// because you obviously infer that there must be people in the world who do 'deserve to be killed' and that is an appalling moral position to adopt ///

So you think that a mad dog shouldn't be killed, or some lunatic gunman who is going on a killing spree, mowing down innocent men, women and children, so he also shouldn't deserve to be killed?

What about Hitler, Himmler, Idi Amin, Osama bin Laden, Gadffi, Saddam Hussein, etc, etc.

Yes there are some people in the world who do deserve to be killed, but then you and your fellow 'handwringers' obviously wouldn't agree, you would rather take the approach that they should be sat down with, so as to try and see why they have been such monsters, and given all the help and support that they never gave to their victims.

No I make no apologies for the fact that I think some people do deserve to be killed, BUT THIS YOUNG SOLDIER DIDN'T, but if he had been fighting with someone who purposely went out with a knife, (as it appears that the one that killed this young soldier did) and in the scuffle the knife owner got killed, then yes that person would have also deserved to be killed.

[andy-hughes]

AOG - interesting that the main thrust of your response starts with the word 'So' - and as per my recent thread, that is followed by a screed of rebuttal to points I did not make, and views I am not proven to hold on the basis of this exchange - nicely proving the point I made on that particular thread.

And so to the gust of your response -

I am not so arrogant as to think that I have the right to separate sheep from goats and arbitrarily dish out summary exections to people whom I feel should not continue to exist. I have to confess that my ego and sense of self-righteousness do not extend that far, and on that point we have to differ.

I am not a 'hand-wringer' - what an odd epithet to use.

An din conclusion, one of your previous responses referred to you being 'tired' of 'attacked' for your posts.

Speaking as someone who has never been 'attacked' on the AB ever, I do wonder if you ought to consider that maybe the fault lies with your continuously provocative and imflamatory opinions which you voice so freely, rather than the misguided views of many and sundry AB'ers, myself included, who take issue with you on a regular basis.

It's something to think about.

[anotheoldgit]

andy-hughes

/// AOG - interesting that the main thrust of your response starts with the word 'So' - and as per my recent thread, ///

Of which you cowedly chose not to return to when you found yourself isolated in the minority.

/// I am not so arrogant as to think that I have the right to separate sheep from goats and arbitrarily dish out summary exections to people whom I feel should not continue to exist. I have to confess that my ego and sense of self-righteousness do not extend that far, and on that point we have to differ. ///

You use the words 'Arrogant' 'Ego' and 'Sense of Self-Righteous' which is rather rich coming from you.

Who says one should arbitrarily dish out summary executions to people whom they feel should not continue to exist?

I was merely responding to your rather strange statement that no body deserves to be killed.

/// Speaking as someone who has never been 'attacked' on the AB ever, ///

Now how arrogant and self-righteous is that, may I once again refer you to your 'SO' thread?

/// I do wonder if you ought to consider that maybe the fault lies with your continuously provocative and imflamatory opinions which you voice so freely ///

'FREELY' ah! isn't that a lovely word, when some would wish to control what news stories one chooses to enter for debate, the news source from whence it came and even how one constructs their words?

As I have said before, I will not be censored so as to fit in with the rest of the Left-Wingers on this site.

/// rather than the misguided views of many and sundry AB'ers, myself included, who take issue with you on a regular basis. ///

I don't really understand these words, are you actually admitting that sundry ABers yourself included posses misguided views? now that is the first thing that you have said that I agree with.

/// Have you ever wondered why you and other ABers take issue with me on a regular basis? ///

Could it be that this site is predominately occupied by the 'Left' who all group together to not only disagree with persons who do not sing from their hymn sheet, but will insult, slander, and if all that fails, accuse them of saying things that they have not.

Have you ever taken part in open debate, and I do not mean on a web site where one can hide behind their monitor, I mean in a debating society where a subject is put up for debate, and generally there are equal sides 'FOR' and 'AGAINST'?

There is no place for rudeness in these debates, everyone, although you might not agree with them, is given an equal chance to have their say, how different from this site where some are spoiling honest debate because it doesn't fit in with their particular agenda.

Congratulations to the few 'FREE THINKERS' on this site, and to all those 'huddled' together ........ what can I say?

Well I think I have.