Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

'But what about Syria'. Would I be unreasonable to tell this woman to go and fuck herself?

219 replies

Runny · 24/05/2017 08:38

I have a Facebook friend who I think it's fair to say has some very extreme political views that she's not afraid to air. Normally I think live and let live, but she really gets her knickers in a knot over things like the Western bombings of Syria, refugees, Israel etc. I should say I'm also against the bombings in Syria and have donated to refugee charities.

Since the Paris terror attacks she's become very vocal about how Western media organisations ignore the terror attacks that happen in the Middle East, lots of 'why don't we change our FB profile pics to Palestinian flags' and the like. I let that go, even though I think she's talking out of her arse and it's blatantly obvious why our media focus on stuff happening in Europe. Since then with every terror attack that's happened she's posted similar stuff, even when the Westminster attacks happened the other week. This person lives in Central London so it bloody happened on her died doorstep and she was still at it even then!

Then yesterday arrived, my feed was full of comments about how awful and horrific the events in Manchester were. She was uncharacterstically quiet for most of the day, then late afternoon she posts a status 'I weep for the children, children everywhere'. What followed was a load of guff implying it was a 'false flag' designed to rig the election in the Tories favour. I hate the Tories as much as the next person, but come on that's just lunacy!

She's been at it most of the night, posts about fucking Syria, don't forget about Syria. Seriously, there's a time and a place for her crack pot opinions, and I really want to comment telling her she's a fucking insensitive idiot for spouting this now. WIBU to do this? She seems to have a complete empathy bypass. I'm so angry reading her posts, she posts this guff just hours after children have been blown to bits at a pop concert. What the hell is wrong with her?

OP posts:
JuicyStrawberry · 24/05/2017 10:46

If she lost a loved one on Monday then she wouldn't be thinking "But what about Syria?!"

Now isn't the time for that. She would want compassion from people without "But what about Syria" being flung around. People lost their children in a tragedy that happened about 20 minutes down the road from me. So close to home and I admit that I have cried about it but never cried about what goes on in Syria. It's sad but this attack on Monday has left the country completely heartbroken.
She needs to pipe down and have a bit of respect for the people who have been killed in Manchester. If that was her child who was killed, she would NOT be saying "What about Syria?".

Rockhopper81 · 24/05/2017 10:47

Her general sentiment isn't wrong, but her timing is shite.

False flags do exist, but this wasn't one.

I understand the need for media coverage, but it feels like it goes on too much sometimes. When the Westminster incident happened, it went on way past when there was anything 'new' to say. What's the point? At that point, it's just feeding the terrorists intent in publicising their ideology.

People in Manchester have my sincerest sympathies, as did the people in London/Paris/Brussels etc. And as do the people of Syria and other middle eastern countries who are facing terror.

I love 'Atrocity Top Trumps' and intend to get that into conversation at the earliest possible convenience, incidentally.

Tazerface · 24/05/2017 10:48

I agree with her on the media and Facebook front. But I have lost friends by having a political opinion so FB in particular is fluff and private groups only now for me.

The false flag stuff is abhorrent, I'm with you on calling her out about conspiracy theories but they are completely separate to the other stuff.

Runny · 24/05/2017 10:49

'Atrocity top trumps' is a brilliant, as is 'Atrocity Olympics' as coined by someone else on this thread.

OP posts:
mikeyssister · 24/05/2017 10:52

68 children were killed in a bomb blast on Saturday out of 126 killed. These were evacuees trying to escape the killings and this was just one incident.

Unless a person is directly affected by the attack in Manchester I can understand why they would consider the Syrian children equally as important.

PumaLeopard · 24/05/2017 10:53

I think OP is disgusting and highly offensive in the way she has referred to Syria. Your 'friend' is right and has a lot more compassion, which is more than what I can say for you.

CaoNiMartacus · 24/05/2017 10:54

False flags do exist. Bay of Pigs, sinking of the Lusitania, Mukden Incident, Operation Northwoods, and lots more. It's fucking terrifying to think that our own government (vaunted as the good guys) would perpetrate atrocities against us for political gain. That's why nobody likes to entertain the prospect. It's even more disgusting than the threat coming from the outside. But it has happened throughout history.

I'm not saying this was a false flag. I don't know if it was. I don't know if it wasn't. Either way, people died in a horrific way.

mustiwearabra · 24/05/2017 10:56

I don't disagree with her. What happened in Manchester is equally as disturbing as what takes place in Syria, Iraq, Nigeria etc every single day. That's the difference though: it's every single day and the vast majority of the western population don't bat an eyelid at it. Just unfriend her.

PumaLeopard · 24/05/2017 10:56

What I don't understand is how you can cry for what happened yesterday AND NOT cry when they show little Syrian children gassed to death or dying from poisoning.

nancy75 · 24/05/2017 10:57

I have a question about us meddling in the middle East - we did bomb Libya not so long ago and if I remember rightly we got involved because people there were begging us to help. In Syria we are condemned for bombing and condemned for not doing enough to help.
What is the answer? Going forward do we get involved or do we leave other countries to fight their own battles despite many civilians being killed?
We, the West, are always the bad guys what are we supposed to do going forward?

Wonderflonium · 24/05/2017 10:58

This reminds me of the issues with gun control in the US. After a big massacre it's not the "time and the place" to discuss the 2nd amendment (or indeed anything to do with limiting access to any kind of weapon), but no one cares to discuss it when the dust has cleared.

Seems to me there has been a "time and a place" to discuss feelings of wanting vengeance and seeking easy solutions (send em back, our values, final solution etc) but more nuanced discussions about western culpability/foreign policy/islamophobia helping in the recruitment of more nutjobs must wait.

Certain political strains are allowed to score points but not others. The right wing reactionary authoritarians have been making out like bandits over this. I guess because their brand of opportunism looks like grief but to be sure, they don't give a fuck about the victims and survivors.

Bettyspants · 24/05/2017 10:59

Puma, completely agree Angry

Runny · 24/05/2017 11:00

Say hypothetically you did want to stage a 'false flag', how on earth would you manage to convince someone to strap a bomb to themselves and detonate it in a crowded room? I suppose they'll start saying the bomber didn't even exist next.

I remember some people saying the Jo Cox murder was a false flag to try and swing the Brexit vote in favour of remain, yes because obviously that one worked didn't it?

OP posts:
YoloSwaggins · 24/05/2017 11:01

we did bomb Libya not so long ago and if I remember rightly we got involved because people there were begging us to help.

No, we got involved basically because our leaders didn't like Gaddafi. Amongst many things he wanted to start a new gold-backed African currency to rival the dollar, and that was the tipping point.
www.africanexponent.com/post/new-evidence-the-real-reason-gaddafi-was-killed-2706 - many other sources you can check for yourself.
If you think we interfere only for "good reasons" you are very naive. It's mainly for oil and money and arms sales. Look at Iraq.

YoloSwaggins · 24/05/2017 11:02

how on earth would you manage to convince someone to strap a bomb to themselves and detonate it in a crowded room?

Just like ISIS do?

onemorecupofcoffeefortheroad · 24/05/2017 11:03

I have a Syrian friend who lives in the UK - last month she lost all contact with her home town for 14 days after it was bombed by Russia. Her mum, her sister, her niece all live there - she had no way of finding out whether they were alive or dead - internet and telephone lines all down. I had visions of them all under rubble and couldn't believe how calm she was - she didn't even mention it until i asked, but then, as she said, they are used to it - it's the norm - at the age of 5 her niece has known nothing else. In the end they were okay - but who knows for how much longer.

So, your friend does have a point although her timing really wasn't terrific. There's a time and a place to bang your drum and the aftermath of the Manchester disaster wasn't it.

LaurieMarlow · 24/05/2017 11:03

What wonder said. With bells on.

JustAnotherPoster00 · 24/05/2017 11:04

You're right. They are deliberately targeted by Assad's henchmen

Where as the uk/us drone strike dont deliberately target children they just wipe out entire streets. We seem to like selling weapons to people who make this situation worse in the ME

In my opinion the rolling coverage of terrorist events should stop, were basically telling any crackpot terrorist organisation if you successfully do something we will give you the publicity you want that will encourage you to do more, I think we should have a self imposed ban, were we as a country stand up and say do this to use and we will deny you any publicity for this

We also need stricter control on recruiting sergeants for these terrorist organisations people like katie hopkins, nigel farage, ukip, britain first, bnp, the s*n, the mail, these people make already disenfranchised people feel like they are powerless and then people like ISIS (who I will now call goat fuckers international because fuck them) come along and say look how your own country hate you, look at the headlines about people just like you from the same part of the world as your family, we wont do that to you Hmm

The way I believe we should tackle this and I know this really isnt a popular view but we 'kill' them with kindness, society needs a change, a kinder way of being, imagine trying to recruit people who felt like they were excepted and valued members of this society, whether they were born here or came here as refugees, and gave them a safe place to grow their family, to work, for their children to play, to go to school or concerts.

How would we change this?

  1. Id start by not selling arms to ME countries, you might be a refugee but 'we had no hand in doing that to you, come in.' Welcome those refugees who want to come to Britain, give them somewhere safe, even if there's a time limit before their circumstances are re-examined, and let them try and heal from what they've been to
  1. Get rid of faith schools in their entirety and bring in free education across the bored, its going to be a lot harder to recruit people who have a good education, a good job, healthcare, social care provision, a social security net underneath them.
  1. Stop going out and on one side of your face praising the emergency services while on the other side knowing your are year on year cutting their funding and expecting them to do more, its no wonder were having to call in the military at times like this because she's cut the funding so hard.
  1. Stop getting involved in wars that arent sanctioned by the UN
  1. Stop rolling news coverage of attacks such as this.

Sorry its a rambly post and I'm sorry (really sorry because this ramble comes from a place of love for humanity) if there is anything in there that might have offended anyone

nancy75 · 24/05/2017 11:04

If you think we interfere only for "good reasons" you are very naive. It's mainly for oil and money and arms sales. Look at Iraq

So the answer is we should never get involved? (I know this might seem like i'm looking for an argument - I'm not it's a genuine question)

JustAnotherPoster00 · 24/05/2017 11:07

*accepted

*other errors I left in there Confused Blush

JustAnotherPoster00 · 24/05/2017 11:08

So the answer is we should never get involved?

We should only get involved at the behest of the UN

MerryMarigold · 24/05/2017 11:08

how on earth would you manage to convince someone to strap a bomb to themselves and detonate it in a crowded room?

You wouldn't need to, you could just turn a blind eye instead of stopping it.

Although I don't think that's the case.

brasty · 24/05/2017 11:09

I have two face book friends who are saying this. I am not impressed.

nancy75 · 24/05/2017 11:10

But getting involved at the behest of the UN still makes us wrong in the eyes of groups like ISIS? Would that make us any safer?

JustAnotherPoster00 · 24/05/2017 11:11

nancy I think it would be harder to lay blame at our feet though

Swipe left for the next trending thread