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

[Runny]

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?

*I specifically referenced regimes that had not been put in place by the West.

Which ones would they be then?*
.... err, the names of the countries referred to in the same post that you c&p'd that quote from?

The West did not put Saddam in place, it did not put Assad in place.

The 'stand back and let them sort out their own problems' approach didn't really work in Germany 1933-39 did it? Nor in the Balkans in the early '90s. We did however stand back and let Rwanda suffer a mass act of genocide and more recently have done little to aid the rescue of the Boko Haram girls. But hey, let's just leave them to it eh?

I find the usage of terrorized and dead children to guilt others who can do feck all for having feelings for others really...disturbing and shitty. What is the point? Who gains? The "friend" appears more empathetic, using Syrians as a prop? What exactly are they doing or proposing to help other than bashing others on facebook to score points? Does not talking about Manchester make anything better for Syrians?

If they really wanted to bring a question on media, surely they would bring up a comparable event not just using everything that happened there which is impossible to cover. What about the Phillipines - they had a Daesh/ISIS attack that started yesterday. Latest report still has them rampaging and rising death tolls. Of course, not much we can do there either though the whole 'they bombed us into doing it' doesn't hold much water there...

There is nothing in going on about 'false flags' or 'what about ...' that helps anyone nor does it really show caring. It's point scoring among themselves. Either give something people can do or get off the pot, but trying to stop people caring about one thing because of other things makes no sense, surely we should expand what we care about...

I agree with your friend, insofar as no-one seems remotely as moved when it's kids dying as a result of military action in Syria. However, the only person I said this to was DH, in private. It would indeed be atrocity top trumps to have said anything more publicly, at least yesterday and today.

I came to the conclusion (in an attempt to explain the disparity of responses) that the deaths of children at a pop concert are more likely to cause widespread shock than the deaths of children in a war zone; you mentally class one group as being at risk while the others are not. Also, one would assume that the poor people who died in Manchester were intentionally murdered while all the children and others who have died in wars were, most of the time, killed by accident. As a society I think we tend to find intentional murder more horrifying than accidental death (although it makes no real difference to the victim, surely).

It's just devastating though, whoever it is, wherever it is

Avoiding yes exactly. Like the homeless guy outside the arena who helped tend to the injured - no doubt he has a sad history but it didn't take away his humanity. There''s no evidence that the bomber had any material disadvantages in life at all, apart from his father's extremism which no doubt influenced his worldview.

Has Corbyn advocated war on the Jewish people? Is that you Katie/Theresa?

Is that you Ken/George?

Corbyn's friends in Hamas and Hezbollah have a charter dedicated to the eradication of all Jews (not just Israeli ones).

If Western forces blow up your town, your family and your entire life, you cannot be surprised that some of these people get radicalised (or "have an axe to grind" as someone put it) to believe the West is evil and go on to commit atrocities.

But loads of countries have had foreign or Western interference and the people don't go around blowing people up in other countries. It's just an excuse. Most of the people killed in the middle east are killed by fellow Muslims. The Sunni-Shia schism has been in existence for centuries. They also persecute their own minorities like Ahmadis and the middle east has more or less been ethnically cleansed of non-Muslim minorities yet they don't go around killing people. For example, the Yazidiis, Bahaai, Christians, Jews, Hindus and Zoroastrians have been completely decimated yet I doubt we are going to see them killing people all over the middle east.

mothertruckr yes, people with the "all our fault" narrative tend to be very ignorant of how minorities in the MENA continue to be eradicated. Or it doesn't fit their narrative.

And how as non believers, we in the west should all be eradicated as well. But somehow that's our fault too, right?

I have a similar friend on Facebook who is condemning the military involvement as they are the same troops who went to eat against the Middle East and caused all the terrorism. No, the British soldiers did not cause the fucking terrorists of Daesh to decide to murder little girls at a concert. I don't understand why our streets are now deemed unsafe because of the military involvement - they are there to do a job and to protect people on the streets of our country, whatever nationality they are.

Also calling all soldiers murderers is not helpful. This friend really gets on my wick, he was appalled when my son decided to join the army cadets and suggested that he was being indoctrinated by murderers. I am on the cusp of blocking him.

Well she's right but there's a time and a place.
It a like turning up at somebodys parents funeral and saying ah ha but what about jennifers parents, I didn't see some of you at that funeral! Or "oh you have cancer? Well, other people have had it twice, so why are you sad"
Yes, way way way to many children, pregnant women, and other innocent people have been killed during these conflicts, but that's not what we're talking about right now. Really, the situation in Syria, Iraq etc do make me really really sad, especially because so many people ignore it, but in my mind that doesn't make our tragedies here any less.

Went to war not to eat. Ffs.

/Also calling all soldiers murderers is not helpful. This friend really gets on my wick, he was appalled when my son decided to join the army cadets and suggested that he was being indoctrinated by murderers. /

Well, soldiers are trained to kill people, so it's technically not false. A lot of people do sign up because they failed their A-levels/don't know what else to do and are promised a solid career with good progression, without really realising what they've signed up for.

I have been thinking about this a lot, the general thoughts are attacks like this happen because people are pussed off that we or our allies have killed Muslim kids in a bombing, I'm fairly sure Isis & other muslims have killed more kids in the ME than we have, so why isn't he angry about that? Dead kids only matter if killed by the West?

I'm pretty sure that murder is unlawful killing, so actually, calling soldiers murderers is technically false.

yolo the distinction is that in a military offensive, the soldiers may formulate the tactics of the attack and go in to execute the attack, but they are doing so because the government of their country is at war with the regime they are attacking. They don't wake up one day and decide to bomb somewhere for the hell of it because that would be a war crime, or just plain criminal if their government was not at war. Whilst they are trained assassins they have rules to follow and will aim to take out the bad guys.

I think I could have made that clearer in my last post, so apologies.

I actually find it upsetting how little some lives are valued.
31 children just drowned in the Med (again). US forces accidentally blew up over 100 civilians in Mosul in March.

Why does this receive so little coverage and so little outrage?
All the pain, grief and horror of Manchester.. . It's no different for humans elsewhere. We are not more special or more precious.

Therehave been many false flags in history, some of which were later admitted to eg Cuba's Bay of Pigs. How naive to say there is no such thing. It'slike saying the Reichstag Fire was not a false flag when it so clearly was the instrument by which Hitler was able to suspend democracy and start cracking down on his many enemies.

the distinction is that in a military offensive, the soldiers may formulate the tactics of the attack and go in to execute the attack, but they are doing so because the government of their country is at war with the regime they are attacking

..and that is our government killing and maiming civilians (including children) in OUR name. We all have blood on our hands!

ToastDemon, as others have said, this happened at home . Obviously home news is more relevant/interesting/shocking than something that happens elsewhere. A car crash in my road captures my attention more than a car crash in Vladivostok.

"All the pain, grief and horror of Manchester..." - that sounds like you are denigrating it. "We are not more special or more precious." Nice words only days after a terrible attack leaving children dead.

There have been much intelligent discussion of all political hues on MN in the last few days, but trotting out the old line of "they're not more important" is crass and downright nasty. Shameful post.