Anders Breivek

[Raven]

Generally they don't. One or two individuals may well do but as a whole the army does not carry out or condone the massacre of civilians.

I always find people who have a problem with the armed forces pretty funny. Maybe they should move to a country that doesn't have one. I hear Somalia is lovely this time of year.

 

[BloodOmen]

So do our armed forces, accidentally or otherwise.

You can't compare the 2.

 

[chipper]

tell me one time any armed unit in our own armed forces in peace time have ever gone into a nation at peace and killed innocents INTENTIONALLY since WW2. and i aint on about an individual in the armed forces i mean as a whole seen as tho you generalised your comment.

they are not compareable he did not declare war on his own nation he planned an operation over a period of years with the sole intention of killing youths it really does blow my mind you try to put the 2 on the same level. our armed forces are told what to do and only go after targets deemed a threat yes innocents get caught up on it thats tragic but its war.
he did this on his own he made the decision he wasnt ordered to do anything. he woke up one morning and decided to MURDER over 70 people in cold blood.

 

[Wazzerphuk]

Generally they don't. One or two individuals may well do but as a whole the army does not carry out or condone the massacre of civilians.

I always find people who have a problem with the armed forces pretty funny. Maybe they should move to a country that doesn't have one. I hear Somalia is lovely this time of year.

IIRC Costa Rica has no military. Bloody nice there too.

 

[Chilly]

our armed forces are told what to do and only go after targets deemed a threat yes innocents get caught up on it thats tragic but its war.

the difference between our war (and it being condoned) and his "terrorist rampgage" is ideological. He's at war, from his point of view. So if we call it war does that mean killing civilians is ok, as you just implied?

 

[chipper]

the difference between our war (and it being condoned) and his "terrorist rampgage" is ideological. He's at war, from his point of view. So if we call it war does that mean killing civilians is ok, as you just implied?

oh right sorry i didnt know the UN had sanctioned his actions ill let norway know right away.

there are rules regarding war thats what seperates it from terrorism. unless your enemy poses an immediate and dangerous threat you are required to capture or let your enemy surrender, from what i can tell a bunch of 14-21 yo offered no immediate or dangerous threat and as far as i know there were no military targets on that island? and i never said killing civilians was ok i said that was war and to expand on that comment it is collateral damage it is not the primary target. these kids were not military they posed no immediate or dangerous threat.

 

[Tom]

tell me one time any armed unit in our own armed forces in peace time have ever gone into a nation at peace and killed innocents INTENTIONALLY since WW2.

Northern Ireland, Sunday, 1972.

 

[Punishment]

Personally i agree with Chilly, one days terrorist is another days hero.

As i pointed out once before my family got it's surname from the crusades where the whole point was to wipe out as many muslims in gods name as was possible, but obviously this was before muslims got the dislike button on facebook.

Point is we are a multicultural world and that's great but you are still going to have extremists on both sides who think that they are right and i highly doubt Brev was working alone even from a logistical standpoint alone.

 

[Scouse]

sorry but he killed a load of innocent kids. i dont fucking care what reasons he has concoted hes a fucking monster, and i hope he spends the rest of his life banged up getting the shit kicked out of him on a hourly basis and getting repeatedly fucked up the ass and upon entry into jail should recieve a lash for every bullet he fired and even then thats too good for him.

We talking about Tony Blair and George Bush here too?

 

[BloodOmen]

We talking about Tony Blair and George Bush here too?

They didnt intentionally send an army to kill only children tho did they? so how can you even compare the 2? Breivik had children in his sights, it was all preplanned.. when your out in a warzone you can hardly preplan who your going to shoot, if a kids coming at you with a grenade what would you do? wave at him? no you'd shoot him like any normal person who wants to continue living, again what would you do if an terrorist is near kids and he's about to shoot you? your going to return fire like a normal person.. I'm not saying any of its right or condoning what happens in warzones but you just cannot compare the 2, there are simply to many factors in warzones compared to a preplanned killing spree.

 

[Scouse]

insurgent

Lol

 

[BloodOmen]

Lol

yes yes just realised what It yped, corrected.

 

[chipper]

Northern Ireland, Sunday, 1972.

noted i apologise i did not think of bloody sunday it was a bad call no question there. the tension was already in the air and the army was provoced by stone throwers and although my knowledge of the event isnt brilliant i am sure there were reports of shots from the IRA. i do not advocate the actions that followed no one can but the circumstances around these 2 events couldnt be further apart from each other.

this isnt about his motives its about right and wrong and i will not sit back and let people tar the military with the same brush as this cunt.

 

[Scouse]

i will not sit back and let people tar the military with the same brush as this cunt.

I agree, the military are worse. He notched up less than 100 kills. Sending the armed forces to war is a guarantee of notching up thousands.

George 'n Tony've a lot to answer for...

 

[Job]

I'm sure the parents of the dead kids in Iraq and Afghanistan don't think their kids are any less dead than those in Norway.

 

[Raven]

Northern Ireland, Sunday, 1972.

Oh my, really?

 

[Chosen]

I'm sure the parents of the dead kids in Iraq and Afghanistan don't think their kids are any less dead than those in Norway.

The kids getting killed by a accident in a country filled with war, and kids getting shot down on a summer camp island by a murderer that intentionally went after them. You see no difference?

 

[DaGaffer]

The kids getting killed by a accident in a country filled with war, and kids getting shot down on a summer camp island by a murderer that intentionally went after them. You see no difference?

Yeah, the kids in the summer camp were several shades whiter.

 

[Chosen]

Yeah, the kids in the summer camp were several shades whiter.

Some of them yes, but seeing it was a multi cultural camp. It makes you wrong!

 

[Access Denied]

Fucking hell. Comparing this nutjob to our military. You really are a fucking cunt aren't you. The military, with a few individual exceptions do NOT go out with the plan to kill civillians. As for the innocents caught up in the fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. Well I dont believe we should've gone into either country but you do realie that far more innocents have been killed by THEIR OWN COUNTRYMEN than our forces, don't you?

Go fuck yourself with a cactus.

 

[DaGaffer]

Some of them yes, but seeing it was a multi cultural camp. It makes you wrong!

Loads of blond nordic looking kids stepping on landmines and getting taken out by drones in Afghanistan, absolutely loads.

Breivik's story is newsworthy because he killed so many kids on his own, so quickly, but let's not kid ourselves, there are a shitload more kids dying violent deaths in the dusty and hot parts of the world every single day, and this story is big because of who it happened to as much as their killer; there would barely be a ripple in the media if this story had taken place in South Sudan or Syria.

 

[Chosen]

Loads of blond nordic looking kids stepping on landmines and getting taken out by drones in Afghanistan, absolutely loads.

Breivik's story is newsworthy because he killed so many kids on his own, so quickly, but let's not kid ourselves, there are a shitload more kids dying violent deaths in the dusty and hot parts of the world every single day, and this story is big because of who it happened to as much as their killer; there would barely be a ripple in the media if this story had taken place in South Sudan or Syria.

You're point beeing? I've never said anything against it, so have none here in this thread. We all know that horrible things goes around in this world, and alot aint covered because of where you live! BUT that does not change the fact that Breiviks action can NOT be justified, OR compared to that of our armies.

Many like you that I know of, that does not take pity in anything. because there is always worse things happening somewhere else.

The people that got killed on that island was multi cultural, and those kids are also representing the political party that wants to save the kids that you are talking about

 

[Job]

You don't think it's as bad because you have bought into the fairy story that is out military operations abroad, but don't worry, 90% of the population has.
We are not heroes marching in, patting the local kids on the head and saving women from discrimination, we are an invading force with little regard for the lives of the people who get in the way and we only report it when the truth leaks out and there's no way to cover it.
Women and children..burnt, shot, blown up all in the name of a war on terror, if you believe it's necessary or that we are making the slightest difference, feel free to wave the flag.
If someone was doing it to us, you , I and everyone on this forum would be building IED's and shooting the fuckers everytime they put their head above the sandbags.

 

[Chosen]

You don't think it's as bad because you have bought into the fairy story that is out military operations abroad, but don't worry, 90% of the population has.
We are not heroes marching in, patting the local kids on the head and saving women from discrimination, we are an invading force with little regard for the lives of the people who get in the way and we only report it when the truth leaks out and there's no way to cover it.
Women and children..burnt, shot, blown up all in the name of a war on terror, if you believe it's necessary or that we are making the slightest difference, feel free to wave the flag.
If someone was doing it to us, you , I and everyone on this forum would be building IED's and shooting the fuckers everytime they put their head above the sandbags.

"fairy storyes" you stupid shit, I have been there myself and know what I have seen and experienced myself. What you see from the news is ALL the negative things that happens down there, and usually with a twist(To make it more attractive for the public such as yourself). More then once have I experienced the media twisting the story of what really happened when it came to my own unit.

media does not usually cover the positive actions that is happening DAILY and more frequently down in afghanistan, because it does not sell.

 

[Job]

I've seen shed loads of footage of troops walking the streets and handing out sweets and the like, possibly staged, but I'm sure it is the norm, but I've seen about a big fat zero of people running from bombs with their heads on fire, You only see someone blown to bits, being carried away by his friends when it's some insurgent bomb.
Our collateral damage is NEVER shown, for obvious reasons, but it does give an awful lot of people the idea it's not really happening.
Exactly what negative twists? It's always a POSITIVE twist, the military closely control all media reporting from warzones, always have, always will.

 

[Chosen]

I've seen shed loads of footage of troops walking the streets and handing out sweets and the like, possibly staged, but I'm sure it is the norm, but I've seen about a big fat zero of people running from bombs with their heads on fire, You only see someone blown to bits, being carried away by his friends when it's some insurgent bomb.
Our collateral damage is NEVER shown, for obvious reasons, but it does give an awful lot of people the idea it's not really happening.

It does not take long before huge incidents involving civilians gets out in the media, and alot of the times it is worse then reality. Mostly because Taliban themself uses it as a propaganda warfare to get the support they need!

Not once have we ever gone in to kill a civilian, a verification of a weapon that is pointed towards us is needed before we can return fire. Civilians do die from our bombs from time to time, even our own soldiers die from blue on blue. But it is not intentionally and is a sad sad loss no matter who it is.

And again, I have never stated that something worse goes out in the world, compared to this incident. But you can't compare what the army does and what Breivik did.

 

[Tom]

And again, I have never stated that something worse goes out in the world, compared to this incident. But you can't compare what the army does and what Breivik did.

They both use violence to an end and in that context we can most certainly compare their actions.

 

[Chosen]

They both use violence to an end and in that context we can most certainly compare their actions.

Now I am talking about the whole perspective of the situation. With you're way of thinking you can compare about everything that goes on in this world.

 

[Chosen]

just to add a story to jobs here,

One of the missions in afghanistan, there were returning fire between us and the taliban. The distance was quite far(About 1500 meters) so their accuracy was not great. But still some minutes after the contact we discovered that there were 2 little kids that had gotten inn-between the line of fire. One of the guys in my troop ordered his squad to drive their car to the kids location(Very much closer to the taliban), to use the vehicle(A light armored iveco) as a shield so they could pick up these two little scared kids. Situations like this rarely gets any attention at all! Seeing that the taliban had RPGs that could easily take out our vehicle at that range, it could've become a catastrophic event for us! But still he was willing to risk himself and his squad just to make sure that they were safe. His reason for this that he later explained, is that when he saw the 2 kids it reminded him of his own two sons. And he could've never forgiven himself if anything were to happen to them, when he had the power to change the outcome.

This is just one of the many stories from my unit only, and why I am sad seeing that the army is being compared to what Breivik did.

 

[Killswitch]

Maybe Bahrain would be a better comparison given their current ongoing game of Maim The Protester. I can see Chilly's point (to some extent) and I doubt Breivik would consider the people he killed "innocents" given his state of mind. With todays asymmetric warfare and insurgencies an "enemy combatant" is pretty much anyone we think is on the other side. I presume that Breivik believed that even the 3 men and a wolfhound that make up the Norwegian standing army were too much for him to handle, so in a Microsoft-esque application of logic simply decided to redefine "Island full of Children" to "Island full of Enemies" and went on his merry, mass-murdering way.

I personally believe that the Norwegian government have this exactly right. No-one is going to listen to his craziness and be swayed by it. By giving him a normal trial in a normal setting, they have essentially emasculated him by making him no better or worse (in the eyes of the law) than a tax avoider or drunk driver. Justice done in secret is no justice at all.

I wonder if he knows how well the "I do not recognise the authority of this Court" defence worked out for Saddam Hussein? Shame that it's very unlikely the same sentence will be applied.