Woolwich Attack

watching lee rigbys fiancee on this morning and have to say remarkable the courage and dignity saying she was glad they got the sentences that they got and saying she didnt want the death penalty because thats what they wanted to die and by letting them rot in jail was a way of the never letting them win

Firstly I've always held the opinion that the death penalty is another form of pre mediated murder so to answer that question. If you think its acceptable to kill another human being then that means you support capital punishment which is effectively what the death penalty is.

Its nothing more that futile revenge which achieves nothing, you can't bring the victim back to life, it has no place in a civilised society and its a disgrace that the USA still practices it

If we still had this option in the UK then it would make us no better than the appalling crime which was carried out on our shores.

When sentence was passed the Judge stated that neither Michael Adebolajo or Michael Adebowale showed any remorse and even shouted out after sentence was passed, Allahu akbar (God is great) and declared that you Britain and America will never be safe.

A full life sentence is the appropriate sentence, may these 2 evil treacherous bastards rot away for the rest of their days. Fair enough be tolerant of all religions but all extremist versions of it needs to be rooted out

RIP Lee Rigby, you deserved better than to die in the country which you had fought so bravely to protect.

Does anyone think that if British troops weren't in Iraq & Afghanistan, this might have not happened? I mean its not like they went there for a holiday, they went to do something, oh thats right, to murder. Just saying.

First off, soldiers don't get deployed to 'murder', for the most part it's clean up, protection and an attempt to help bring order to a country that's in chaos, they don't go around intentionally killing innocent people to further a cause. Secondly, these two evil cunts would have done something like this whether we had troops there or not, that was just an excuse for them to commit a horrible act and anyone defending that, or trying to justify it should pull their head out of their ass. Just saying

You "clean up", "protect" and bring "order" using tanks and bombs? How nice. In "chaos"? according to whom? The ruling elite? Why don't they send their children to fight*, I'd be happy with that (because they'd never go to war then) instead of sending the young men of working class families to fight a wear that only benefits elitists. I don't think any professional military has a policy of systematically killing civilians, certainly not the British military, however this doesn't mean war crimes happen, certainly in the case of Iraq and being involved in the CIA rendetioning.

There have been NO attacks on UK soil from Muslims/middle eastern bg UNTIL Blair decided to join Bush's warcrimes-fact. There have been no attacks in non-muslim countries like Brazil for a reason-they don't bomb people to bring "order". And talking of bring order....Saddam was an evil cunt, however minorities and women were treated fairly well, what order is there now in Iraq? A huge chunk if not most of the Christian population has left, women are being killed for not dressing "moderately" etc. And the people ruling in Baghdad, once bombed the US embassy in Kuwait. How wonderful this "order" is!

I wasn't justifiyng what those men did, I condemn it as much as I condemn the bombs that fell over Baghdad. Here is a great quote from an American diplomat, Charles Freeman; "On the question of U.S. strikes on targets in Iran or elsewhere, I simply want to register what I think is an obvious point; namely that what 9/11 showed is that if we bomb people, they bomb back."

*I'm sick of listening to armchair generals typing away, justifiying young men dying in wars that they didn't need to get involved in. How about you step away from your screen and go fight instead please. Enough of the killing.

/rant over

This thread isn't about war in general, it's about an evil act that was carried out by two sick individuals upon an innocent victim.
You've made some valid points, so I'm not going to disagree for the sake of debate. I'm glad you weren't justifying what those men did.