233
Taliban execute two men by gunfire in packed Afghanistan stadium
(www.independent.co.uk)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2024
233 points (95.3% liked)
World News
38705 readers
2392 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It does not reduce murder or crime in general - but it DOES devalue human life
At least they retained the USamerican values after kicking them out
The Taliban were assholes long before 9/11.
The Taliban were US-backed and US-funded long before 9/11.
That's a common assumption that's based in "they're all the same over there" style of racism.
The group the US backed in the 80s was the mujaheddin, which went to form the government which the Taliban (a separate group) all but overthrew. The last remnants of the pre-Taliban Afghanistan government was called the Northern Alliance, which was allied with the US when fighting the Taliban.
It was politically convenient for the left to along with a racist narrative to score cheap political points against Dubya, Cheney, Rumsfeld etcl. And yeah, fuck those guys for sure, but it was wrong to go along with a racist narrative to do so. Because of the "they're all the same over there" kind of racism in both the left and right of the US, there wasn't much chance for any kind of success in defeating the Taliban.
It's not racist to be aware of the fact that the US supported the Taliban after the fall of the Mujaheddin.
The only difference is time IMO. Same people. Same views. Just changed their name and fought against different people for different reasons. They will all still stone you to death for teaching math to women, they just disagree on who should be the caliph.
Yes that "they're all the same over there" is a common opinion.
Can't win a war when you can't tell the difference between friend or foe. Which is why the US lost to the Taliban.
I suppose they think something similar about your govt
Yeah, so? There are many assholes in the world, you know. Pointing at some other group of assholes doesn't make the Taliban not assholes.
Very insightfull. Is that a quote from Nietzsche?
Any cases.
Fair? What does fair mean? Does an execution un-kill the victims? What a ridiculous notion that any sort of punishment for a perpetrator could be "fair" for the victims.
The death penalty is an abject failure. It has no benefits and numerous issues. Practicing barbarism can never be justice.
There is absolutely no evidence to support that assertion.
US Department of Justice
I believe that most developed countries have gotten rid of the death penalty, and a big part of that is because it doesn't work as a deterrent.
Very few people decide whether or not to commit a crime based on the punishment. Most criminals think they won't get caught at all, or if they do, they think they'll get away with it in court.
This slightly misses the mark. The majority of crimes, including violent ones, are not committed by people performing a risk calculus. They're done with minimal thought and more often than not in the heat of the moment. Effectively, they are not crimes that you can deter because for a crime to be deterred, the potential criminal has to assess whether it makes sense to commit the crime. This works in cases of like financial fraud and white collar crime. Someone shooting another person during an altercation, not so much.
Yeah there’s a way to deter crimes and it’s increasing the certainty of punishment. Overly severe punishment actually has an unwanted effect of increasing the severity of crimes. If a rapist is going to die if caught that incentivizes murdering the victim who is inherently a witness.
No, they convince themselves it isn’t rape. Rape is a lot less dark alley and a lot more sober person and person too drunk to say no or pressuring or some other means of soft power. Look at studies which showed that if you don’t say the word rape a lot of admit they’re willing to do it.
So what you get from executing rapists is someone who raped their partner either in an emotional frenzy or a coercive stage gets accused or has a flash of realization and promptly gets violent lest they die.
Also, as a woman I’m a lot less likely to accuse someone of rape they actually did to me if I know it could lead to them hanging in the public square. Suddenly the weight of their life feels like it’s on my hands and I don’t want them dead.
Thanks here for this comment, I feel like I see where my stance might not make sense, ofc death penalty should not be given in cases like this where emotion takes over, I am rather taking about ppl like trump and gates and Netanyahu who are completely sane, they just kill for their own benefit
Ppl here have assumed that just because I said ‘I see reason’ means I feel like you need to kill everyone who commits this, No, I am saying that I don’t know the exact circumstance, it might or might not be justified, I hope we can clear this up moving forward
And what level of certainty do you need? Keep in mind uncertainty means innocents are murdered by the state and 100% certainty is difficult enough that it will generally put you into the anti capital punishment camp.
Also it sounds like you have a failure of understanding how the rich get out of punishment. Yes sometimes it’s like Brock Turner where it’s blatant. But other times it’s because they can afford the means to hide evidence and sow doubts. And when all else fails they’re more likely to have ins with judges or the ability to flee preemptively.
No matter what follows this...yes, we do. You should need evidence to believe anything; understanding of course that the more extraordinary the claim, the more extraordinary the evidence needed.
Then imprison them for life. Guess what, life imprisonment is cheaper than the death penalty, and can be overturned if there's an error.
Yes, we should also be addressing the failings of our penal system(s). Unfortunately, many around the world, and clearly yourself included, are more interested in retributive "justice" than habilitative functions.
Crime is decreasing year after year except during the pandemic. What do you mean it's not working?
That is the same thinking that those who own hand guns think. They think they will be safer, yet all the stats indicate other wise including all the children accidentally firing a gun and killing a family member. If risk of death was a deterrent, the USA would be among the safest place in the world.
Can you rephrase as I am not understanding your point I think.
I have a degree in criminology and there is no truth to this. People don't ever rationally decide to do crimes.
Do you really have a degree in criminology? What kind of lawyer are you exactly?
I used the search functionality, they have a degree in criminology, history, and law. I don't know how common that combo is, neither do I want to cast doubt on this person's comments... but it doesn't help that the majority of them defy logic at every turn.
Just yesterday, @JustZ@lemmy.world told me they know more than South Africa about apartheid, and thus Israel cannot be an undemocratic apartheid state. They also told me that when America didn't allow women and black people to vote, it was "still a democracy". But they also said that an apartheid rule is when a minority has control over a majority (this is the only definition they offered)... that would mean, by @JustZ@lemmy.world's own definition, that America before suffrage for women and black people was an apartheid state.
I deleted my comment due to some drama, but I remember also having pretty long conversations with this guy, who thinks that just because hamas exists, Israel is free to genocide
No worries, I understand.
Same here... for me it's that the pretends to respect Palestinian life then says something that amounts to excusing genocide and 75 years of Israeli opression all in the same sentence.
Youre a moron and have no idea what you're talking about. Please stop tagging me. I don't care what you have to say any longer.
You post irrelevant links constantly, you lie about what they say, you lie about what you think I said, and it's exhausting to try and correct you. I'm not your dad or your teacher so kindly fuck off and leave me alone. Do you understand?
Grow up.
You're right, I'm being immature. To be honest, reading about this genocide day after day, seeing Palestinians like me denied self determination and having their voices silenced... it frustrates me.
Your attitude and bad logic (which I'm sure you know is my opinion... stemming from denial in my view anyway), makes my frustration even deeper. It irks me when seemingly normal people repeat empty hollow IDF propaganda.
The truth is however that most people on the globe are decent and value the lives of others, so there is no need to get myopic about opinions like yours that deny a clear genocide... Most people I will meet in my life would not think it's okay if the IDF killed me and demolished my house, and they would call a spade a spade. I think you going as far as calling Bibi's Amalek comments as "cherry picked" is what made me realize I have better things to do, and that you represent the opinion that will hopefully end up in the dustbin of history as examples of human beings at their shittiest.
I'll stop now. Let me know if you need help blocking me though. It must have been pretty shit to keep getting messages from someone you weren't able to block.
https://lemmy.world/comment/7897946
I will admit that part of my mind would support making a public example of any fascist leader, but any public execution or punishment serves only to normalize that violence.
Would I condemn anyone involved with the death of Mussolini? Absolutely not. Best of luck to any Israeli anti fascists in the right time and place.
Do you think the members of the general public are often considering committing those kinds of crimes?
"Gee whiz, I sure wish I could be a serial killer. Too bad they publicly executed that last serial killer, though! I'd better move to the US, where executions are done in private!"