Posted on 05/29/2015 1:35:30 PM PDT by Enlightened1
A Syrian Christian fighter has beheaded an Islamic State group (IS) militant to avenge people "executed" by the jihadists in northeastern Syria, a monitor said on Friday.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the incident took place on Thursday in Hasakeh province, where IS holds large areas of the countryside.
According to the monitor, the Christian fighter, a member of the minority Assyrian community, found the jihadist in the local village of Tal Shamiram.
"He took him prisoner and when he found out he was a member of IS, the Assyrian fighter beheaded him in revenge for abuses committed by the group in the region," Observatory chief Rami Abdel Rahman said.
The Observatory is based in Britain but has covered the Syrian conflict since it broke out four years ago thanks to a network of sources inside the country.
The Christian was fighting in the ranks of Kurdish forces who earlier this month drove IS out of more than a dozen Assyrian villages the jihadists had captured in Hasakeh.
IS has carried out a wave of abuses in areas it controls in both Syria and Iraq, including public beheadings, mass executions, enslavement and rape.
(Excerpt) Read more at en-maktoob.news.yahoo.com ...
This isn’t a political war, but rather, a Holy one. He who has the will-wins.
We are in total war. The question is whether we will fight it or be defeated utterly.
One of the Yazidi captives tried to run. They cut off her legs. Yeah. THAT kind of war.
IN that case consider that God has offered to be a fool for you. The alternative is hellish.
The bible doesn’t.
The sin is forgivable, but (as with any sin) never excusable.
Military action is appropriate. Individual vengeance is not. And if you are going to join the ranks of those who behead your enemies, don’t call yourself a Christian.
Excellent, excellent.
Going down the rip roaring road of self powered vengeance never delivers the payback to the one who does it, that it promises.
But note well, reports like this are “man bites dog” news.
They deserved it, but not from us. It wasn't Americans who were killed in the death camps. Japanese troops, whose atrocities focused on POW's rather than civilians, bore the brunt of US retaliation. US troops went out of their way to avoid accepting Japanese battlefield surrenders. Was this moral? No. But it was infinitely more satisfying, and may have helped preserve the peace in post-War Japan by killing off large numbers of zealots who never got the chance to stage a mass insurgency against Occupation forces.
Here’s a catalog of inexcusable sins committed during the Siege of Malta:
By that measure, Christianity only came into being in the 20th century, when beheading was (mostly) abolished within Christendom. I'm sure your forebears would be proud that you view them as benighted heathens.
Did it ever occur to you that maybe God sent this man so he could kill this savage?
Hmmmm?
L
Again you are talking about what armies did. This was an individual who committed a revenge murder. Individuals have a right to self defense. They do not have a right to vengeance.
There are many barbaric things that used to happen but in modern times have been deemed to be immoral and wrong. Slavery for example.
God sent Pilate to kill Jesus.
Hmmmmmmmmmm?
You’re pretty simple minded.
The reason to not accept Japanese surrenders was that history showed them to be likely ambushes. It had nothing to do with moral satisfaction.
“Just wait until the federal government instigates armed rebellion in our own country. When the gloves come off, acts of barbarism will be commonplace and not limited to either “side”. Our current state of civility will be left behind instantly.”
You are right. Such is the stuff of civil wars. It was ever thus.
I knew some WWII USMC veterans. After a while, they took no prisoners. War is hell.
“Individuals have a right to self defense. They do not have a right to vengeance.”
If the barbarians had slaughtered — and I mean slaughtered in the true sense of the word — one of your loved ones, I suspect you’d exact some vengeance.
Under stress many people sin markedly. And so?
Are you asking for excuses? Or for forgiveness?
“The reason to not accept Japanese surrenders was that history showed them to be likely ambushes. It had nothing to do with moral satisfaction.”
Yeah, it did. Maybe not exclusively, but it certainly came into play. Talk to a WWII USMC veteran of the Pacific War if you can still find one. I grew up with many, and I can tell you they hated the Japanese with a fury that you cannot comprehend.
“Under stress many people sin markedly. And so?
Are you asking for excuses? Or for forgiveness?”
Neither.
Was the blade lubed with bacon grease?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.