96 killed as Yemen soldier turns bomber

[grandpa]

"A Yemeni soldier packing powerful explosives under his uniform blew himself up in the middle of an army battalion in Sanaa Monday, killing 96 troops and wounding around 300, a military official and medics said.

The suicide attack was the deadliest in the country's capital since newly-elected President Abdrabuh Mansur Hadi pledged to oust Al-Qaeda militants from Yemen's mostly lawless and restive southern and eastern provinces."
http://news.yahoo.com/suicide-attack...073300581.html

A lot to debate here. Let me start: Why do they keep referring to Al-Qaeda militants as "lawless," or, like they do here, "mostly lawless"? The fact is, they and the Taliban would love to impose all sorts of laws. That has been thoroughly, undeniably established. It just seems like a dishonest narrative to me.

Grandpa h.

[Angry Citizen]

96 people die on the other side of the world, and all you care about is a small snippet in a news story that might impugn the honor of anarchism?

[Maryjane]

There's a topic to debate. Hint...it's not grandpa.

[Charlatan]

When one fights for something, there is a difference between making someone see it your way with or without a threat.

A more effective way of getting what you want would be to go on hunger strike. Imagine a lot of people on television, prominent people sometimes, that refuse to eat from the land that they wish to change? If they were to act non aggressively, they would not need to hide away, and would not have a guilty conscious every now and again. But...

They fight! They fight as it is the only effective way to get thier ideals entrenched. Why not take the money used for guns, the intelligence used for coordinated attacks, and put it to a better use? If they were to run a smear campaign, or even blackmail the leaders into giving them what they want, then they would stand an even greater chance.

[Thanatos]

I'm sure that if you asked the Taliban, the government of Yemen would be described as lawless. People tend to react to rules they can't understand or don't agree with as if they were anarchy.

[truthreality]

"A Yemeni soldier packing powerful explosives under his uniform blew himself up in the middle of an army battalion in Sanaa Monday, killing 96 troops and wounding around 300, a military official and medics said.

The suicide attack was the deadliest in the country's capital since newly-elected President Abdrabuh Mansur Hadi pledged to oust Al-Qaeda militants from Yemen's mostly lawless and restive southern and eastern provinces."
http://news.yahoo.com/suicide-attack...073300581.html

A lot to debate here. Let me start: Why do they keep referring to Al-Qaeda militants as "lawless," or, like they do here, "mostly lawless"? The fact is, they and the Taliban would love to impose all sorts of laws. That has been thoroughly, undeniably established. It just seems like a dishonest narrative to me.

Grandpa h.

I agree with you. It also disguises the AL-Qaeda's agenda, I am not saying on purpose, which is to force laws down people's throats. I think in this case, being lawful is worse then being lawless. Laws are what drive Al-Qaeda, whether they be spiritual or moral, to commit violent acts.

[Darklordabc]

I think the article is just saying that Yemen does not have police control of those areas of the country. I don't think its making any judgements on Al-Qaeda's ideology.

P.S: Fucking Islamic Savages.