Well, what can we say? There’s no debate to be had here. Everyone agrees that this was despicable. Conversation on the matter can’t really advance beyond echoing the OP.
Well, that’s not proof that it is wrong, and that’s just your own opinion. Clearly there are a bunch of men in Afghanistan who righteously disagree with you. You just don’t understand why they did it.
Not a debate, but certainly a lot of relevant and interesting questions.
-
Why did they decide to gouge the eyes out? Could they have not done something like tearing his limbs out, or cutting his balls out, or cutting his tongue or somthing like that?
-
Was it premeditated eye gouging or was it done on impulse? Did the gang have an argument to settle the issue of what would be done and was it a unanimous decision to gouge the eyes or was there suppressed dissent?
-
Why did they put the Kalashnikov in the victim’s mouth? Were they afraid, that if he asked them why his eyes were being gouged they would have no option but to be honest which would make them feel guilty which in turn would make them leave without gouging the eyes out and thereby earn the shame of a failed mission?
-
Since they put the Kalashnikov in the guy’s mouth, it is implied that it was done with the intention of pulling the trigger provided some specific conditions were met at a certain point in time. What were those conditions under which they would have pulled the trigger?
I think you’re reading way too much into the actions of madmen.
I resemble that remark! But hey! It earned me an offer to get sexed up!
You see this sort of thing fairly often, where the word ‘gentlemen’ is used to mean unidentified men doing anything from slightly off-color to utterly abominable. During the 1992 riots in L.A. I remember one news clip where the commentator kept referring to a ‘gentleman’ trying to break a tempered glass window with a trash barrel, and now we have “Gentlemen’s clubs.” The OP and these have nothing to do with polite men of good education and breeding.