Nigeria army kills 50 jihadists in northeast

That's less appeasement and more "if you're going to kill them, just kill them, don't stand around gloating about it".

Lefties most likely

Appeasement? What I said is finish the objective quickly instead of torture for the fun of it, to not endanger anyone else that could he targets fir revenge.

The problem with thinking the way you do, is you can't see how the wolves can slip amongst the sheep. If we advocate for truly horrific deaths for truly horrific crimes, all we're doing is legitamising horrific actions. It will attract the horrific people. They'll walk amongst us, smiling, shaking hands, paying taxes and torturing criminals 9 to 5, 5 days a week. If you can't see the issue here, you're a lost cause.

In what world is a jihadist good?

They never stopped kidnapping it just stopped making the news

You just committed one of the most basic logical fallacies in existence. Some governments mislabel people as terrorists to justify atrocities, therefore Nigeria mislabeled these 50 people as terrorists. *By that reasoning, because some doctors misdiagnose patients, your doctor is lying when he tells you that you have hypertension.* The existence of abuse does not automatically invalidate every legitimate application of the same category. And are you insinuating that the Nigerian government woke up one morning and randomly selected 50 civilians to kill for what purpose exactly? Political opponents? Why will Tinubu ignore political opponents (that are political threat to him) like Atiku, Peter Obi etc. and go and kill 50 innocent people? Perhaps we can chuck this up as an intelligence error. There are far more efficient and less internationally scrutinised ways to eliminate political rivals in this part of the world, and none of them involve staging firefights in remote areas. *You are constructing a conspiracy that requires more moving parts than the straightforward explanation that Boko Haram militants were engaged and killed.* I am Nigerian and I live with this. So let me explain something your moral framework has clearly not accommodated yet. *These terrorists do not walk around in uniforms.* They herd cattle. They drive motorcycles. They sell goods in markets. They blend into farming communities. In fact, some of them appears nice and look like responsible citizens with civilian jobs. However, when the order comes, they massacre a village/community, and then dissolve back into the civilian population before anyone can respond. For instance, the farmers-herders conflict that has killed tens of thousands in the Middle Belt was fuelled largely by armed militants hiding among nomadic herders, using the cover of an ancient land dispute to slaughter farming communities. And the logic you are applying here is precisely the logic that makes these tactics so devastatingly effective. For instance, Iran understood it perfectly. She does not need precision weapons because her enemies must achieve the impossible, waging war with zero civilian casualties, while Iran counts on people like you to generate the outrage that ties those enemies' hands. *It is why she paraded civilians around her nuclear plants knowing full well that Ukraine could never try that same tactic against Russia without being obliterated within the hour.* The tactic works exclusively against enemies restrained by the kind of moral scrutiny you are currently applying, selectively, only to the side fighting the terrorists.

What you need to do most right now is read these two articles carefully. If everyone thought the way you do, there would be no need for things like “government” and “media” in the world at all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boko_Haram https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boko_Haram_insurgency

Im good with getting rid of boko haram

Now if it said “Nigerian army storms university journalism department and kills 50 people” or “Nigerian army finds opposition party harboring jihadist in a house in the capital. 50 killed in a gunfight” then sure you can cast doubt But the Nigerian has been fighting jihadist and Islamist separatist militias in the northeast in a low intensity, on and off conflict, for many decades now. So it doesn’t seem likely a conspiracy like you think. It’s certainly not a random event and has plenty of precedent.