So Sup Forums yesterday I was talking to a german (girl) friend about the security problems that infest my country and...

So Sup Forums yesterday I was talking to a german (girl) friend about the security problems that infest my country and the region. I was telling her how policies of "forgive, forget and start again" promoted by "pro-human rights" european NGO's aren't working because:
>the gangs keep ordering killings and extortions from the jails, because the security guards are either scared of them or are willing to take bribes.
>Gangmembers use the free education and money provided by the government, to start their own business. Later they'd kill small business owners (civilians) in the neighborhood in order to have monopoly
>Gangmembers are slowly becoming a high social class, at the same level of doctors and relatively successful business men. It's already happening in Honduras, it's on it's way in El Salvador
So I proposed: Kill all leaders of gangs, continue killing those who want to be leader and send the gangpleb to prison to work for the next 30 years.
Her reaction?
>OMG you psycho
>You aren't trying to understand their reasons
>You aren't better than them if you kill them
>Psychos don't try to understand other human beings, I think you're a psycho
>Everyone has rights
>Europe successful because Human Rights
Me: By everyone do you mean the mothers, wives, children who cry their murdered fathers because they couldn't afford to pay extortion money on time?
>UH STOP APPEALING TO FEELINGS
>YOU AREN'T FACING THE PROBLEM
>YOU ONLY HAVE HATE AND VIOLENCE IN YOUR MIND! YOU ARE WORSE THAN GANGMEMBERS!

I received a similar opinion from a frenchwoman a few months ago.
Surprisingly when discussing this with european men, they seem to understand that controlled violence with a clear purpose (like beheading the gang institution) it's acceptable and necessary in order to restore the security and order.

giving women the vote was our greatest mistake

>talking to a woman about anything other than your dick in her butthole
>thinks a woman that finds you unattractive will ever agree with you on anything

You deserved it

>in her butthole
>not vagina
What did you mean by this?

This is why women are the ultimate weakness in politics. No connection to reality and too much sentimentality. They can't break free of emotional thinking and accuse others of being burdened by it instead.

>Europe successful because Human Rights

which hole isn't so important actually

just never talk to a woman about politics, doing it is a sure way to never get anywhere near any of her holes

really makes me think

He only talks to """"""""women""""""""

Rape her, teach that bitch how to respect man.

Hans Gruber speaks the truth

For what appreciated, European women are actually quite interesting and knowledgeable in different topics, most of them having really elaborate and even impressing hobbies. But when it comes to politics they go full Sweden, and start regurgitating socialist propaganda until they feel everything is PC again.

On the other hand, American women are among the less interesting and plain stupid I've come across, with zero hobbies or just beginner-level knowledge in X topic, but if you explain to them in a detailed way the situation (like the security measures that are required because the situation is desperate in my country), they will agree. Maybe the won't be fully supportive, but they'll recognize that is necessary.

>>in her butthole
>>not vagina
>What did you mean by this?
My exact thoughts

Meh she's quite ugly desu
I don't mind

Then stop wasting everyones time

>arguing with uggo females

fpbp

it's the biggest reason for western civilization's collapse

>Psychos don't try to understand other human beings

The left's biggest mistake.
Assuming that "understanding" must inevitably lead to sympathy and goodwill.
You already do understand them. She's the one who's struggling.

She isn't really trying to understand those people. How can she when she simply rejects all explanations and solutions that do not jibe with her foolishly optimistic worldview?

>You aren't better than them if you kill them
This one is the worst. Why did we let these walking fuck puppets vote again?

This

the funny thing about that image is if you disagree with anyone on Sup Forums
they will lsoe their fucking shit & claim
1: you're baiting
2: you're a payed shill
3: you are le JEW!!!!
this place gets worse every day
>LE OMG THEN LEAVE
no, cuck yourself faggot

Indeed, these 'tolerant' types seem to think that if you understand someone's point of view, you will necessarily be more sympathetic to them. I had fun pointing out that sometimes I despise people even more once I understand their point of view, because only then can I fully appreciate their barbarism or immorality.

the main difference being that we don't pretend to be a board of love and tolerance

>Me: By everyone do you mean the mothers, wives, children who cry their murdered fathers because they couldn't afford to pay extortion money on time?

They think executing the offenders would be worse morally.
There is this despicable idea that all good, moral people should stay out of moral grey areas at ANY cost and that this is actually virtuous.
It isn't. It's selfish. They would refuse an opportunity to save millions of lives if it meant they had to kill one person. Even if that person unquestionably deserved it.
Sacrificing lives so you can sleep soundly with a clear conscience is not noble.

Yeah rich leftist woman who travel the world fairyland style.

Nothing pisses me off more than organised crime. The smug, satisfied look of the gang members, thinking their better than everyone when in reality they're nothing but useless parasites

If you put it in their butt then they can't get pregnant and entrap you.

> how cum people never pull the switch when faced with a real-life trolley problem

self interest.

If you disagree without backing your arguments up with anything other than "stormweenies" and pointless obfuscation, you are rightfully called out a shill.

Sup Forums is a board of peace and art. The majority of the board should not be judged for the actions of the few, extremely minor number of radicals who in no way represent the board in its fullest.