Russian ambassador to Turkey shot

On December 20 2016 03:01 ahswtini wrote:

i would advise you to edit that out, the mods are very touchy about "graphic" videos/pictures

On December 20 2016 03:27 Pontual wrote:
Holy fuck, pls just no atomic shit, neither bombing civilians. Not bombing military bases is probably a bit too much too ask at this point.

On December 20 2016 03:30 Sent. wrote:


Calm down, nobody is going to start a war because of this

On December 20 2016 04:42 maze. wrote:
Prayers for his family.

The conspiracy theorists are gonna have a field day in the next 24hours.

On December 20 2016 04:07 farvacola wrote:
Be suspicious of anyone who claims to be able to tell the future based on this event, particularly during the next 24 hours. The number of people making crazed predictions all over the internet and news media is incredible.

On December 20 2016 04:46 opisska wrote:
I am quite fascinated by the guts of whoever took those pictures of the killer with a gun in his hand ... It honestly lloks almost suspicious. Is it sure that this is actually what happened?

Anyway, how is this bad news - except for the obvious tragedy of two dead people? What I see as really bad news for the region is any improvement of Russian-Turkish relations, so this could be actually useful.

On December 20 2016 05:04 ahswtini wrote:

i mean the shooting was carried out in front of a camera that was recording/broadcasting the event

On December 20 2016 05:06 opisska wrote:


Sure, but the photos do not look like video frames and they are also nicely focused on him. It seems like someone took those on purpose, instead of running away.

On December 20 2016 05:06 Sent. wrote:
Does anyone know where was the Russian security? I assume Russian ambassadors have their own bodyguards, at least in countries where there is a high risk of terrorist attacks



I think the killer made it clear that he's not going to shoot the reporters so one of them just used the opportunity to make photos of his life.

On December 20 2016 05:37 True_Spike wrote:


The photographer kept his cool and is gutsy for sure, but I do believe that's exactly what a terrorist would want the most - publicity.

On December 20 2016 05:40 opisska wrote:


Can this really be called "terrorism", when he explicitly did not kill any civilians? I understand that being an ambassador doesn't come with a "front line" job description, but it was a very clear political gesture, even if a little overboardly violent.

On December 20 2016 05:40 opisska wrote:


Can this really be called "terrorism", when he explicitly did not kill any civilians? I understand that being an ambassador doesn't come with a "front line" job description, but it was a very clear political gesture, even if a little overboardly violent.

On December 20 2016 06:07 LegalLord wrote:

Apparently the shooter was part of his security detail and/or an off-duty police officer.

On December 20 2016 07:46 parkufarku wrote:
Yeah, this is gonna speed up Turkey's admission into EU

Beautiful country, but had to cancel family trip to there b/c of instability

On December 20 2016 18:12 opisska wrote:


The only reason you "had to" cancel any trip to Turkey is in your head or possible in the heads of other participants. The danger of something happening to you there is unchanged withing statistical uncertainties and still heavily dominated by traffic.

On December 20 2016 19:13 nothingmuch wrote:


All "reasons" are in the head, because that's where "reasoning" happens. There are plenty of reasons to cancel trips to Turkey right now, and the political situation is a very valid one.

On December 20 2016 19:22 opisska wrote:


can you describe specific issues the situation causes for a tourist. other then a vague feeling of danger?

On December 20 2016 18:12 opisska wrote:


The only reason you "had to" cancel any trip to Turkey is in your head or possible in the heads of other participants. The danger of something happening to you there is unchanged withing statistical uncertainties and still heavily dominated by traffic.

On December 20 2016 15:46 FlaShFTW wrote:
Putin is going to be livid.

On December 20 2016 05:37 Ppjack wrote:
what is up with these guys ?

we intervene in their country, military and more often than not humanitary... they scream against ingerence and how we should let them be sowereign colonialism and such.

we don't do anything because geopolitics and diplomacy are more complicated than "do whatever you want", and they cry about not giving a shit about their country.

and in the meantime we are supposed to welcome every bit of misery of the world, true or false, for economic purpose or legitimate humanitarian one.

and they still shit on us on a regular basis and most of them fail to integrate and live outside of their own community.. what leads to a huge ressentment towards us.

living in brussels is like being bipolar sometimes, guess we are fucked. (and if you add on top of that all the possible extreme leftist bullshit economically speaking, you know we are really in a bad state)

and it comes from a guy who breath, work, dream, and fight for european union every day. damn

(+christmas market in berlin)

On December 20 2016 19:22 opisska wrote:


can you describe specific issues the situation causes for a tourist. other then a vague feeling of danger?

On December 20 2016 21:51 opisska wrote:
The "dont support erdogan" is possibly the only sane line of thought here, even though on thr scale of turkey, the effect is gonna be minimal and it is questionable whether the contact of locals with westerners isnt actually helpful. The danger to be hurt in a terrorist attack is still statistically much smaller than many other dangers you are probably not changing your plans for. Its the same twisted logic that allows many goverments to invest into security and "anti terrorist measurea" even though the same money could save much more lives when put elsewhere.

On December 20 2016 21:51 opisska wrote:
The "dont support erdogan" is possibly the only sane line of thought here, even though on thr scale of turkey, the effect is gonna be minimal and it is questionable whether the contact of locals with westerners isnt actually helpful. The danger to be hurt in a terrorist attack is still statistically much smaller than many other dangers you are probably not changing your plans for. Its the same twisted logic that allows many goverments to invest into security and "anti terrorist measurea" even though the same money could save much more lives when put elsewhere.

On December 20 2016 19:30 Pontual wrote:

You think it's a vague feeling of danger, he thinks it's real danger. Get used to different opinions.

On December 21 2016 16:37 Orcasgt24 wrote:

The likelihood of a terrorist attack in Turkey is higher than what could be described as "normal risk". Obviously there's always a risk of one anywhere and being in the wrong place at the wrong time is a statistical unlikelihood but this is your life. You only get one. Why risk it?

On December 20 2016 18:12 opisska wrote:


The only reason you "had to" cancel any trip to Turkey is in your head or possible in the heads of other participants. The danger of something happening to you there is unchanged withing statistical uncertainties and still heavily dominated by traffic.