Unless they are killed (hope), they'll be back.......when they get to that shithole and realise the freedom this country gives them.
I read in the Times that one of the militants was beaten badly for being caught smoking during ramadan......
I cant imagine the young men raised in inner cities staying long in a country where they're not allowed to drink, smoke, do weed or have sex and instead made to concentrate on killing. Might be playing at being big bad men right now but a few months time when their mates are getting killed they wont be so keen, begging to come back on the pretence of spreading the word for more to go out there. we shouldnt let them back in but unfortuntely the law says we have to.
I haven't already seen it posted in the thread so I'll make the point that it is completely illegal internationally (and totally immoral) to make somebody deliberately stateless, which is largely what you're all proposing.
If the government somehow were legally able to make people stateless that could be abused by just making anybody they don't like stateless.
Scary stuff.
Far more scary stuff is the idea that some of the indoctrinated psychos who now get their kicks from beheadings, mass shootings /rapes and genocides could creep back in to UK to fester and plan another Lee Rigby-style attack.
I hope the Americans blow them to bits, or the Kurds catch them, so we don't have to either rely on our border guards to find them or pay for their legal aid while in prison.
Far more scary stuff is the idea that some of the indoctrinated psychos who now get their kicks from beheadings, mass shootings /rapes and genocides could creep back in to UK to fester and plan another Lee Rigby-style attack.
I hope the Americans blow them to bits, or the Kurds catch them, so we don't have to either rely on our border guards to find them or pay for their legal aid while in prison.
Thats going to be such a joke when theyre back and allowed to claim benefits. we're supporting terrorists if they can.
They only believe in one thing, "an eye for an eye", treat them the same way. I don't really care about being dragged down to their level. Force should be met with force, especially where these psychopaths are concerned.
They only believe in one thing, "an eye for an eye", treat them the same way. I don't really care about being dragged down to their level. Force should be met with force, especially where these psychopaths are concerned.
Abandon the rule of law? Doesn't sound very sensible.
What's the point of making them stateless? You'll never know where they are then and your going to have to try and constantly track these people to make sure they don't try and come back to the UK. Better I think to let them keep their citizenship and arrest them on their return. Then bang em up.
The current laws we have can deal with these people already.
If you make them stateless then what do you have - a terrorist on the lose. Let them back into the country and then try them in a court of law. A terrorist in jail is a failed terrorist.
This is what happens when you had out like citizenship like smarties.
Remove their citizenship, even if they are a natural born citizen, make them stateless - I am sure there friends in ISIS will give them citizenship - or if law does not permit they should be tried for treason - that's what the Americans would do, and for all their faults - at least with this kinda crap, they don't put up with. Britain these days seems like a breeding ground for terrorism - I heard the CIA were seriously concerned about a new wave of terrorists being natural born British citizens (visa waiver etc) because Britain gives citizenship to any Tom, Dick or Abdul.
They only believe in one thing, "an eye for an eye", treat them the same way. I don't really care about being dragged down to their level. Force should be met with force, especially where these psychopaths are concerned.
But it is our record of human rights, freedom of speech and upholding the rule of law that differentiates us from hardline states and groups like Isis, and makes our societies better than theirs.
If we resort to the same things they do it makes us no better than them, and does the terrorists job for them.
We didn't fund ISIS, part of the whole reason why we didn't bomb Assad was fear of it taking over.
You have no idea if that is true, right? I remember from news reports nothing about ISIS I remember the fear of funding groups affiliated with al queda although it was never a fear expressed until the media began asking the question. Where have IS come from? We have given funding/weapons/training to rebel groups/militants/mercinaries in Libya and Syria. As far as I can tell IS are these same guys plus mercinaries operating in the power vaccum in Iraq and who knows who was funding them for their work previous. So i would say it is inevitable we had been funding them. We didnt know who we were funding at the time (or so it was claimed) hence the medias concerns
You have no idea if that is true, right? I remember from news reports nothing about ISIS I remember the fear of funding groups affiliated with al queda although it was never a fear expressed until the media began asking the question. Where have IS come from? We have given funding/weapons/training to rebel groups/militants/mercinaries in Libya and Syria. As far as I can tell IS are these same guys plus mercinaries operating in the power vaccum in Iraq and who knows who was funding them for their work previous. So i would say it is inevitable we had been funding them. We didnt know who we were funding at the time (or so it was claimed) hence the medias concerns
The problem is quite a complex one. In any conflict, once it gets going the extremists and militants jump on that bandwagon. They take advantage of the power vacuum and begin to push their own agenda. The Syrian opposition fractured a couple of years ago, as the extremists began to emerge and assert their beliefs. No doubt to many in the West, and amongst the more moderate Syrian opposition groups, they were seen at the time as an annoyance, unlikely to gain traction and were probably tolerated somewhat for their fighting abilities and their willingness to die.
But in the last year Isis has exploded (no pun intended), and become such a large and dangerous group that the more moderate Syrian opposition groups are just as terrified of them, and are actively engaged in fighting them too. The West and the Syrian opposition were caught off guard, and Isis are even too extreme for the various Al Quada factions, which I guess says something about their sheer brutality.
But the West most certainly backed off supporting and arming the Syrian opposition when Isis began to gain a real foothold and came to the attention of the World. Of course Isis became an even bigger danger as they defeated first Syrian and then Iraqi army units, enabling them to get access to much better weapons to further help their cause.
They only believe in one thing, "an eye for an eye", treat them the same way. I don't really care about being dragged down to their level. Force should be met with force, especially where these psychopaths are concerned.
I agree.
Those bottom-feeders don't deserve to live here or anywhere else on this planet. They are THE bottom of the barrel, right under the diseases and bacteria.
Abandon the rule of law? Doesn't sound very sensible.
well here's a quick rewrite......Those that leave this country for the purpose of jihad can hereby go and f**k themselves If they think they can come back...
You have no idea if that is true, right? I remember from news reports nothing about ISIS I remember the fear of funding groups affiliated with al queda although it was never a fear expressed until the media began asking the question. Where have IS come from? We have given funding/weapons/training to rebel groups/militants/mercinaries in Libya and Syria. As far as I can tell IS are these same guys plus mercinaries operating in the power vaccum in Iraq and who knows who was funding them for their work previous. So i would say it is inevitable we had been funding them. We didnt know who we were funding at the time (or so it was claimed) hence the medias concerns
The vast majority of the Syrian opposition was always islamist based. Not all of them as extreme as ISIS but similar to the likes of Hamas or the Muslim Brotherhood. ISIS themselves are a combination of the remnants of AQI (Al-Qaeda in Iraq), the most extreme elements of the initial Syrian opposition as well as a host of foreign Jihadists.
They have also attracted a lot of fighters from more moderate opposition to fight for them so it is indeed likely that some of them have received funding, training and weapons from the West (or our allies).
well here's a quick rewrite......Those that leave this country for the purpose of jihad can hereby go and f**k themselves If they think they can come back...
Emergency extradition laws might help. Any caught creeping back here - fly them back and hand them over to the Kurds. No legal aid bills, no prison costs, no regrets.
Emergency extradition laws might help. Any caught creeping back here - fly them back and hand them over to the Kurds. No legal aid bills, no prison costs, no regrets.
Again, a highly impractical solution. Extradition only works if the foreign authorities request it, in which case I'd be all for it. But you cannot just dump a UK citizen in a foreign country.
Funny how no one mentions the UK citizens that go and fight in the Israeli Army, and have been doing for years. The Israelis have committed far worse atrocities than ISIS, but that doesnt seem to matter.
What is really needed in the long term is education. If these people were educated properly they wouldn't be Muslim in the first place as they would see how misguided that religion is.
Funny how no one mentions the UK citizens that go and fight in the Israeli Army, and have been doing for years. The Israelis have committed far worse atrocities than ISIS, but that doesnt seem to matter.
As usual double standards.
What are these atrocities that you believe are worse than raping and beheading little children ?
Comments
LOL this is DS, watch and be amazed:D
I cant imagine the young men raised in inner cities staying long in a country where they're not allowed to drink, smoke, do weed or have sex and instead made to concentrate on killing. Might be playing at being big bad men right now but a few months time when their mates are getting killed they wont be so keen, begging to come back on the pretence of spreading the word for more to go out there. we shouldnt let them back in but unfortuntely the law says we have to.
Far more scary stuff is the idea that some of the indoctrinated psychos who now get their kicks from beheadings, mass shootings /rapes and genocides could creep back in to UK to fester and plan another Lee Rigby-style attack.
I hope the Americans blow them to bits, or the Kurds catch them, so we don't have to either rely on our border guards to find them or pay for their legal aid while in prison.
Thats going to be such a joke when theyre back and allowed to claim benefits. we're supporting terrorists if they can.
Abandon the rule of law? Doesn't sound very sensible.
The current laws we have can deal with these people already.
If you make them stateless then what do you have - a terrorist on the lose. Let them back into the country and then try them in a court of law. A terrorist in jail is a failed terrorist.
Remove their citizenship, even if they are a natural born citizen, make them stateless - I am sure there friends in ISIS will give them citizenship - or if law does not permit they should be tried for treason - that's what the Americans would do, and for all their faults - at least with this kinda crap, they don't put up with. Britain these days seems like a breeding ground for terrorism - I heard the CIA were seriously concerned about a new wave of terrorists being natural born British citizens (visa waiver etc) because Britain gives citizenship to any Tom, Dick or Abdul.
But it is our record of human rights, freedom of speech and upholding the rule of law that differentiates us from hardline states and groups like Isis, and makes our societies better than theirs.
If we resort to the same things they do it makes us no better than them, and does the terrorists job for them.
You have no idea if that is true, right? I remember from news reports nothing about ISIS I remember the fear of funding groups affiliated with al queda although it was never a fear expressed until the media began asking the question. Where have IS come from? We have given funding/weapons/training to rebel groups/militants/mercinaries in Libya and Syria. As far as I can tell IS are these same guys plus mercinaries operating in the power vaccum in Iraq and who knows who was funding them for their work previous. So i would say it is inevitable we had been funding them. We didnt know who we were funding at the time (or so it was claimed) hence the medias concerns
The problem is quite a complex one. In any conflict, once it gets going the extremists and militants jump on that bandwagon. They take advantage of the power vacuum and begin to push their own agenda. The Syrian opposition fractured a couple of years ago, as the extremists began to emerge and assert their beliefs. No doubt to many in the West, and amongst the more moderate Syrian opposition groups, they were seen at the time as an annoyance, unlikely to gain traction and were probably tolerated somewhat for their fighting abilities and their willingness to die.
But in the last year Isis has exploded (no pun intended), and become such a large and dangerous group that the more moderate Syrian opposition groups are just as terrified of them, and are actively engaged in fighting them too. The West and the Syrian opposition were caught off guard, and Isis are even too extreme for the various Al Quada factions, which I guess says something about their sheer brutality.
But the West most certainly backed off supporting and arming the Syrian opposition when Isis began to gain a real foothold and came to the attention of the World. Of course Isis became an even bigger danger as they defeated first Syrian and then Iraqi army units, enabling them to get access to much better weapons to further help their cause.
I agree.
Those bottom-feeders don't deserve to live here or anywhere else on this planet. They are THE bottom of the barrel, right under the diseases and bacteria.
well here's a quick rewrite......Those that leave this country for the purpose of jihad can hereby go and f**k themselves If they think they can come back...
Propose it Sunday.... implemented Monday.
If you choose to fight for an enemy army, then as far as I'm concerned you renounce all right to be treated as a UK citizen.
The vast majority of the Syrian opposition was always islamist based. Not all of them as extreme as ISIS but similar to the likes of Hamas or the Muslim Brotherhood. ISIS themselves are a combination of the remnants of AQI (Al-Qaeda in Iraq), the most extreme elements of the initial Syrian opposition as well as a host of foreign Jihadists.
They have also attracted a lot of fighters from more moderate opposition to fight for them so it is indeed likely that some of them have received funding, training and weapons from the West (or our allies).
I think this is beyond even terrorism, it should be either war crimes at The Hague or high treason against the crown.
If only things were so easy...
Ok, that probably is a tad simplistic. ....
However, in extreme times, extreme emergency measures should be bought in....... any small islands around the uk unused? our Guantanamo?
I'd vote for it.....
Again, a highly impractical solution. Extradition only works if the foreign authorities request it, in which case I'd be all for it. But you cannot just dump a UK citizen in a foreign country.
What about putting them in Gruinatd Island
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gruinard_Island
As usual double standards.
What are these atrocities that you believe are worse than raping and beheading little children ?