ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

joeyjojo said:
You just explained it perfectly. They would have been arrested and tried, in a court with a judge. Since they were in a lawless region though where our government couldn't get at them they went straight to "execution by missiles" instead.

Even worse, the decision seems to have been taken by Cameron and Hammond with no other legal backing than the attorney general saying there was a "legal basis" which they've refused to share in parliament.

The BBC paraphrasing Kat Craig (Reprieve) puts it succinctly: 'the prime minister "has given himself a secret, unreviewable power" to kill anyone anywhere in the world at any time'.



Have you read 1984? This is thought-policing.
Click to expand...

George Galloway is that you?
 
arknor said:
no but they were involved in active operations inside Pakistan at the time against the Taliban and paying the Pakistani government large amounts of monies to facilitate this.
They didn't just invade foreign airspace (yes I'm aware Pakistan didn't know about the osama raid before it happened)

Russians are now in syria anyway, be funny if we accidentally bombed them instead of isis or assads forces
Click to expand...

I've got a feeling that Assad will be ignored a bit now that ISIS is so prominent as a threat. As long as he doesn't escalate attacks on civilians or use chemical weapons he might get away with it all now he's the lesser evil.
 
RDM said:
I find it really hard to care too much about this to be honest.

Joined a foreign military we are actively fighting against, plotting attacks against the UK, in an effectively stateless part of the world, they seem to me to be legitimate targets and the sort of people we should be targeting.
Click to expand...

Well why did you reply in the first place then? :p
 
n111ck said:
No one really cares about this - attacking the government is just an easy way to get in the papers.
Click to expand...

Yes and no.

It really depends on whether this was an isolated incident, or something that is going to happen regularly. Some people are massively overreacting, sure. Parliament was in recess, a decision had to be made.

However, at the same time, the Prime Minister did authorise military action in Syria a year after Parliament told him not to. If it's likely to happen again in the near future then he really should be asking Parliament for permission. It wouldn't be acceptable to repeatedly go against its wishes.

By and large nobody is hugely bothered about this one incident. It's the potential for more that has people's backs up.
 
Last edited:
satchef1 said:
Yes and no.

It really depends on whether this was an isolated incident, or something that is going to happen regularly. Some people are massively overreacting, sure. Parliament was in recess, a decision had to be made.

However, at the same time, the Prime Minister did authorise military action in Syria a year after Parliament told him not to. If it's likely to happen again in the near future then he really should be asking Parliament for permission. It wouldn't be acceptable to repeatedly go against its wishes.

By and large nobody is hugely bothered about this one incident. It's the potential for more that has people's backs up.
Click to expand...

Which is illogical, most have already said it is ludicrous that we can attack ISIL grunts in Iraq yet cannot strike their C2 nodes in Syria. Time to change policy and not blink an eyelid when this happens again.
 
Both of those texts are rather good, all I could come up with was a pale twist on what the grim reaper said in Bill and Ted, being the drone is called the reaper.

"Be you the caliph or an IS street sweeper, sooner or later you dance with the reaper"
 
Tango Down...

Job well done RAF, can't believe the BBC bias on the reporting though (well, actually I can). However opening up their HYS for comments seems to have backfired spectacularly, apart from a few woolly headed conchies who wanted to bring the "poor dears" back to the UK for a chat over tea and biscuits, the ayes had it by about 99 to 1.

Just hope when it's "JJ's" turn they put a little extra sunshine on the missile tip, if you know what I mean. ;)
 
Vern1961 said:
Tango Down...

Job well done RAF, can't believe the BBC bias on the reporting though (well, actually I can). However opening up their HYS for comments seems to have backfired spectacularly, apart from a few woolly headed conchies who wanted to bring the "poor dears" back to the UK for a chat over tea and biscuits, the ayes had it by about 99 to 1.

Just hope when it's "JJ's" turn they put a little extra sunshine on the missile tip, if you know what I mean. ;)
Click to expand...

The media are always very quick to accuse politicians of being "out of touch", but between this and the migrant crisis when will the media acknowledge that they themselves are "out of touch"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom