ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

RoboCod said:
How is it sucking up to Obama? I'm stating fact and opinion on matters. If anything, that opinion was super critical, in that he wants a big win before his exit.

Then the comment about Russia and Syria "bombing way harder". I just don't know what to say, how old are you? Does this mean you support indiscriminate targeting and barrel bombs?
Click to expand...

lol



as supposed to the west

 
Er lol? (am I doing it right kids?)....



[insert any other 3rd hand media that supports my closed view here, because that alone makes me an expert on what I'm talking about]
 
scorza said:
Breaking News: France drops nationality-removal plan. Doesn't say why yet but I bet it's human rights related - probably got Amal Clooney suing the French government on behalf of some poor, oppressed jihadi. The weak west is hampered in its fight against terrorism because of dumb human rights legislation.
Click to expand...

"French President drops plans for knee-jerk constitutional change, scorza speculates why and ends up in the realm of fantasy"

I hope you never need to call on any long standing legal protections that you're so keen to sweep aside under the guise of a barely-defined war on a thing.
 
Last edited:
I doubt he knows much useful at all - those kind of operations are usually massively fragmented and the cells largely isolated.
 
scorza said:
Breaking News: France drops nationality-removal plan. Doesn't say why yet but I bet it's human rights related - probably got Amal Clooney suing the French government on behalf of some poor, oppressed jihadi.
Click to expand...

This is wild speculation on your part but, if true, I'd say that is human rights legislation doing its job. It's there to protect everyone from capricious, knee-jerk rubbish like this.

The weak west is hampered in its fight against terrorism because of dumb human rights legislation.
Click to expand...

If we give up on Human Rights in order to "protect" ourselves from terrorism then the terrorists truly have won.
 
Mr Jack said:
This is wild speculation on your part but, if true, I'd say that is human rights legislation doing its job. It's there to protect everyone from capricious, knee-jerk rubbish like this.
Click to expand...

How many terrorist atrocities does Paris have to stomach before taking action isn't "knee-jerk"?

Mr Jack said:
If we give up on Human Rights in order to "protect" ourselves from terrorism then the terrorists truly have won.
Click to expand...

I didn't say give up on human rights, I said give up on dumb human rights - which the Human Rights Act is certainly a part of.
 
scorza said:
How many terrorist atrocities does Paris have to stomach before taking action isn't "knee-jerk"?
Click to expand...

Action likely to have a meaningful impact is one thing; knee-jerk suspension of rights is another. "We have to do something; this is something; we must do this" is not a coherent chain of argumentation.

I didn't say give up on human rights, I said give up on dumb human rights - which the Human Rights Act is certainly a part of.
Click to expand...

The Human Rights Act does exactly nothing but bring Human Rights into law; if you are against the Human Rights Act you are against Human Rights. There is no two ways about it.
 
Mr Jack said:
Action likely to have a meaningful impact is one thing; knee-jerk suspension of rights is another. "We have to do something; this is something; we must do this" is not a coherent chain of argumentation.
Click to expand...

Neither is "we must do nothing and just hope the problem goes away". The case for stripping terrorists of their western nationality has been made, the reason why France has dropped it is because Hollande doesn't have the energy to take on the human rights brigade.

Mr Jack said:
The Human Rights Act does exactly nothing but bring Human Rights into law; if you are against the Human Rights Act you are against Human Rights. There is no two ways about it.
Click to expand...

So human rights didn't exist before the ECHR? What a warped viewpoint you have. When we can't deport Iraqi failed asylum seekers convicted of killing a child by dangerous driving because of human rights laws, then that law is a dumb law.
 
scorza said:
So human rights didn't exist before the ECHR?
Click to expand...

I see you're up to your usual standards of reading comprehension.

When we can't deport Iraqi failed asylum seekers convicted of killing a child by dangerous driving because of human rights laws, then that law is a dumb law.
Click to expand...

The point of human rights is that the qualifying criteria is "human" not "human who hasn't committed a crime", "human born in the right country", "human with the right religion", "human with the right skin colour", etc.
 
Human rights law has been *******ised by lawyers making themselves a huge amount of money by twisting it in directions it was never intended to be used. It's now so far from a catchment for those in genuine need as to be farcical.
 
Mr Jack said:
I see you're up to your usual standards of reading comprehension.
Click to expand...

In other words, you've got no response.

Mr Jack said:
The point of human rights is that the qualifying criteria is "human" not "human who hasn't committed a crime", "human born in the right country", "human with the right religion", "human with the right skin colour", etc.
Click to expand...

What about the the dead girl, was she not a "human"? The fact is this guy had no right to be in the country, he committed a crime, he should have been deported, but instead of judge in his ivory tower decided that the scumbags right to a family life was more important than all that. That's dumb, dumb, dumb.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom