Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Govt Minister says all British ISIS members should be killed Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Rory Stewart, a Minister of State at the Department for International Development, has said that all British members of ISIS should be killed while they are still in Syria rather than allow them to return to the UK.

    I agree with this. They are an intolerable threat, they have given up their allegiance to this country and we owe them nothing. It would be safer to kill them while they are over there rather than allow these vicious, cowardly terrorists to filter back here over time.

    In other Iraq/Syria news, the ISIS Caliphate is in a state of terminal decline and collapse. Their capital in Raqqa has been taken by the Kurds, they have no more large cities in Iraq. Their territory is now limited to towns in the Euphrates river valley in western Iraq and eastern Syria. With the Kurds and Syrians closing from the west and the Iraqis closing in from the east, it is now only a matter of time before the caliphate is destroyed (see map below; ISIS territory is black, Syrian/Iraqi territory in red and Kurdish territory in yellow)

    https://i.imgur.com/ZvbOgDQ.jpg
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    Don't think anyone can disagree tbh.

    However there's more issues that need to be addressed when you're the govt of this country. They are still british passport holders and bureaucracy dictates that a bunch of other things to be considered. So for ppl getting outraged that theyre being let in, shut up.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I don't mind if they aren't killed in Syria. They can be killed in Turkey / UK / Germany / US.
    Online

    18
    ReputationRep:
    US have insisted no ISIL fighters of US citizenship should,be caught. UK should say the same. :fuhrer:

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    we can take them all back & give them counselling on the NHS

    :emo:
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    The collapse of ISIS in Iraq and Syria will most likely mean a series of bombing campaigns/ terrorist attacks in Europe is incoming.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    It's madness that we freely let these people back into this country. Even if they are not sleeper cells intent on terrorism when they return, they have willingly and with great effort joined a group engaged in outrageous human rights abuses and a group which declares itself the enemy of all Western people. Even if they did not engage in human rights abuses in ISIS territory (how can we ever be certain of this?) they are at the very least complicit and abetting in such acts.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    This needs to include the 23000 Islamists on the government's list. Liquidate them and we no longer have a problem.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    I agree with this. They are an intolerable threat, they have given up their allegiance to this country and we owe them nothing. It would be safer to kill them while they are over there rather than allow these vicious, cowardly terrorists to filter back here over time.
    Both the minister and yourself don't seem to be very British. What happened to the rule of law? Just because someone is vile doesn't mean we can circumvent the values that uphold out society. ISIS preach and eye-for-an-eye. Don't stoop to their level. We are better than they and one of our core values is innocent until proven guilty. If you want to live in a country that executes people on a whim or has kangaroo courts, go and live in an ISIS stronghold.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Both the minister and yourself don't seem to be very British. What happened to the rule of law? Just because someone is vile doesn't mean we can circumvent the values that uphold out society. ISIS preach and eye-for-an-eye. Don't stoop to their level. We are better than they and one of our core values is innocent until proven guilty. If you want to live in a country that executes people on a whim or has kangaroo courts, go and live in an ISIS stronghold.
    First vile of the day. Congrats.

    You're missing the point. There's a war going on over there, and there are no courts or executions. We can just kill them in the warzone and there are no problems.

    Or you can bring them back here, and put them on trial for crucifying children and making women eat their own babies - at enormous cost to the taxpayer and lock them up in prison for a while where they can go around beheading other inmates (yes, that's already happened).
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Those not killed should be put on trial for treason and hung.

    The only issue is the cost. Hellfire missiles are expensive but so are trials. I think it must cheaper to kill them over there so we should try to get as many as possible.

    Treason used to be the only crime in which capital punishment was retained. I think that has been rescinded so that must be reinstated immediately.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by itsfantanoooo)
    Don't think anyone can disagree tbh.

    However there's more issues that need to be addressed when you're the govt of this country. They are still british passport holders and bureaucracy dictates that a bunch of other things to be considered. So for ppl getting outraged that theyre being let in, shut up.
    Suppose that someone who has a mental health disorder and for some reason they think that if they kill their family, their ex, their dog (may be all the same person in some circles) they will be happy and their life will be validated. That person is a nutjob and needs MH support. Just before they buy the machete from B&Q, they see an ISIS advert on the Internet and rather than lob off the head of their dog, they run off to Syria and through their MH-warped perspective of the world they think that serving the Caliphate will give them validation.

    Now, if they simply killed their family, we wouldn't even put them in prison. They could commit no offence because they are not mentally competent; we would put them in a nice cushy hospital and support them through their struggles, hope they get better. However, once war enters the picture, these people become the worst criminals imaginable and we come to the conclusion that such people have no humanity and deserve nothing but the gravest retribution. Why is that?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trinculo)
    You're missing the point. There's a war going on over there, and there are no courts or executions. We can just kill them in the warzone and there are no problems.
    Yep - I get that. And going to war on their turf is just what they need in order to feed their recruitment program. Oppressive Western state bombing innocent Muslims and all that.

    What business have we ever had going to war in the Middle East? Other than their oil and other business interests that is.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Notorious_B.I.G.)
    Suppose that someone who has a mental health disorder and for some reason they think that if they kill their family, their ex, their dog (may be all the same person in some circles) they will be happy and their life will be validated. That person is a nutjob and needs MH support. Just before they buy the machete from B&Q, they see an ISIS advert on the Internet and rather than lob off the head of their dog, they run off to Syria and through their MH-warped perspective of the world they think that serving the Caliphate will give them validation.

    Now, if they simply killed their family, we wouldn't even put them in prison. They could commit no offence because they are not mentally competent; we would put them in a nice cushy hospital and support them through their struggles, hope they get better. However, once war enters the picture, these people become the worst criminals imaginable and we come to the conclusion that such people have no humanity and deserve nothing but the gravest retribution. Why is that?
    this
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Yep - I get that. And going to war on their turf is just what they need in order to feed their recruitment program. Oppressive Western state bombing innocent Muslims and all that.

    What business have we ever had going to war in the Middle East? Other than their oil and other business interests that is.
    This isn't a situation with any good options - there are only bad ones.

    Were there no "Western" Intervention, what do you think would happen? They wouldn't need a recruitment programme, because they would have killed or enslaved half the people in the region.

    Play out the obvious scenarios:

    (1)No Western intervention or support - the governments in the area fight back the only way they know how - with equally incompetent and brutal troops. Many, many more people in region die in a protracted war - but obv that's ok as long as none of them are killed by us (this is the nature of just about all problems in the region - it's better for 1 million to die in a civil war than a single person is killed by an American)

    (2) ISIS wipes out everyone and gains support and beats a path of death and destruction toward Israel. Israel does what it does - mobiiises and wipes ISIS off the face of the earth somewhere in Southern Syria. This causes outrage in the Arab World, and everyone declares war on Israel. Israel wipes out a heap ton of Arab armies before Iran gets involved and starts bombing Israel in a naked Shia power grab. Israel calls on the US. The US gets involved and we have a World War.

    Not altogether in the realms of fantasy - and upon reflection, I think it's better that we do a bit of bombing and let Jeremy Corbyn cry a river about innocent Muslims.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    What business have we ever had going to war in the Middle East? Other than their oil and other business interests that is.
    What business we have had is immaterial. So unless you have a time machine, that argument you present is a rocking horse: it'll give you something to do but it won't get you anywhere.

    Fact is we are. If we stop, we run the risk of them bringing the war to us.

    There is no right in this argument, this is merely the lesser of two evils.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Fact is we are. If we stop, we run the risk of them bringing the war to us.
    You raise some fair points. But we aren't exactly at war with them. Our current operations in the Middle East involve a water pistol and a model helicopter.... thankfully. I don't see war being bought to us. A few loaners supposedly acting on instructions doesn't constitute war.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    He knows full well that America/Israel fund and support ISIS via Saudi; they want to sustain the presence of ISIS and carry on the disruption in the region.

    The usual inflammatory rhetoric from a political elite that want a racial civil war in this country as well.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    You raise some fair points. But we aren't exactly at war with them. Our current operations in the Middle East involve a water pistol and a model helicopter.... thankfully. I don't see war being bought to us. A few loaners supposedly acting on instructions doesn't constitute war.
    There is a political mandate to not place our people at risk, but also a political mandate to do something about the situation, so we end up arming and training people that, really, we'd be better off not arming and training... That will come back to bite us.

    And war takes many forms. If engaging them over there means that fewer people are over here to bomb tubes, buses, arenas, etc, then that's fine by me.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    There is a political mandate to not place our people at risk, but also a political mandate to do something about the situation, so we end up arming and training people that, really, we'd be better off not arming and training... That will come back to bite us.

    And war takes many forms. If engaging them over there means that fewer people are over here to bomb tubes, buses, arenas, etc, then that's fine by me.
    Agreed - but I can't help feeling that your later point is somewhat irrelevant as has been played out several times over the year or so. I am not convinced that engaging a guerrilla enemy using conventional war tactics works. This has been born out across the world many times over. But we don't seem learn or adapt our tactics.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.