Isis burn pilot alive..

Tugboats

ireland.man wrote: »

I'm not dismissing 2 people's lives but I'm including all 100,000 other hostages they have and are mistreating. You're choosing to focus on two and ignoring every non-'famous' hostage. How in gods name can you justify ignoring some hostages in favour of others?

The western hostages are a propaganda tool for isis. Releasing videos every day of a local Syrian fruit seller or a gay lad getting executed wont inspire the next Jihadi John in a London council house to board a flight to Syria.

As i said the shock value increased in their latest video and it will be interesting to see what moves they make in the coming months. Apparently they have increased the amount they pay fixers to bring them hostages so they may well be getting desperate. Its vital to keep aid workers and reporters away imo

Wurzelbert

RobYourBuilder wrote: »

Our lads want 'disenfranchised' Jihadis to liase with the Gardai. Sweden want to give them jobs and help them integrate. I'm of the opinion that you can't reasonate with people who have the mentality of an 11th century tribal warlord.

Make them persons non grata.

is there an option - in the constitution or wherever - to declare an irish citizen persona non grata and no longer let him into the country? i know there is a similar discussion going on in germany...
and i completely agree with the 11th century tribal warlord mentality part...so basically - in theory anyway - we would need a couple of laws changed and the death penalty reinstated around here..

BoJack Horseman

Wurzelbert wrote: »

is there an option - in the constitution or wherever - to declare an irish citizen persona non grata and no longer let him into the country? i know there is a similar discussion going on in germany...
and i completely agree with the 11th century tribal warlord mentality part...so basically - in theory anyway - we would need a couple of laws changed and the death penalty reinstated around here..

The 'withdrawal of passports' is being looked into, hopefully to be passed in the summer.

Death penalty was abolished by plebecite.

RobYourBuilder

Basis for Revocations of naturalised Irish Citizenship:

The Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act, 1956, section 19, states the Minister may revoke a certificate of naturalisation if he is satisfied:


a) You obtained it through fraud, misrepresentation or concealment of material facts or circumstances 


b) You have, through an overt act, failed in your duty of fidelity to the nation and loyalty to the State 


c) You were ordinarily resident outside Ireland (other than in public service) for a continuous period of 7 years and, without a reasonable excuse, did not register your name and a declaration of your intention to retain Irish citizenship with an Irish diplomatic mission or consular office or with the Minister for Justice and Equality on an annual basis


d) You are also, under the law of a country at war with the State, a citizen of that country 


e) You have, by any other voluntary act other than marriage or registration of civil partnership, acquired citizenship of another country 

seamus

Wurzelbert wrote: »

is there an option - in the constitution or wherever - to declare an irish citizen persona non grata and no longer let him into the country?

No. The minister for justice has the power to revoke citizenship, but I believe this only applies to naturalised citizens. Afaik, people who have citizenship through birth or descent cannot have it revoked.

There are also international rules against making a person stateless, so it couldn't be legislated for anyway.

This is kind of a stable door/horse situation anyway. The kind of idiots who go halfway across the world to join a war can't exactly be considered mentally stable, so the threat of losing their citizenship likely wouldn't weigh heavily on their minds. Chances are they expect to go across, fight and then live there in the glory of Islamic state.

It's only once they get over there they realise they don't belong and try to come home. At that stage the revocation of citizenship accomplishes little except encourage them to stay with ISIS and fight - because they have nowhere else to go.

A more sensible approach would be legislation which simply made it illegal to travel for such purposes. When you get home, you go to jail. It's preferable to living in a warzone, so people will take that option.

If possible, you then revoke their citizenship and send them home after serving their time in jail. If not, you then place limits on their ability to travel outside of the country for the next ten years.

Wurzelbert

RobYourBuilder wrote: »

Basis for Revocations of naturalised Irish Citizenship:

okay, that looks like it could be made to work if enforced properly...on the other hand, what they do in syria does not really affect “the state”...so i dunno...

Timberrrrrrrr

DarkJager wrote: »

It's called an opinion. And for the record, I would happily back up my statement and personally execute these scum if given a chance with no legal repercussions. I mean that 100%.

So why not hop on a plane to Turkey, cross the border into Syria and join the militias that are fighting?

Tugboats

seamus wrote: »

No. The minister for justice has the power to revoke citizenship, but I believe this only applies to naturalised citizens. Afaik, people who have citizenship through birth or descent cannot have it revoked.

There are also international rules against making a person stateless, so it couldn't be legislated for anyway.

This is kind of a stable door/horse situation anyway. The kind of idiots who go halfway across the world to join a war can't exactly be considered mentally stable, so the threat of losing their citizenship likely wouldn't weigh heavily on their minds. Chances are they expect to go across, fight and then live there in the glory of Islamic state.

It's only once they get over there they realise they don't belong and try to come home. At that stage the revocation of citizenship accomplishes little except encourage them to stay with ISIS and fight - because they have nowhere else to go.

A more sensible approach would be legislation which simply made it illegal to travel for such purposes. When you get home, you go to jail. It's preferable to living in a warzone, so people will take that option.

We hardly jail murderers and rapists I don't think putting a member of Isis in jail for about 20 minutes is a good plan

Timberrrrrrrr

DarkJager wrote: »

A ground force would sustain countless casualties trying to remove IS from Raqqa. The only sensible option is to destroy it. Obviously there will be a large loss of civilian life, but the annihilation of IS is top priority.

So again,


Kill THOUSANDS of innocent men, women and children to save a few innocent people?

This is your answer to stopping the murder,


More murder :rolleyes:

RobYourBuilder

Across western Europe, the prisons are a hotbed for extremist Islamic beliefs. That's where one of the Paris shooters became radicalised. Jailing them might just exasperate the problem.

crockholm

RobYourBuilder wrote: »

Our lads want 'disenfranchised' Jihadis to liase with the Gardai. Sweden want to give them jobs and help them integrate. I'm of the opinion that you can't reasonate with people who have the mentality of an 11th century tribal warlord.

Make them persons non grata.

Unfortunately Örebro municipality might have a recruitment headache as their Jihadis have a terrible knack of dying over there-2 didn't make it past the first interveiw in january and last week Another was made unavailable due to an inability to breathe;)

ChunkyLover54

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So again,


Kill THOUSANDS of innocent men, women and children to save a few innocent people?

This is your answer to stopping the murder,


More murder :rolleyes:

Can you post at least one comment that consists of more than just sarcasm?

Rikand

BMMachine wrote: »

okay, I don't have a solution. Why would I?

What I do know is that millions of kilo's of explosives haven't solved one damn thing in the middle east. why would another couple of million ?
You think Al-Qaeda is 'defeated'? Did you know that the invasion of Afghanistan by the west just ratified their power and ambition in the eyes of many extreme Islamists, especially in neighbouring Pakistan.. or do you guys have the same delusion that the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was just because, ya know, all dem terrorists live there? If you do think that, watch the video I linked earlier, it will explain the history of that region far better than I could.

all of you going "BOMB THEM MORE!" are just playing into the hands of vast areas of political establishment. Its very easy to have an enemy and sell that enemy to a public that wants one, especially when that enemy is as vague and confusing as "terrorism". If you want to have no understanding, then by all means just eat up what you are given and react in inane and stupid ways on the internet. If you want to understand the deep web and history of these and other societies, do some research, its not all as it seems. Humanity and societies, especially those that are so distant from us like the middle-east can be quite alien to us but when you break things down and start seeing and learning, all that goes away.

Yes, this latest act is absolutely evil and it is in the long string of evil acts from this particular group. There is no one denying that, its just we need to think about what we do rather than jump in and make an even bigger mess

Ah sure Hitler was a grand lad when he was over in Poland making an arse of things, you know, you could keep him on the long finger and not worry because he was all the way over there....

I'm sure ISIS will be no different!

DarkJager

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So again,


Kill THOUSANDS of innocent men, women and children to save a few innocent people?

This is your answer to stopping the murder,


More murder :rolleyes:

Or allow IS to continue existing with that area as their stronghold until they decide it's time to extend their caliphate again? To destroy a cancer, a few good cells also have to die.

Timberrrrrrrr

ChunkyLover54 wrote: »

Can you post at least one comment that consists of more than just sarcasm?

It's not sarcasm it's disbelief that the people on here with their faux outrage at the horrible murder of a few innocent people want to kill THOUSANDS of innocent people to stop said murders!

ireland.man

Tugboats wrote: »

The western hostages are a propaganda tool for isis. Releasing videos every day of a local Syrian fruit seller or a gay lad getting executed wont inspire the next Jihadi John in a London council house to board a flight to Syria.

As i said the shock value increased in their latest video and it will be interesting to see what moves they make in the coming months. Apparently they have increased the amount they pay fixers to bring them hostages so they may well be getting desperate. Its vital to keep aid workers and reporters away imo

The higher 'shock value' of a Western media focused individual being executed over a local shopkeeper is all due to people only caring about some victims and not others- typical of this thread.

Timberrrrrrrr

DarkJager wrote: »

Or allow IS to continue existing with that area as their stronghold until they decide it's time to extend their caliphate again? To destroy a cancer, a few good cells also have to die.

So you advocate murdering thousands of innocents? You realise this makes you just as blood thirsty than any ISIS member right?

Royal Irish

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So again,


Kill THOUSANDS of innocent men, women and children to save a few innocent people?

This is your answer to stopping the murder,


More murder :rolleyes:

What is your opinion on what western governments should do to stop the Islamic State?

Timberrrrrrrr

Royal Irish wrote: »

What is your opinion on what western governments should do to stop the Islamic State?

Train and equip the Kurds and other countries in modern warfare and let them take care of the business end of things. These middle eastern countries are oil rich and should also invest in training troops and educating their people.

cerastes

ChunkyLover54 wrote: »

Can you post at least one comment that consists of more than just sarcasm?

It holds up some strange beliefs or outrages to light, someone outraged at burning someone to death? Their answer to burn bomb and shoot what may likely be innocent civilians in a vain attempt, if not costly one to kill a few extremists hiding among them doesn't sound either reasonable or is surprisingly violent for someone outraged by similar violence? Maybe that poster can reply just when he's crossing the border into Syria?

seamus

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So you advocate murdering thousands of innocents? You realise this makes you just as blood thirsty than any ISIS member right?

Ah yeah, but they're only towelheads. The children would end up becoming terrorists themselves.

Everyone knows that massive acts of brutality are really good at quashing terrorism, just look at Iraq...no wait, what about.....em.....well, you know what I mean, it's just common sense!

Tugboats

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Train and equip the Kurds and other countries in modern warfare and let them take care of the business end of things. These middle eastern countries are oil rich and should also invest in training troops and educating their people.

So you support military action by the Kurds and middle eastern countries? Weren't you giving out earlier about the loss of civilian life by the use of military action?

Timberrrrrrrr

Tugboats wrote: »

So you support military action by the Kurds and middle eastern countries? Weren't you giving out earlier about the loss of civilian life by the use of military action?

I'm talking about a well planned boots on the ground (not western troops as this will cause more problems than solve) action by troops from that region, not an invasion by western troops, not carpet bombing towns and cities filled with innocent civilians and certainly not nuking the area as some fools on here have advocated.

lazybones32

I think Jordan has the right attitude towards these 'creatures': if they execute one of yours, kill two of theirs. Go on a serious hostage-grab and get enough to last a few months of executions...

Personally, I'd bury the f**kers with pig-flesh and put that on Youtube...isil like Youtube, don't they?

My inhumanity may offend some of the more delicate members of Society, who want to discuss solutions while weeping for the children but human history shows that power and ruthlessness is a universally understood language. And it gets results.

Timberrrrrrrr

lazybones32 wrote: »

I think Jordan has the right attitude towards these 'creatures': if they execute one of yours, kill two of theirs. Go on a serious hostage-grab and get enough to last a few months of executions...

Personally, I'd bury the f**kers with pig-flesh and put that on Youtube...isil like Youtube, don't they?

My inhumanity may offend some of the more delicate members of Society, who want to discuss solutions while weeping for the children but human history shows that power and ruthlessness is a universally understood language. And it gets results.

So you advocate the actions of ISIS? Because that's exactly the language they are using.

lazybones32

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I'm talking about a well planned boots on the ground (not western troops as this will cause more problems than solve) action by troops from that region, not an invasion by western troops, not carpet bombing towns and cities filled with innocent civilians and certainly not nuking the area as some fools on here have advocated.

Learn any lessons from Afghanistan in the 80's? Iraq? Training and arming a native force can have serious consequences down the line but you recommend trying it again?

Timberrrrrrrr

lazybones32 wrote: »

Learn any lessons from Afghanistan in the 80's? Iraq? Training and arming a native force can have serious consequences down the line but you recommend trying it again?

It's a middle eastern problem so let them sort it out. You want western troops to go in? How did that work in Afghanistan? Iraq?

Sure lets just bomb em all and let their god sort em out right?

Skylinehead

DarkJager wrote: »

To destroy a cancer, a few good cells also have to die.

To expand on that analogy, to kill a cancer we have to kill the person outright. But hey, the cancers dead!

BoJack Horseman

Skylinehead wrote: »

To expand on that analogy, to kill a cancer we have to kill the person outright.

Your right.

The only way to destroy ISIS is to destroy the entire planet.

Royal Irish

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I'm talking about a well planned boots on the ground (not western troops as this will cause more problems than solve) action by troops from that region, not an invasion by western troops, not carpet bombing towns and cities filled with innocent civilians and certainly not nuking the area as some fools on here have advocated.

The Peshmerga seem to be having the most success fighting ISIS toe to teo but unfortunately the Kurds are only protecting their own lands and people, and they wont fight ISIS in Syria and parts of Iraq that isn't Kurdish.

Agreed about western troops intervening. It would only make ISIS stronger as there would be a massive influx of foreign fighters for "Jihad".

I doubt any middle eastern countries will commit to anything more than just airstrikes.