ISIS people returning thread - no Lisa Smith talk (21/12/19)

Signore Fancy Pants

Gatling wrote: »

Maybe it's time for the defence forces investment in military drone technology .

We have a UAV capability suitable to our needs. Unfortunately like everything else, the DOD run the show.

end of the road

Dale Doback wrote: »

I know they don't, they want to get on with their Rojava and negotiations for establishing a federalised Kurdistan.

If they go to Iraq they may be killed, however, Turkey is an option.

an option for what?

SEPT 23 1989

She should have been down on her hands and knees in that interview begging to get out of that prisoner of war camp

Let the innocent child come back over here and let her stand trail for crimes against humanity standing by her dead husband beliefs that she ran away with

Signore Fancy Pants

end of the road wrote: »

an option for what?

What do you think?

Turkey would accept her or facilitate her illegal migration through the Eastern Mediteranean Route towards the Balkans as others have done.

Her options are not limited to Syria or Ireland.

Also, I see you missed my earlier post directed at you. Here it is again.

Would you not rather she pose a risk in a conflict zone rather than back in Ireland?

Gatling

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

She should have been down on her hands and knees in that interview begging to get out of that prisoner of war camp

Instead we got I'm an prisoner and were all not terrorist's and I'm ready to come home .


She actually seemed awfully calm for an Isis bride/terrorist

BBFAN

Dale Doback wrote: »

That is not Irelands problem tbh.

Lets remember, while ISIL were in a good position militarily, she wasnt looking to come back with her kid or concerned for its safety. The Caliphate in its current form has failed, "Plan B" is now in effect...."let me come home, 'cos child".

Id have sympathy for her if she was dragged to Syria, held against her will and ended up with a child from the result of nefarious actions....thats not the reality though.

The reality is, she found her religion of choice, she followed her beliefs, she willingly went to Syria and married an ISIL fighter and had a kid for him (potentially).

She made a litany of decisions that led to this. Now she wants out.

You dont put €100 on a horse to win and when it falls you cant change your mind and get your money back.

This entire post is about her and not the child. I've already said I don't support or agree with her in any way, shape or form.

That doesn't take away from the fact that this child exists and is an Irish citizen. We can take her back and throw her in prison if that keep you happy. I couldn't care less as long as the child is saved from a ****ty ****ty life or a premature death, whichever comes first.

end of the road

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

She should have been down on her hands and knees in that interview begging to get out of that prisoner of war camp

Let the innocent child come back over here and let her stand trail for crimes against humanity standing by her dead husband beliefs that she ran away with

and where is she going to stand trial for crimes against humanity exactly? certainly not in syria anyway.

Dale Doback wrote: »

What do you think?

Turkey would accept her or facilitate her illegal migration through the Eastern Mediteranean Route towards the Balkans as others have done.

Her options are not limited to Syria or Ireland.

Also, I see you missed my earlier post directed at you. Here it is again.

Would you not rather she pose a risk in a conflict zone rather than back in Ireland?

i'd rather she pose no risk. but given the risk she poses if left where she is, or if allowed to migrate wherever through turkey, then i'd suggest ireland is the best place to hold her given she belongs to it, and ireland is best placed to insure she doesn't pose a risk.

Signore Fancy Pants

BBFAN wrote: »

This entire post is about her and not the child. I've already said I don't support or agree with her in any way, shape or form.

That doesn't take away from the fact that this child exists and is an Irish citizen. We can take her back and throw her in prison if that keep you happy. I couldn't care less as long as the child is saved from a ****ty ****ty life or a premature death, whichever comes first.

If it makes ME happy? LOL, classic.

So, run me through the childs next 20 years in Ireland. How will mammy and daddys life choices effect the child in the future?

Should the child remain with the mother?

Can it legally be taken into State care?

Can it be argued that mommy has been radicalised and be classed as an "unfit" mother?

Whats the plan here?

Gatling

end of the road wrote: »

then i'd suggest ireland is the best place to hold her given she belongs to it, and ireland is best placed to insure she doesn't pose a risk.

Why is here the best place , given she won't locked up or face any trial ,we've no capability to monitor and control terrorists or facilitators as it is ,but you want a trained killer turned terrorist to brought home to Ireland,

Will you be happy to have her live next door to you or your family members or is this the usual case any where but mine

BBFAN

Dale Doback wrote: »

If it makes ME happy? LOL, classic.

So, run me through the childs next 20 years in Ireland. How will mammy and daddys life choices effect the child in the future?

Should the child remain with the mother?

Can it legally be taken into State care?

Can it be argued that mommy has been radicalised and be classed as an "unfit" mother?

Whats the plan here?

Of course it can be argued that she's an unfit mother and if that is decided then the child is removed and lives a fairly happy life I hope.

I'm not sure why anyone wants the child to suffer?

Signore Fancy Pants

end of the road wrote: »

i'd rather she pose no risk. but given the risk she poses if left where she is, or if allowed to migrate wherever through turkey, then i'd suggest ireland is the best place to hold her given she belongs to it, and ireland is best placed to insure she doesn't pose a risk.

What risk does she pose over there? Sure she wasnt a "combatant"....eh, apparently. She's not a "terrorist" by her own admission.

It could be logically argued that she poses a undeniably greater risk in Ireland than in Syria.

She's a small fish and just a number over there. Here, she is a minority. Her beliefs which drew her to Syria dont fit with Ireland.

She lost a husband over there, you cant just turn that mindset off like a light switch and go back pushing trolleys in Tesco.

Ireland is not "best placed to ensure she doesnt pose a risk", not by a long shot. We do not operate 'de-radicalisation' programmes. We do not have sufficient resources for 24/7/365 monitoring.

The only way she will be a non threat to Ireland is if she is not in Ireland.

Signore Fancy Pants

BBFAN wrote: »

Of course it can be argued that she's an unfit mother and if that is decided then the child is removed and lives a fairly happy life I hope.

I'm not sure why anyone wants the child to suffer?

I doubt anyone wants the child to suffer but it plainly isnt our de facto problem just because she's Irish.

The child is being used as a tool to get back to Ireland. She didnt have a problem raising a baby, a toddler or child in the Caliphate, surrounded by suicide bombers, head choppers and other mad sh1t.

Lets be honest, it's only an issue now because her Caliphate has crumbled.

Id class a person who left their child in a hot car for an hour as an unfit parent.....what would you class one who raised an ISIL baby in a war zone?

BBFAN

Dale Doback wrote: »

I doubt anyone wants the child to suffer but it plainly isnt our de facto problem just because she's Irish.

The child is being used as a tool to get back to Ireland. She didnt have a problem raising a baby, a toddler or child in the Caliphate, surrounded by suicide bombers, head choppers and other mad sh1t.

Lets be honest, it's only an issue now because her Caliphate has crumbled.

Id class a person who left their child in a hot car for an hour as an unfit parent.....what would you class one who raised an ISIL baby in a war zone?

No point in talking to you as you just keep coming back with "she" did this "she" did that.

That has nothing to do with an innocent child.

Yes, she's an unfit mother, so what? That means we just let the child rot or die?????

You've no justification for your replies and you know it.

screamer

We give everyone free choice to do as they wish in life. We don’t prevent people having kids, we don’t vet them before parenthood. If someone has a child, that’s on them. I don’t see why we should have to interviene now that Isil land has gone tits up. The kid is just the latest pawn, and we’re the suckers. Lisa smith or whatever name she goes by may wish to come “home”, doesn’t mean home wants her back.

Signore Fancy Pants

BBFAN wrote: »

No point in talking to you as you just keep coming back with "she" did this "she" did that.

That has nothing to do with an innocent child.

Yes, she's an unfit mother, so what? That means we just let the child rot or die?????

You've no justification for your replies and you know it.

Bye now.

end of the road

Gatling wrote: »

Why is here the best place , given she won't locked up or face any trial ,we've no capability to monitor and control terrorists or facilitators as it is ,but you want a trained killer turned terrorist to brought home to Ireland,

Will you be happy to have her live next door to you or your family members or is this the usual case any where but mine

she can be got on membership of an illegal organisation. isis can be made a proscribed organisation within the time it will likely take her to come back here. membership of an illegal organisation i believe carries a 10 year sentence, so plenty of time to update the laws to keep her in indefinitely if needs be

Dale Doback wrote: »

What risk does she pose over there? Sure she wasnt a "combatant"....eh, apparently. She's not a "terrorist" by her own admission.

It could be logically argued that she poses a undeniably greater risk in Ireland than in Syria.

She's a small fish and just a number over there. Here, she is a minority. Her beliefs which drew her to Syria dont fit with Ireland.

She lost a husband over there, you cant just turn that mindset off like a light switch and go back pushing trolleys in Tesco.

Ireland is not "best placed to ensure she doesnt pose a risk", not by a long shot. We do not operate 'de-radicalisation' programmes. We do not have sufficient resources for 24/7/365 monitoring.

The only way she will be a non threat to Ireland is if she is not in Ireland.

unfortunately this is actually not the case. she could still very much pose a risk to ireland, if she is left in syria to rome free, or facilitated by turkey to illegally migrate wherever. that risk could likely be a lot more then if
a managed return took place. this is why the west are going to have to take back their terrorists. along with trying to insure isis cannot re-group.

BBFAN

Dale Doback wrote: »

Bye now.

As I predicted.

SEPT 23 1989

Gatling wrote: »

Instead we got I'm an prisoner and were all not terrorist's and I'm ready to come home .


She actually seemed awfully calm for an Isis bride/terrorist

The west is weak (as we see already from our own cork politician)

No repercussions for crimes against humanity

Better we help the locals set up a court system over there to put her on trial and keep everyone on that camp who is convicted locked up

We don't want that poison here

Do people here not realise the horrors inflicted against women and children that happened?

She was an an accessory to this

screamer

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

The west is weak (as we see already from our own cork politician)

No repercussions for crimes against humanity

Better we help the locals set up a court system over there to put her on trial and keep everyone on that camp who is convicted locked up

We don't want that poison here

Do people here not realise the horrors inflicted against women and children that happened?

She was an an accessory to this

And you’d think that she was the victim the way this is being spun..... how many other little kids died at the hands of Isil, the very group she went to support, one she married into and bred with. Those children suffered, and died and what did oireland do to help them? Nothing much. But now, her kid is special and needs to be rescued.....

Pythagorean

There is talk of sending the Government jet over to bring her back, ( cost 45000 or so). I predict she will appear on numerous chat shows, to thunderous applause, and be treated as a victim/ returning hero.

Sand

BBFAN wrote: »

That doesn't take away from the fact that this child exists and is an Irish citizen.

I'd agree the child is Irish by descent. Even if his mother's citizenship is revoked (and it should be) he would still be entitled to claim Irish citizenship by virtue of descent from his Irish grandparents.

However some would argue the child was born in Syria, and is therefore Syrian, just as Syrian as Bashar al Assad.

We can take her back and throw her in prison if that keep you happy. I couldn't care less as long as the child is saved from a ****ty ****ty life or a premature death, whichever comes first.

As a compromise, what if she stays in Syria given the ongoing security threat she poses to Irish people? Instead she is offered the opportunity to send her child to be cared for by her Irish family. The child is safe, and the Irish people are safe.

screamer

Pythagorean wrote: »

There is talk of sending the Government jet over to bring her back, ( cost 45000 or so). I predict she will appear on numerous chat shows, to thunderous applause, and be treated as a victim/ returning hero.

That is vomit inducing

Sand

Pythagorean wrote: »

There is talk of sending the Government jet over to bring her back, ( cost 45000 or so). I predict she will appear on numerous chat shows, to thunderous applause, and be treated as a victim/ returning hero.

The Halawa show all over again.

end of the road

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

The west is weak (as we see already from our own cork politician)

how so? because some of it at least understands that we don't get to dump our rubbish on other countries?

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

No repercussions for crimes against humanity

countries can charge these people if they have broken their relevant laws. a western country can prosecute citizens who go abroad and commit an act that is illegal in the country they have visited.

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Better we help the locals set up a court system over there to put her on trial and keep everyone on that camp who is convicted locked up

what about the likely reality that these locals don't want this court system? or to have to clean up the west's mess? or is it a case they and their rights wants and feelings don't matter?

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

We don't want that poison here

that's just tough i'm afraid. syria doesn't want foreign terrorists, and they have an absolute right to not to have to have them, and to deport them to their countries of origin.

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Do people here not realise the horrors inflicted against women and children that happened?

She was an an accessory to this

yes . we also know that major western powers, mainly the US and probably britain, funded and trained and armed isis, because essentially they were the greatist thing ever. now, some want the syrians, who have been through unthinkable and unimaginable conflict, to have to take on the burden of holding foreign terrorists, people who helped to destroy their country, and who caused millions to flee.

BBFAN

Sand wrote: »

I'd agree the child is Irish by descent. Even if his mother's citizenship is revoked (and it should be) he would still be entitled to claim Irish citizenship by virtue of descent from his Irish grandparents.

However some would argue the child was born in Syria, and is therefore Syrian, just as Syrian as Bashar al Assad.



As a compromise, what if she stays in Syria given the ongoing security threat she poses to Irish people? Instead she is offered the opportunity to send her child to be cared for by her Irish family. The child is safe, and the Irish people are safe.

I'd be fine with that.

Sand

end of the road wrote: »

yes . we also know that major western powers, mainly the US and probably britain, funded and trained and armed isis

This is just a conspiracy theory, capitalising on the dull memory of US support for the anti-Soviet war of Islamic fundamentalists in 1980s Afghanistan.

end of the road

Sand wrote: »

I'd agree the child is Irish by descent. Even if his mother's citizenship is revoked (and it should be) he would still be entitled to claim Irish citizenship by virtue of descent from his Irish grandparents.

However some would argue the child was born in Syria, and is therefore Syrian, just as Syrian as Bashar al Assad.

ireland cannot revoke the citizenship of an irish born individual as it would break international law.

Sand wrote: »

As a compromise, what if she stays in Syria given the ongoing security threat she poses to Irish people? Instead she is offered the opportunity to send her child to be cared for by her Irish family. The child is safe, and the Irish people are safe.

but the syrians aren't hence it's not a compromise, but simply us dumping a problem on another country who does not want that problem, and who has an absolute right to repatriate that problem back to where it came from.

mynamejeff

end of the road wrote: »

ireland cannot revoke the citizenship of an irish born individual as it would break international law.



but the syrians aren't hence it's not a compromise, but simply us dumping a problem on another country who does not want that problem, and who has an absolute right to repatriate that problem back to where it came from.

yes they can


and no it doesn't

Sand

end of the road wrote: »

but the syrians aren't hence it's not a compromise, but simply us dumping a problem on another country who does not want that problem, and who has an absolute right to repatriate that problem back to where it came from.

When is Europe repatriating all the Syrians and the "Syrians" back to Syria then?

Ah, we both know that will never happen. Your uncompromisingly principled and moral stances are only taken to bring problems to Europe. At the end of the day this woman is an immigrant to Syria. She is their problem now. I honestly do not care how they solve that problem so long as it does not involve her returning to Ireland to radicalise a new generation of terrorists in Ireland.

end of the road

Sand wrote: »

When is Europe repatriating all the Syrians and the "Syrians" back to Syria then?

Ah, we both know that will never happen. Your uncompromisingly principled and moral stances are only taken to bring problems to Europe. At the end of the day this woman is an immigrant to Syria. She is their problem now. I honestly do not care how they solve that problem so long as it does not involve her returning to Ireland to radicalise a new generation of terrorists in Ireland.

i'm afraid she is not their problem. them solving that problem will be her returning to ireland. quite rightly syria doesn't care about some in the west not wanting to take responsibility and take back their terrorists. a lot of the syrians will return once syria is safe for them to do so