UK forces kill own citizens in Syria

KomradeBishop · 08-09-2015 02:01AM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Tell you what. Why does one not head over to ISIS land and tell them how concerned one is about it's members being killed illegality let us know how one gets on.

Oh so "nobody cares therefore it's ok" right? :rolleyes: Right so due process counts for fúck all, so long as nobody cares.

end of the road · 08-09-2015 02:03AM

snubbleste wrote: »

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/sep/07/uk-forces-airstrike-killed-isis-briton-reyaad-khan-syria
Is this state-sanctioned death penalty without trial? Extra-judicial murder by a western democracy?
It strikes me as completely wrong, no matter what the individuals did.
Where do you draw the line?

yes, most definitely. as far as i'm concerned they are now not guilty of anything

petrolcan wrote: »

They went to join ISIS. The reality is they should've expected it. In fact, I'd support more of these drone strikes if it stops just one person going out there.

it won't. infact, it won't make any difference apart from saying these people are innocent of any wrong doing. thats what the british government have said by carying out this extra-judicial murder

jobbridge4life wrote: »

THese individuals had renounced their citizenship. There death is on their own hands, as is the blood of all Isis's victims. Its sad that two youths had to end up like this however, it isn't remotely sad that they were killed.

no, the death is on the british government who caried out an extra-judicial murder just because. wouldn't surprise me if they had nothing on them.

Old Jakey wrote: »

They were traitors to Britain and got what they deserved.

traitor is a redundant term and has been for decades. britain have effectively stated they aren't guilty of anything. if someone is murdered without trial, then any allegation against them cannot be trusted. the british government therefore are less trust worthy then they were.

Notorious97 wrote: »

They need to be hunted down and killed

extra judicial murder. when carried out is effectively stating those being murdered are innocent.

Notorious97 wrote: »

why bother putting them on trial and wasting any nations taxes on prison care for them.

putting people on trial is never a waste of anything. by not putting them on trial and killing them via extra judicial murder a government is stating they are innocent by default.

frostyjacks wrote: »

Surprised Cameron has to defend himself over this

good. and hopefully he keeps having to as clearly his word is untrustworthy. a government saying something doesn't make it true, and now the british government have caried out an extra judicial murder whatever they say on the issue now is invalid.

frostyjacks wrote: »

seems perfectly reasonable way to deal with these barbarians.

if a government is the exact same yes .

frostyjacks wrote: »

Hopefully it deters others from following in their footsteps.

it won't. no such thing as a deterrent to this.

KomradeBishop · 08-09-2015 02:06AM

Eugene Norman wrote: »

Ah now.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Flavius

Although in that case the European court said it wasn't fore-planned but I think that was a cop out.

I'm pretty certain, as are many in Ireland, that British agents facilitated bombings in the Republic. Which isn't their citizens of course.

What's unique here is there is no denying it was deliberate and authorised by the PM.

But they've been engaged in extra judicial killing for years.

Okey, that shows good past precedent - it doesn't make it right though.

Lemming · 08-09-2015 02:17AM

I think I smell some "anti-Brit" sh1te wafting in the air. Lets face it lads, there wouldn't have been a fart given from any of you if it was the Americans that did this, or the French, or the Russians, or a bunch of ear-wig slug brain-eating thingies from Ceti Alpha Five.

Trabejo · 08-09-2015 02:37AM

Lemming wrote: »

I think I smell some "anti-Brit" sh1te wafting in the air. Lets face it lads, there wouldn't have been a fart given from any of you if it was the Americans that did this, or the French, or the Russians, or a bunch of ear-wig slug brain-eating thingies from Ceti Alpha Five.

I think you should keep your opinions to yourself pal. No one has given you the right to speak for the collective forum's opinions on this matter. And you leave the Russians out of this, they have enough bad press as it is without a scathing attack from the infamous lemming of boards.ie

moc moc a moc · 08-09-2015 02:51AM

Trabejo wrote: »

I think you should keep your opinions to yourself pal

I don't think you quite grasp how public discussion forums work.

Trabejo · 08-09-2015 03:03AM

moc moc a moc wrote: »

I don't think you quite grasp how public discussion forums work.

I don't think you grasp the intricacies of my arguments pal.

BlaasForRafa · 08-09-2015 05:00AM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

The UK is not at war. They have no legitimate definition for a 'combat zone' that reneges citizens right to due process, outside of declaring war.

Due process? LMFAO, what due process are Daesh giving to anyone.

So according to you, a couple of members of Daesh were denied their human rights? Well boo-f*****g-hoo, my heart bleeds for them. By their actions Daesh have effectively declared war on humanity, thus is should be incumbent on humanity to crush them utterly.

Trabejo · 08-09-2015 05:03AM

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Due process? LMFAO, what due process are Daesh giving to anyone.

So, a couple of members of Daesh were denied their human rights? Well boo-f*****g-hoo, my heart bleeds for them. By their actions Daesh have effectively declared war on humanity, thus is should be incumbent on humanity to crush them utterly.

Using the word Daesh instead of ISIS doesn't make you appear more knowledgeable pal.

pmasterson95 · 08-09-2015 06:59AM

They made their choice they paid the price. Got what they deserved.

strelok · 08-09-2015 07:09AM

Lemming wrote: »

I think I smell some "anti-Brit" sh1te wafting in the air. Lets face it lads, there wouldn't have been a fart given from any of you if it was the Americans that did this, or the French, or the Russians, or a bunch of ear-wig slug brain-eating thingies from Ceti Alpha Five.

the americans did the same a few years back didnt they? and there an even larger scandal

kstand · 08-09-2015 07:23AM

It does raise legal questions but was it the right thing to do? Absolutely. These vermin left of their own accord and were trying to remotely orchestrate attacks on the streets here.
The people who have created and fought for the so-called Islamic State are the antithesis of humanity and therefore they must be exterminated.

CruelCoin · 08-09-2015 08:48AM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

The UK just executed two of its citizens without a trial. The UK is not at war, anyone who supports these executions is an idiot, as it guarantees erosion of the legal rights of UK citizens.

You don't play around with strictly legal issues like this, they are important for the integrity of democratic nations. There has to be due process here.

Are they meant to hold a trial every time they launch a plane/drone/missile?

Should they be holding a trial for british terrorists and no trial for the others?
Because somehow, british hands holding an ak47 while he massacres some more minorities is different from a non-british person doing the same...

Citizen or no, they became the enemy the moment they joined a terrorist organisation and went off for a bit of raping.

Captain Chaos · 08-09-2015 08:52AM

The moment they joined the ISIS cause they stopped being British civilian citizens and became military targets. Simple as really.

inforfun · 08-09-2015 09:05AM

Last week a sergeant of the Dutch army joined IS.
I hope the UK/US have a special drone reserved for him and anyone else born and raised in the west who thinks it is great fun joining that shower of *****.

The world loses nothing, only wins, if they are all wiped out

Fratton Fred · 08-09-2015 09:10AM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

To kill their own citizens? I think you'd need to show some past precedent for that. That's not just an ECHR violation, that's an extremely serious violation of the rights of citizens, of their own country - that is really dangerous to the democratic integrity of the UK.

Yes, it is a violation of their rights as British citizens. However, a far bigger violation would have been allowing them to carry out their plans and kill a greater number of British citizens.

Killing these two was, from a government perspective, the lesser of two evils.

josephryan1989 · 08-09-2015 09:13AM

snubbleste wrote: »

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/sep/07/uk-forces-airstrike-killed-isis-briton-reyaad-khan-syria
Is this state-sanctioned death penalty without trial? Extra-judicial murder by a western democracy?
It strikes me as completely wrong, no matter what the individuals did.
Where do you draw the line?

What's the big deal?
The scumbag signed his own death warrant when he chose the side of pure evil.
I hope the worms enjoy their lunch.

cnocbui · 08-09-2015 09:15AM

asherbassad wrote: »

No, that's not a good fit at all. And it doesn't come close to the definition of treason.

Oh, really? "• the action of betraying someone or something"
In what way does killing your fellow countrymen en masse, at the behest of a hostile foreign entity, not fit that definition?

08-09-2015 09:30AM

I wouldn't mind seeing them rain down napalm or phosphorous on IS. Yeah, I know, international conventions, use of certain weapons etc. But part of an army that sees burning prisoners as legitimate, pfffffffffft, they chose the weapons.

MonkeyTennis · 08-09-2015 09:37AM

This all happened in July. Something odd going on here

sheesh · 08-09-2015 10:56AM

Eugene Norman wrote: »

Ah now.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Flavius

Although in that case the European court said it wasn't fore-planned but I think that was a cop out.

I'm pretty certain, as are many in Ireland, that British agents facilitated bombings in the Republic. Which isn't their citizens of course.

What's unique here is there is no denying it was deliberate and authorised by the PM.

But they've been engaged in extra judicial killing for years.

sure thats nothing they were doing drive by shootings in west belfast

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Reaction_Force

I know its wikipedia so here is a link from the Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/21/army-unit-killings-northern-ireland

So is the killing of those 2 guys murder? yes but its up to the government in syria to launch an investigation and trial for the killers.

legal? no. pragmatic? yes.

I would say it is up to the democratically elected government of the UK to make that decision.

namloc1980 · 08-09-2015 11:09AM

Captain Chaos wrote: »

The moment they joined the ISIS cause they stopped being British civilian citizens and became military targets. Simple as really.

But the British Parliament never authorised military action in Syria. Or are we cool with unauthorised military action in other countries because they're getting the baddies?

Fratton Fred · 08-09-2015 11:12AM

namloc1980 wrote: »

But the British Parliament never authorised military action in Syria. Or are we cool with unauthorised military action in other countries because they're getting the baddies?

Which is why Cameron took legal advice and made an open and honest statement to parliament.

asherbassad · 08-09-2015 11:16AM

inforfun wrote: »

Last week a sergeant of the Dutch army joined IS.
I hope the UK/US have a special drone reserved for him and anyone else born and raised in the west who thinks it is great fun joining that shower of *****.

The world loses nothing, only wins, if they are all wiped out

You sound like the deluded generals who thought dropping nuclear bombs on Vietnam from the Mekong Delta to Hanoi was a brilliant idea. Or that bombing entire towns of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan in the vain hope of killing a single "enemy combatant" would not result in any kind of negative consequences.

asherbassad · 08-09-2015 11:23AM

CruelCoin wrote: »

They declared ISIS terrorists, and Britain sees itself at war with all terrorists.

This was obvious a decade ago.

Then why was Britain arming ISIS in Libya? They've opened a Pandora's Box and are powerless to halt the shtstorm they've unleashed. The chaos in the Middle East and the whole refugee crisis engulfing Europe is a direct consequence of the neocon foreign policy of regime change, invasion and pushing "democracy" at the barrel of a gun. A child could see this but it seems most adults who don't like to hear uncomfortable truths would rather call you a bleeding heart for pointing this out instead of stepping back and intelligently taking stock of the situation.

asherbassad · 08-09-2015 11:27AM

Gatling wrote: »

As I already stated my assad

I like the user name

OK, I get it. You make outlandish claims you can't back up and when you are asked to you say something you think is cute.

asherbassad · 08-09-2015 11:34AM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Due. Process.

You don't get to execute your own countries citizens, without them having a trial. Doing so, sets an extremely dangerous precedent, that is a significant danger to democracy itself.

No scaremongering about 'terrorists' and imaginary terrorist attacks, will ever justify executing citizens without due process.

Ah well, armed drones are already patrolling the skies over the US now and will soon be "taking out" US citizens in car chases, protests, etc. As you know the police don't need a trial or even a warrant to shoot somebody there so it's only a matter of time before the guy piloting the drone will determine that the guy walking along the street posed a "threat" to someone/something and needed to be eliminated with a hellfire missile.

asherbassad · 08-09-2015 11:36AM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

But they have already come out with this being legal and above board.

Wait a minute. If they just said it was perfectly legal to kill your mother would you be fine with that? No reason or anything...they just "said" it was legal and above board, would you just accept that?

Fukuyama · 08-09-2015 11:36AM

namloc1980 wrote: »

But the British Parliament never authorised military action in Syria. Or are we cool with unauthorised military action in other countries because they're getting the baddies?

Wars are not what they used to be. IS is a group which has claimed its own (ever expanding) borders and have, surprisingly, managed to hold ground. Terrorist groups take advantage of international borders to hide. Much like the IRA attacking a patrol up the north and then scurrying away across the boarder.

From a pragmatic approach, it would have been justified for the UK to send jets or special forces (the latter they often did) into the Republic to catch, detain or kill the IRA fighters.

It would have been illegal under international law but when a state such as Syria or Ireland is incapable or unwilling to take on terrorist groups within their territory then it's up to other countries to sort them out.

AFAIK, the UK are not attacking Syrian Army targets. Just ISIS in Syria. Big difference.

asherbassad wrote: »

Then why was Britain arming ISIS in Libya? They've opened a Pandora's Box and are powerless to halt the shtstorm they've unleashed. The chaos in the Middle East and the whole refugee crisis engulfing Europe is a direct consequence of the neocon foreign policy of regime change, invasion and pushing "democracy" at the barrel of a gun. A child could see this but it seems most adults who don't like to hear uncomfortable truths would rather call you a bleeding heart for pointing this out instead of stepping back and intelligently taking stock of the situation.

Go back to 2011 and the whole world was calling for the rebels to be armed in Libya. What was the west supposed to do when hundreds of thousands of people in Libya were begging for help.

It got to a point where Ghadaffi was shelling protests and arresting hundreds every day.

The rebels were the "Good Guys" and for the most part they were.

If you want to see the real problem in the Middle East, particularly concerning ISIS, look Saudi Arabia. They don't give a fcuk about Iraq and Syria. They arm and financially support ISIS directly.

The world is a small place these days. The UK and US, as members of NATO, have a responsibility to protect their smaller members who are getting pulled into this mess. How long can Turkey hold out with ISIS knocking at it's door and just a thin line of Kurds (who they themselves despise) in border towns like Kobani, effectively, defending them!!??

The situation can't be ignored. The West did that in Rwanda in the early 90s and look how that turned out. If we're to blame anyone let's blame the nutjobs who have no problem burning people alive in cages, cutting of heads, summarily executing whole towns and hanging Christians.

KomradeBishop · 08-09-2015 11:37AM

Lemming wrote: »

I think I smell some "anti-Brit" sh1te wafting in the air. Lets face it lads, there wouldn't have been a fart given from any of you if it was the Americans that did this, or the French, or the Russians, or a bunch of ear-wig slug brain-eating thingies from Ceti Alpha Five.

Uh, yea there's a big difference between the US killing UK citizens, and the US killing US citizens.

Read up on Anwar al-Awlaki - a US citizen killed by the US government, without due process; generating a big controversy, and setting a very worrying precedent.

Anyone who doesn't give a toss about stuff like this, and just labels it "anti-Brit" or "anti-US" has an idiotic point of view frankly.

You don't give governments the power, to kill their own citizens without trial - it should be obvious to anyone with even the smallest bit of sense, that this is an incredibly stupid idea, and is enormous dangerous to the democratic integrity of a country.

UK forces kill own citizens in Syria

Comments