Disillusioned British jihadists stuck in Turkey because they are too scared to come back to UK

[ibx 2]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/disillusioned-british-jihadists-stuck-in-turkey-because-they-are-too-scared-to-come-back-to-uk-9775281.html

I think this is really an interesting problem. What do you with these type of people of which there will undoubtedly be more in the future?

I think this really puts the fundamentals of a free western society and the presumption of innocence to a test.

[Arvoitus 1]

Our mentally unstable leftist's were suggesting that these people should get the same, taxpayer funded, benefits that our WWII veterans get. I personally hope that they all just die in some air raid and are simply unable to ever return.

Your rights end where my feelings begin.

[DanG 1]

Quote

Our mentally unstable leftist's were suggesting that these people should get the same, taxpayer funded, benefits that our WWII veterans get.

I don't remember that. Who proposed enemy terrorist get treated as US veterans?

- Dan G

[Andy9o8 2]

I would suggest nations of origin such as the UK, US, etc. enact what I suppose might be referred to as a "from this date forward" provision. That is, set a specific date, and give all those wishing to return an exemption from prosecution if they renounce their activity and leave the conflict countries by a certain date. After that date, anyone remaining in the conflict areas, or anyone going there to engage in warfare-related activities, will be liable to be prosecuted.

Quote

I think this really puts the fundamentals of a free western society and the presumption of innocence to a test.

Not necessarily. As long as the rule of law that currently exists in the UK, US, etc. of a minimum level of evidence needed to charge someone criminally, and an opportunity for a fair trial by a jury, with the presumption of evidence, assistance of counsel and opportunity to present a defense, as with any other criminal case, that probably addresses that concern.

[champu 1]

A few semi-related thoughts on the matter...

If you leave your country to join and fight for an organization that your country has declared to be an enemy, that was the crime. So while you can presume innocence until it's established that that happened, I don't think the British government owes them a trial where they have to prove anything more specific than that.

Also, why would you trust these people when they say they've defected a second time? If they claim they're afraid to come back to the western world because of the punishment they'd face, I say good. If they ditch the fight in Syria and head to Pakistan to settle down with extended family and lay low because they honestly feel they made a mistake and that's the only option they left themselves, even better.

This is what happens when you burn bridges. Joining a jihadist group in the middle east is not a sabbatical that you can quit early, come back from, and get a rap on your shoulder and a, "Told you so" from your mates.

[muff528 3]

Hold them as POWs until the end of hostilities ...however long that may be. Same for Gitmo.

[DanG 1]

There was a story on NPR recently about some UK citizens who went to Syria to fight against Assad and got absorbed into ISIL. One day ISIL basically showed up and said, "You guys are with us now. Got a problem with that?" Now they are afraid of trying to leave ISIL because they like having their heads attacked to their bodies.

What do you do with people who went to fight Assad, but not fight for ISIL? Remember, Assad used to be the enemy.

- Dan G

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Joining a jihadist group in the middle east is not a sabbatical that you can quit early, come back from, and get a rap on your shoulder and a, "Told you so" from your mates.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPw-3e_pzqU

[Backintothesky 0]

At risk of being controversial, perhaps they shouldn't have joined the rebel force in the first place.

If you are a citizen of one country and leave it to join a revolutionary force in another then you made your bed so you can lie in it.

It was a very different case when Irish citizens joined the British army during WW2 or some American citizens joined the RAF during the Battle of Britain. They were joining an established state army in a clear cut battle between "good" and "evil".

These days, those lines of good and bad sides are blurred. The FSA and other rebel groups in Syria were not the "good" guys. Syria and the Middle East in general is a whirlpool of sectarian conflict and war crimes.

I couldn't give a shit about UK citizens who joined the rebels and now find themselves under ISIL.

They shouldn't have gone over there to fight in the first place. If they really wanted to help they should have done what the very brave, now deceased, Alan Henning did and go over there to deliver aid..not death.

DanG

There was a story on NPR recently about some UK citizens who went to Syria to fight against Assad and got absorbed into ISIL. One day ISIL basically showed up and said, "You guys are with us now. Got a problem with that?" Now they are afraid of trying to leave ISIL because they like having their heads attacked to their bodies.

What do you do with people who went to fight Assad, but not fight for ISIL? Remember, Assad used to be the enemy.

[Bolas 5]

Quote

He said: "The people we have been talking to … want to quit but feel trapped because all the Government is talking about is locking them up for 30 years."

So they aren't truly afraid of returning, just afraid they'd be forced to face the consequences of their previous actions.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[jakee 1,445]

Quote

If you are a citizen of one country and leave it to join a revolutionary force in another then you made your bed so you can lie in it.

It was a very different case when Irish citizens joined the British army during WW2 or some American citizens joined the RAF during the Battle of Britain. They were joining an established state army in a clear cut battle between "good" and "evil".

What about, say, Americans who fought against Franco in the Spanish civil war?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[turtlespeed 212]

DanG

There was a story on NPR recently about some UK citizens who went to Syria to fight against Assad and got absorbed into ISIL. One day ISIL basically showed up and said, "You guys are with us now. Got a problem with that?" Now they are afraid of trying to leave ISIL because they like having their heads attacked to their bodies.

What do you do with people who went to fight Assad, but not fight for ISIL? Remember, Assad used to be the enemy.

Obviously you do a pub crawl.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[lawrocket 3]

Is nobody putting themselves in Turkey's shoes? Turkey probably doesn't want them, either. They aren't Turks.

They are British. And I have a bit of a problem with Britain NOT doing something about it. The British should be doing something instead of having their nationals sticking around in Turkey because Britain won't take them back.

There's now a whole new thing that needs treaty treatment. As a planet, we can't just be having some countries operate as dumping grounds. (Like England wouldn't be pissed off if Pakistan wouldn't take its citizens back...)

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Andy9o8 2]

lawrocket

Is nobody putting themselves in Turkey's shoes? Turkey probably doesn't want them, either. They aren't Turks.

They are British. And I have a bit of a problem with Britain NOT doing something about it. The British should be doing something instead of having their nationals sticking around in Turkey because Britain won't take them back.

There's now a whole new thing that needs treaty treatment. As a planet, we can't just be having some countries operate as dumping grounds. (Like England wouldn't be pissed off if Pakistan wouldn't take its citizens back...)

Yeah, but I don't think the UK govt is refusing to take them back, it's just declining to exempt them from prosecution if they do come back. So... can't the Turks just deport them? Am I over-simplifying?

[billvon 2,917]

>As a planet, we can't just be having some countries operate as dumping grounds.

I know. Next thing you know the Turks will start hunting kangaroos, going on walkabouts and putting shrimp on the barbie.

[Arvoitus 1]

DanG

Quote

Our mentally unstable leftist's were suggesting that these people should get the same, taxpayer funded, benefits that our WWII veterans get.

I don't remember that. Who proposed enemy terrorist get treated as US veterans?

I probably should've mentioned that I'm from Europe.

Your rights end where my feelings begin.

[JerryBaumchen 1,340]

Hi Dan,

Quote

You guys are with us now.

I remember reading about a US citizen who had been born in Iraq but raised here in the USA.

He had gone back to Bagdad to visit his grandmother and, since he was still an Iraqi citizen, got drafted into the Iraqi army, just as the G H W Bush first Iraqi war was beginning.

As the US troops were moving into Iraq, he came running over a sand dune showing his Chicago Cubs T-shirt and surrendering as fast as he could.



Jerry Baumchen

[Backintothesky 0]

Your "problem with Britain" is based on an incorrect assumption.

Britain is not saying they won't take them back, they're saying they will be open to prosecution. So these "jihadists" are avoiding going back even though they want to.

If you're gonna have a problem with my country, at least make it a real one....

lawrocket

Is nobody putting themselves in Turkey's shoes? Turkey probably doesn't want them, either. They aren't Turks.

They are British. And I have a bit of a problem with Britain NOT doing something about it. The British should be doing something instead of having their nationals sticking around in Turkey because Britain won't take them back.

There's now a whole new thing that needs treaty treatment. As a planet, we can't just be having some countries operate as dumping grounds. (Like England wouldn't be pissed off if Pakistan wouldn't take its citizens back...)

[Backintothesky 0]

I don't know enough about the Spanish civil war to give an informed opinion but I'm still sticking to my guns here. They shouldn't have got involved.

Civil wars, civil unrest etc., why should citizens of a foreign country get involved? And why should that foreign country accept that from its citizens?

If you want to go to war, join your own country's army, a private security firm, or if you really want that mercenary experience, join the French Foreign Legion.

Either way, its unacceptable that, in the modern conflicts of today - characterised by militia groups and civil conflict, people should expect to be able to fight in another countries army or rebel force and then come home expecting a warm welcome...Especially when BOTH sides of the conflict are committing horrific war crimes. At the very least expect a thorough investigation into your actions.

And given the woeful lack of military training that most of these people have, they'd of done more good by providing aid to the displaced civilian population, than by cracking off a few rounds whilst silhouetting themselves on a hill before getting their heads blown off by a well-placed 7.62 round.

jakee

What about, say, Americans who fought against Franco in the Spanish civil war?

[SkyDekker 1,410]

lawrocket

Is nobody putting themselves in Turkey's shoes? Turkey probably doesn't want them, either. They aren't Turks.

They are British. And I have a bit of a problem with Britain NOT doing something about it. The British should be doing something instead of having their nationals sticking around in Turkey because Britain won't take them back.

There's now a whole new thing that needs treaty treatment. As a planet, we can't just be having some countries operate as dumping grounds. (Like England wouldn't be pissed off if Pakistan wouldn't take its citizens back...)

Are they still British though? A few countries have started revoking passports of those leaving to fight with ISIS. Would leave them stateless.

[muff528 3]

SkyDekker

***....
Are they still British though? A few countries have started revoking passports of those leaving to fight with ISIS. Would leave them stateless.

Well, they would be new citizens of the Islamic State. Not the fault of the UK if they changed their minds.

[aphid 0]

SkyDekker

Are they still British though? A few countries have started revoking passports of those leaving to fight with ISIS. Would leave them stateless.

As I understand it as presented in (Canadian) Parliament, it would used only against people holding dual citizenship. Singular Canadians would re-enter and be subject to prosecution under Canadian law.

[Andy9o8 2]

aphid

***
Are they still British though? A few countries have started revoking passports of those leaving to fight with ISIS. Would leave them stateless.

As I understand it as presented in (Canadian) Parliament, it would used only against people holding dual citizenship. Singular Canadians would re-enter and be subject to prosecution under Canadian law.

Plus, not all countries legally equate revocation of passport with revocation of citizenship.
For example, HERE is what it takes to lose one's US citizenship. Simply having one's US passport involuntarily revoked does not seem to be enough.

[kallend 1,935]

Backintothesky

At risk of being controversial, perhaps they shouldn't have joined the rebel force in the first place.

If you are a citizen of one country and leave it to join a revolutionary force in another then you made your bed so you can lie in it.

It was a very different case when Irish citizens joined the British army during WW2 or some American citizens joined the RAF during the Battle of Britain. They were joining an established state army in a clear cut battle between "good" and "evil".

The RAF recognizes seven aircrew personnel who were from the United States as having taken part in the Battle of Britain. American citizens were prohibited from serving under the various US Neutrality Acts; if an American citizen had defied strict neutrality laws, there was a risk of losing their citizenship and imprisonment. It is believed that another four Americans misled the British authorities about their origins, claiming to be Canadian or other nationalities.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[muff528 3]

kallend

***At risk of being controversial, perhaps they shouldn't have joined the rebel force in the first place.

If you are a citizen of one country and leave it to join a revolutionary force in another then you made your bed so you can lie in it.

It was a very different case when Irish citizens joined the British army during WW2 or some American citizens joined the RAF during the Battle of Britain. They were joining an established state army in a clear cut battle between "good" and "evil".

The RAF recognizes seven aircrew personnel who were from the United States as having taken part in the Battle of Britain. American citizens were prohibited from serving under the various US Neutrality Acts; if an American citizen had defied strict neutrality laws, there was a risk of losing their citizenship and imprisonment. It is believed that another four Americans misled the British authorities about their origins, claiming to be Canadian or other nationalities.

But there were "ways" to get around the Act. I wonder if this idea could have been used for the BoB participation?