Former Soldier Charged For Fighting Against Isis

[Gromit]

The man joined Kurdish fighters who themselves had air cover from the French and the support of Britain. They fought ISIS in Syria.
He is now being prosecuted for terrorism.

Isn’t this nonsense? And a waste of money?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/14/former-soldier-faces-prosecution-for-fighting-against-isis

[Peter Pedant]

blimey
there is even a book about this - or learned article
sub needed
"This article examines the official response to the policy problems raised by the over two thousand Britons who went to fight for the Republic during the Spanish Civil War, with particular reference to the Foreign Enlistment Act (1870). Revived in January 1937 as a means of reducing the flow of volunteers and curbing the recruiting efforts of the Communist Party of Great Britain, the act proved embarrassingly unenforceable. Ambiguity over its applicability to the situation in Spain, combined with problems of evidence, meant that no charges were ever laid against volunteers caught attempting to leave for Spain or members of the recruiting organization of the CPGB. Though a complete failure as a legal tool, the Foreign Enlistment Act nevertheless symbolically underlined the British government's declared support for international non-intervention in Spain, and was never rescinded."

something wrong with this - laws dont go to sleep and need reanimation - they are always there used or not.
( a point such as this is not Too Difficult for the average AB reader is it?), ( Oh, OK yes it is, thanks)
and laws are not rescinded - repealed (= goes away ) or replaced ( with a better one )

The charges now are aiding terrorism
good treatment of this in the tv drama 'Next of Kin' a few weeks ago
and miney laundering for the internet warriors

thanks to the readers who have made it this far.

[Peter Pedant]

// The new paradigm needs to see Law as an instrument for constructive social change, //

this was a new paradigm in the thirties - and is somewhat tarnished now - and was called social engineering
It didnt work

comes up in criminology - why do we obey laws? - because it is the right thing to do not because there is a policeman with a big stick ....

why do the average ABers find comments like this so very very hard to understand ?

[vetuste_ennemi]

PP:
"// The new paradigm needs to see Law as an instrument for constructive social change, //

this was a new paradigm in the thirties - and is somewhat tarnished now - and was called social engineering
It didnt work"

Tarnished? Only the labels, surely? Social engineering (re-badged as multiculturalism) is alive and well. And, as far as I can see, is working very well indeed. Speaking, of course, from the point of view of the engineer.