Fighting Against Isis

[emmie]

should people who go and fight against the terror group ISIS be charged when they get back to UK.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43086865

[youngmafbog]

With you on that Talbot, and that includes mercenaries.

[Khandro]

Zacs; There is a large bronze plaque honouring the British soldiers of the International Brigades who died defending the Spanish Republic at the monument on Hill 705, Serra de Pàndols. Many British (and men of all nations) volunteered including George orwell.

[Zacs-Master]

Ever so slightly different circumstances, Khandro.

[Zacs-Master]

In fact, I don't really see any analogous circumstances at all.

[Spicerack]

2 wrongs don't make a right, Khandro. Those commies should have been arrested and tried, too.
At the very least they prolonged a bloody civil war.

[Gromit]

// we have uneducated Brits going to the Islamic state and causing terrorism //

Got to correct that.

There is no Islamic State, ISIS are invaders in Syria and Iraq. They are an hostile force who have occupied another country. Defending those countries from the oppression brought by ISIS are not terrorism, they are legitimate defence against an hostile aggressor.

The whole Syrian adventure was a huge mistake by the UK Government. Hague and Cameron never seemed to know which side they were on, and what they were fighting for. With the US, we actively encouraged ISIS because they were fighting Assad. We bombed Syrian Army positions so that ISIS could take terroritory. The US funneled money and weapons to the syrian ‘freedom fighters’ who were in fact ISIS and other Islamic terrorist groups.

The Kurds designation as terrorists is false, and we only go along with it to curry favour with our NATO ally, Turkey.

I suspect that we are engaging on these prosecutions because we have our eye on forging trade deals with Turkey when we leave the EU. The despotic Turkish President will be greatly pleased by our compliance and will be more favourable in any trade deals.

[Gromit]

Just spotted this after my post.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-middle-east-43062244/why-are-nato-allies-confronting-each-other-in-syria

[Khandro]

Zacs; // I don't really see any analogous circumstances at all//

As you said to emmie, "If you can't think that one through, I ain't explaining."

[Zacs-Master]

......Tumbleweed.........

[Peter Pedant]

isnt this a groundhog thread
we had it all before a few days ago

as in yes there is a law
no it didnt work
yes they tried to use it in 1936
yes there was a previous common law offence
yes the law WAS used against Jameson and the jameson raid 1896
yes they use the Terrorism act now - materially aiding terrorism
yes there is a section for internet warriors

... anything else ?

[Peter Pedant]

foooo ! it reminds me of the good old days of a Brexit fredda day and sometimes even more !

[naomi24]

spathiphyllum , //Maybe this is the reason of terrorism, we have uneducated Brits going to the Islamic state and causing terrorism//

Is that a serious comment?

[Old_Geezer]

"their actions could be in breach of UK terrorism laws."
Maybe the laws need updating ?
Hopefully a decent precedent will result from the cases.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Jameson raid? 1896? That's a long time ago. Takes me back. Young VE (fourth year) doing one year course on history of British Empire - Treaty of Utrecht 17 something to annexation of Uganda 1923. Not much fun. Heights of Abraham - black hole of Calcutta - Boxer rebellion were goodies; lists of governors-general and the impeachment of Max Hastings - dear me no. Mind you, did like the recent BBC4 two-parter on the East India Company.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Did nine O-Levels. Failed that one. Something to do with the Max and various other confusions possibly.