Paben

iTrader: (5)

We can't refuse repatriation but what happens after they have been repatriated is the issue. But perhaps you believe that they should be welcomed home, feted and treated with respect and kindness. Hal anty tamzahee ma'ee?

JTaylor

So you concede that we'll seriously struggle to convict these people of a crime and you acknowledge that we can't refuse repatriation. What's your proposal then, Paben, TPIMS done nastily? I say TPIMS conducted with respect, courtesy and yes, kindness, because this stands a chance of garnering a result. The alternative is to further alienate an already alienated man.

Paben

iTrader: (5)

I concede no such thing. They most certainly have committed crimes, and being members of a fully operational and deadly terrorist army might be just one of them. Establishing what else they may have done will take time and so confinement on their return is inevitable and essential. What would you say if one those repatriated just happened to be the beheader? Offer him counseling and kindness so as not to alienate him further? Expecting that he or his compatriots could be rehabilitated is a fool's hope.

JTaylor

I would have him tried for murder. Your third sentence sounds like an endorsement of a Guantanamo Bay type set-up. Did the Bush administration have it right, then? I used to believe it did, but then of course IS appeared.

Paben

iTrader: (5)

Nice idea, try him for murder. But what do you propose happens while the authorities decide which one of them actually is him? Let them all run around free until his conscience gets the better of him and he hands himself in? Or incarcerate the lot until the innocent can be separated from the guilty?

The Government's prime directive is to protect the nation. If that means severely inconveniencing some repatriated terrorists by locking them up then that is the nature of our national security. Many other countries would be less lenient. You may have noticed that you are the only one pleading their cause by the way.

Blue by You

iTrader: (23)

Question... what do you get when you turn the other cheek?
Two sore cheeks!

Some people simply do not understand nor are they interested in, and consequently do not deserve as a first response, compassion.

JTaylor

Guantanamo Bay MkII. Should they wear orange boiler-suits like James Foley and Stephen Sotloff?

JTaylor

Imagine if the west had turned the other cheek after 9/11.

Paben

iTrader: (5)

You're good at quoting various scenarios that you find unacceptable but you seem unable to provide sensible alternatives. I'm discounting your 'kindness and love' approach. That would cause outrage amongst the population and would be seen as pathetic weakness by the terrorists, who would surely exploit it ruthlessly.

JTaylor

I want to know if you're advocating a Guantanamo Bay-style detention centre here in the UK? How does your plan look? Do you think this would temper IS' recruiting apparatus or would it sharpen them? I'd also like to extend the question I've asked of Blue by You: what do you think would have happened if the west had turned the other cheek post 9/11? Would it have been "pathetic weakness" or miraculous strength?

Paben

iTrader: (5)

You persist in asking questions but carefully avoid answering any. I was working in an Arab country when 9/11 occurred. The celebrations in the streets were sickening but predictable. Suppose you speculate where a non response to 9/11 would have led, your 'miraculous strength'.

jonc

So we now have a group of British Jihadists being held captive by IS. It's clear there are no diplomatic solutions as we do not negotiate with terrorists. I say lets get a rescue operation underway and send in our troops to pull these unfortunate Britains out. Sure there might be some casualties amongst our forces and maybe a few good soldiers will be sacrificed in the process, but we can't ignore the plight of these citizens of Britain who will no doubt suffer prolonged harsh and brutal torture and even death. ...............

JTaylor

A non-response would have nullified Bin Laden's recruitment strategy. Perhaps the young, impressionable Muslim on the street would have seen him as evil rather than as at the vanguard of defensive jihad. We had the opportunity to show the 'Muslim world' that we believed the Sermon on the Mount to be just and correct. I suspect that had we left South Asia and the Middle East and North Africa alone we wouldn't now be confronted with the emergence of a vicious caliphate populated by Islamo-fascists of the very worst kind. We've been outplayed by the Islamists, and that's because we lacked righteousness.

SJ_Skyline

Self-cleaning oven....

Well, that was my initial thought. Should the west show mercy? Probably. Would the services turn them and make them work for us? Certainly.

Paben

iTrader: (5)

A vain hope. The young and old Muslims on the street where I happened to be that September were exulted by 9/11, they needed no encouragement only leadership. Bin Laden would never have been regarded as evil. Don't you realise that these people hate us?

JTaylor

I do realise that.

hodgy0_2

Why do you think they hate us, is it simply a religious issue

stipete75

In theses peoples eyes we are the terrorists.
We came to their shores armed to the teeth, destroyed everything in site and killed lots of people. Bin ladens 9/11 was a scapegoat. As was Saddams WMD.

Imagine if that happened here in the uk! North Korea has intelligence the uk has WMD and they believe Cameron has twitchy fingers, intelligence that turns out wrong, but it's to late they have already dropped bombs all over London and deployed soldiers killing thousands maybe millions. Question is who are the real terrorists.
People are pi55ed, who can blame them.

The biggest problem we have here in the uk is the media, the bbc and the dailies. We rely 100% info from them, they are biased and wrong, the only say what you want/need to hear.

hodgy0_2

I am sure there is some truth in that - but it does not entity fit your scenario

The timeline is wrong, Paben says they hated us before 911

Although, the west had been meddling in the affairs of the middle east before that (which begs the question - what has the middle east got that is so important to us)

Propping up a hated monarchy in Iran, messing about in Egypt and its control over the Suez

Duplicitousness in the Iraq/Iran war

Inaction over Lebanon

The Palestinian issue

zip106

'We didn't start the fire,
It was always burning
Since the world's been turning...'

AndyBaker

Spot on

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

That is the single most sensible point on this thread.

Paben

iTrader: (5)

Perfidious Albion; that's us. But we can't rewrite history or go back in time and put right what our forebears perhaps got wrong. What's done is done and we must deal with the present however it came about. And the present requires that for the sake of our national security terrorists cannot be allowed just to stroll back into the UK.

gazney101

iTrader: (5)

If they are jihads they are not British imo

Turbohot

I'm with you on this. In addition, I'd also recruit all those merciless blood thirsty warriors as snipers or SAS, and put their hard core situational psychopathy into good use.

I hear that a sniper can potentially kill six Talibans with one bullet>

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ne-bullet.html

I think those come back wannabes would be good at that.

Morally, some may think that this way, they would be used as human shields, and that will be a wrong thing to do. Well, I don't think they'll care TBH. They seem to have the mindsets of the kind that they'd go for it. I think they'll give ISIS a serious run for their money.

Paben

iTrader: (5)

I hope you're not being serious?!

Turbohot

I'll let you decide that.

Suresh

I reckon they should be let back into the country. It's their right to return. Once they are back they should be beheaded on live tv. How cool would that be?