Hundreds of Britons waging jihad in Syria

[Falcon29]

They should stay in in Syria.UK/European private citizens shouldn't wage "jihad' on top of their heads.That, if they want to be european citizens,if not they can choose another country to live in.This kind of behaviour is unacceptable,every one of them should be locked.

Let me break down what you're saying....

"They should stay in Syria..."

I'm guessing they intend to do so? They made a decision to participate in war so the UK isn't responsible for their return or has any onus on them anymore.

"This kind if behavior is unacceptable..."

What behavior? Them going to Syria? It's their choice and it's not related to being acceptable or unacceptable. A choice is not a portrayal of behavior. If they come back they shouldn't accept immunity. That's understandable.

I have a question for you though, if national militaries approve of gathering men from various nations to go and participate in a conflict under their command is this behavior acceptable? And why so?

 

[flamer84]

I have a question for you though, if national militaries approve of gathering men from various nations to go and participate in a conflict under their command is this behavior acceptable? And why so?

Because it's sanctioned by the state as a matter of national interest (generally that's why states go to war).A private citizen deciding willy nilly to fight a "holy war" represents a danger back home,especially if he's an indoctrinated jihadist,and you know it.

 

[Falcon29]

Because it's sanctioned by the state as a matter of national interest (generally that's why states go to war).A private citizen deciding willy nilly to fight a "holy war" represents a danger back home,especially if he's an indoctrinated jihadist,and you know it.

The Syrian conflict is crystal clear and is not a religious conflict. I wasn't sure that certain British citizens went there to fight a 'holy war'. Also frankly could care less how one decides to attach an term to their decisions. I would appreciate it if you showed me where these people indicate such a thing.

I was also talking about western nations gathering private citizens of other countries to fight a war for them. Is that unacceptable behavior? For example, the soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the US allowed fighters to come in and out of this nation and supported them. They were portrayed as people fighting for self-determination and freedom. Now we have a similar scenario yet these fighters are demonized in the West. I'm having a hard time understanding this apparently clear cut matters in the West.

Does this mean unacceptable behavior is acceptable by the West only when it suits the West? Can you help me understand this? Because I see a double standard.

 

[flamer84]

The Syrian conflict is crystal clear and is not a religious conflict. I wasn't sure that certain British citizens went there to fight a 'holy war'. Also frankly could care less how one decides to attach an term to their decisions. I would appreciate it if you showed me where these people indicate such a thing.

I was also talking about western nations gathering private citizens of other countries to fight a war for them. Is that unacceptable behavior? For example, the soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the US allowed fighters to come in and out of this nation and supported them. They were portrayed as people fighting for self-determination and freedom. Now we have a similar scenario yet these fighters are demonized in the West. I'm having a hard time understanding this apparently clear cut matters in the West.

Does this mean unacceptable behavior is acceptable by the West only when it suits the West? Can you help me understand this? Because I see a double standard.

I see your point.No,that's not acceptable.But leaving morals and history aside,those guys go to Syria to fight a holy war,it's not about saving children.That makes them dangerous at home and they should be eliminated,there's no place in european society for this kind of people.There's really no debating this.I for one,hope that they're watched and seized immediately upon coming back.These are future terrorists,plain and simple.

 

[Falcon29]

I see your point.No,that's not acceptable.But leaving morals and history aside,those guys go to Syria to fight a holy war,it's not about saving children.That makes them dangerous at home and they should be eliminated,there's no place in european society for this kind of people.There's really no debating this.I for one,hope that they're watched and seized immediately upon coming back.These are future terrorists,plain and simple.

When someone is proven guilty of illegal activities then I will believe it case by case. Of course, private citizens if they came back to the UK would be apprehended because that's an illegal activity. But, I don't what these people each personally believe and what their actions may have consisted of. So I won't demonize them.

I don't care for terminology either, attach whatever terminology to someone's cause or to a conflict, it doesn't make them any more or less evil. Actions and intentions determine who is unjust. The West doesn't have a good record with justice abroad, they may have sugar coat their intentions to the general public but that is meaningless because analyzing a conflict or policy will ultimately reveal the truth.

Thanks for understanding my point, I also want to clarify to you...these citizens made these decisions at their own expense. I'm not debating whether they should be allowed back to the UK.

I'm trying to take things with an honest and specific approach so I can make things out of it that I believe are true. I don't believe in a ignorant or arrogant approach when it comes to content. I also wanted to point out the double standard.