General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsUS leaders who ordered the kill for J John should be imprisoned
http://order-order.com/2015/11/16/corbyn-questions-legality-of-jihadi-john-strike/They violated international law. Hang them!
msongs
(67,420 posts)Historic NY
(37,451 posts)actively engaged against citizens from various countries and the US sound ridiculous. What law did he follow???? Maybe Corbyn should poll his countrymen.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)yeah, sure.
world wide wally
(21,744 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,828 posts)http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-questions-legality-of-drone-strike-against-jihadi-john-a6736751.html
Asked whether he believed the attack on Mr Emwazi was legal, the Labour leader said: "I question that. Surely if somebody is doing something wrong you act legally against them.
"If we are setting ourselves up as the West, as in accordance with the UN, with international law and of our own laws, then I think we have to act in accordance with them.
"I am awaiting an explanation of where the legal basis was for that incident that went on.
"Obviously people planning things to attack others is wrong, but there is a process to go on about that. That is why I am looking for a political process."
Mr Corbyn said he did not support the "shoot-to-kill" policy in the UK in the event of a terror attack, saying such an approach could "often be counter-productive".
He's looking for a political process that does not exist. ISIS/ISIL are not countries/nations and can't define it's leadership and own political process. All they seem capable of is declaring war. They declare war then expect the world to behave like lambs. Jihadi John declared war. It was either him or Obama. I'm glad Obama got to him before he got to my President.
cprise
(8,445 posts)Sounds to me like you cannot think outside the box of declaring war-on-something (militarization). This business of nations and international law is insufferable. Just ask GW Bush.
JustAnotherGen
(31,828 posts)I'm the corporate side of it. Think phones/tapping/cell phones with tracking devices in them, etc. etc. Working with Federal Law Enforcement, Local, CBP HS - etc. etc.
He's an outlier to that. He doesn't fall in the same scope as the Russkies, Mustafa Crime Family, Ho Chin Minh Trail, etc. etc.
linuxman
(2,337 posts)Enjoy your stay.
LoL!
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)I'm glad he is dead. He was not a prisoner, safely in a cell, unable to harm others. Instead he was raping, killing, enslaving and beheading people. If you are not glad he is dead then I think you are messed up.
JustAnotherGen
(31,828 posts)Someone up above seems to want to make a comparison to this and the Russian Mafia running up and down I-95 doing the wrong thing. Apples and Oranges.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)And then put a spotlight on it?
tsk tsk.
EX500rider
(10,849 posts)....it is not against international law to kill enemy combatants in a hot war zone.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)Shine on you crazy diamond.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(101,322 posts)Jeneral2885 uses their posts here to stir up anti-Labour feeling by attacking the leader Jeremy Corbyn,
'order-order.com' is a British right wing website that is the go-to place for gossip with a right-wing slant. Sort of the equivalent of Drudge, but not with wide-ranging news stories.
T_i_B
(14,739 posts)Jeneral is a regular troll in the UK forum, and has managed to alienate even those of us who aren't keen on Jeremy Corbyn.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10888641#post3
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10888710#post3
LeftishBrit
(41,208 posts)It is a gutter-gossip-column site by Paul Staines, who, very ironically for such a supposedly staunch opponent of all terrorism, calls himself 'Guido Fawkes'. Very right-wing; hates all Labourites; but even prepared to be slimy about his own side, e.g. spread vile homophobic rumours about William Hague.
Please do not cite this source on DU.
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)picking off a few useful idiots here and there.
And there's always a new boogeyman along before too long.
Throd
(7,208 posts)SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)lpbk2713
(42,760 posts)OK ... thanks for your valuable input.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)being beheaded. I don't mourn him.
trumad
(41,692 posts)for blowing up the shit head terrorist.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)who holds things up by complaining about people complaining. It's about time something was done about it.
Renew Deal
(81,866 posts)At least we know who you stand with.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Jeneral2885
(1,354 posts)Give him trial. Let him be acquitted. The West has killed more than he has.
What Corbynites actually say is "why is Jeneral2885 posting bollocks on mesageboards again?"
Which is the same thing that Blairites say come to think of it!
Chan790
(20,176 posts)A.) That's not what he said.
B.) If he did actually believe that, he would be wrong. There is nothing in international law prohibiting the killing of an enemy non-state combatant engaged in lethal political violence once they have refused a demand to surrender. There is no legal obligation to arrest, nor right to trial, nor are they subject to protection as prisoners of war or recognized enemy combatants.
Basically, international law takes a dim view of terrorists and non-state resistance fighters...they get few protections; none at-all when they turn their violence against non-combatants. (Keep in mind those laws are written and ratified by nation-states and their representatives.) It's every bit as legal to issue a shoot-to-kill/shoot-on-sight order on terrorists as it is to do so for any individual that represents a high-degree of a continuing and ongoing risk of lethal violence--Jihadi John is viewed no differently under international law (or even domestic law in the UK for that matter) than a rampaging gunman on a killing spree. If you can't take them alive, dead is preferred to ongoing violence.
randome
(34,845 posts)Your thinking is flawed on this.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]