I sense that the big story in the coming weeks is going to be around the whole British Jihadists themes and it seems obvious that our publicity hungry politicians are going to be falling over themselves to push through the sort of botched equivalent of the ‘Dangerous Dogs Act’ to somehow try and prevent our current crop of little Ali-G sounding ‘Lions’ from making the trip over to the badlands of Iraq and Syria and joining up with their new buddies in the Caliphate.
Now my understanding is that there is already legislation in place that makes it a criminal act for a British citizen to go abroad and take part in a foreign conflict as a combatant (I am sure it is a little bit more technical than this but for the purposes of kicking off the thread I am making this general assumption) but I do wonder if this is actually a state power that should not exist.
Who is the state to tell me who or what I can go and put my life on the line for ? And if this is such a terrible thing why do we have statues and recognition given to those who went and fought on the Republican side in the Spanish civil war ? (huge holes in this example so feel free to fill your boots on this because I am happy to be educated).
As somebody who got himself involved in a foreign conflict some 20 years ago (admittedly by accident rather than design and not in a combatant role although by the end of the experience it was certainly an option on the table) I sort of understand some of the motivations behind why these Brits have made the trek abroad and whilst I hope that when the violent end comes for these little scum bags who are boasting about killing people and raping female prisoners that it is a official British finger on the trigger because they are treacherous little ****s when all is said and done is it the role of HMG to stop them making a choice to do what they are doing ?
Also surely we are better off having the twisted little bastards over there rather than on a rush-hour tube train here ?
Now my understanding is that there is already legislation in place that makes it a criminal act for a British citizen to go abroad and take part in a foreign conflict as a combatant (I am sure it is a little bit more technical than this but for the purposes of kicking off the thread I am making this general assumption) but I do wonder if this is actually a state power that should not exist.
Who is the state to tell me who or what I can go and put my life on the line for ? And if this is such a terrible thing why do we have statues and recognition given to those who went and fought on the Republican side in the Spanish civil war ? (huge holes in this example so feel free to fill your boots on this because I am happy to be educated).
As somebody who got himself involved in a foreign conflict some 20 years ago (admittedly by accident rather than design and not in a combatant role although by the end of the experience it was certainly an option on the table) I sort of understand some of the motivations behind why these Brits have made the trek abroad and whilst I hope that when the violent end comes for these little scum bags who are boasting about killing people and raping female prisoners that it is a official British finger on the trigger because they are treacherous little ****s when all is said and done is it the role of HMG to stop them making a choice to do what they are doing ?
Also surely we are better off having the twisted little bastards over there rather than on a rush-hour tube train here ?
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire