Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Peregrine wrote:

Go back and read the original post then.

I already did that.

 Peregrine wrote:

He's clearly talking about using a harsh sentence as a means to prevent people from doing bad things elsewhere, not because the crime they committed on US soil deserves it by itself.

Sure, in the same way Holloway clearly meant "respect the police or we'll punish you for it".

 Peregrine wrote:

After all, ISIS isn't doing anything on US soil, and the only crime (under US law) committed was making an attempt to join ISIS outside of the US.

Yes, and he wants the penalty for doing so to be harsher. There is no need to mischaracterize an argument to demonstrate the fact that you disagree. That way lies Glenn Beck.

 dogma wrote:
Sure, in the same way Holloway clearly meant "respect the police or we'll punish you for it".

Yeah, I'd say that's a pretty good summary of what he meant. Or did you miss the fact that talking about "signs that she may re-offend" is something that could have an effect on sentencing, parole decisions, etc?

Yes, and he wants the penalty for doing so to be harsher. There is no need to mischaracterize an argument to demonstrate the fact that you disagree. That way lies Glenn Beck.

Sigh. I really don't see why this is so hard to understand. He wants the punishment to be harsher as a deterrent to crimes committed outside of the US. The only way that makes sense is if you feel that the US has a responsibility to stop the bad things ISIS is doing outside of the US. If you don't believe that the US has any responsibility for bad things that happen outside its borders then there's no reason at all to punish our own citizens for trying to join ISIS.

 Grey Templar wrote:
That would be a truly fitting punishment. Ship them all off with a one-way ticket to Syria.

Way to take the high road. The way to win a culture war is to demonstrate you have the better culture, or entirely wipe out the other culture. Since glassing large parts of the planet and killing billions of human beings isn't a good option (they are still human beings even if they are a funny colour and believe in a different imaginary friend, right?), it remains to demonstrate you have the better culture.

Being a bunch of vindictive jerks is not the way to go about that.

....Silver... are you alright mate? All Grey did was was suggest that letting the individuals who wish to do a stupid and join Daesh be allowed to do so. No one's mentioned glassing the Middle East yet, though it WOULD sort the region's issues in a rather permanent sense.

Why does Dakka still disappoint me?

More importantly, why do I keep coming back? It's like a slow motion trainwreck and you're just unable to do anything but stare in morbid curiosity.

 Peregrine wrote:
Since when is ISIS a domestic rebellion or at war with the US? ISIS is likely guilty of those crimes in the countries where it is fighting, but it isn't treason against the US to attempt to overthrow the government of Iraq.

I don't know if non-State actors can technically be at "war". But the fact that ISIS has been deemed a threat to the US, a threat to US interests, and has made threats against the US are reasons as to why we are involved in an air campaign against them.

 Peregrine wrote:
Why should we punish them? Why should the US have the role of being the police for some other country? Why shouldn't dealing with crimes committed elsewhere be the responsibility of those other countries? And don't bother answering with any nonsense about "human rights violations" or whatever, the US is perfectly content to let people get away with all kinds of abusive stuff as long as they're an important ally.

I don't know about punishing them for crimes committed on sovereign soil, but there are very clear reasons for concern, and possibly send a strong deterrent to others considering joining Jihadists;




http://abcnews.go.com/International/isis-threat-home-fbi-warns-us-military-social/story?id=27270662
http://abcnews.go.com/US/homeland-warns-isis-retaliation-us-sympathizers/story?id=25087995

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
.No one's mentioned glassing the Middle East 

No, he didn't, nor did I suggest he did...

All Grey did was was suggest that letting the individuals who wish to do a stupid and join Daesh be allowed to do so.

No, he has suggested shippimg them off and stripping their citizenship.

I am suggesting that since this isnt the way to win hearts and minds (we've already seen a few people who joined the cause and came to see it for what it really was and wanted to return) - blocking these people from coming back isn't going to stop others going out, or convince anyone who is out there to lay down arms. We should be repatriating these people and helping them to share what made them change their minds.

And since kneejerk "well screw them!" moves is not showing your culture to be superior, or helping to wipe out the culture you are fighting, it can therefore only be hurting your own position.

Edit: fixed what I was quoting and replying to - stupid phone selecting the wrong things

Honestly, I wonder who actually read the article and watched the video, and who's just immediately clamoring for Old Testament vindictiveness.

 Peregrine wrote:

Yeah, I'd say that's a pretty good summary of what he meant. Or did you miss the fact that talking about "signs that she may re-offend" is something that could have an effect on sentencing, parole decisions, etc?

I didn't. Focus on what happened, not what you think could happen.

 Peregrine wrote:

I really don't see why this is so hard to understand.

I understand your position, I just think it is bad.

 Peregrine wrote:

He wants the punishment to be harsher as a deterrent to crimes committed outside of the US.

No, he wants the punishment of certain US crimes to be harsher.

 Peregrine wrote:

The only way that makes sense is if you feel that the US has a responsibility to stop the bad things ISIS is doing outside of the US. If you don't believe that the US has any responsibility for bad things that happen outside its borders then there's no reason at all to punish our own citizens for trying to join ISIS.

The US has a responsibility for bad things that happen within its borders.

 daedalus wrote:
Honestly, I wonder who actually read the article and watched the video, and who's just immediately clamoring for Old Testament vindictiveness.

She's a local, I'm on the up and up

No, he has suggested shippimg them off and stripping their citizenship.

Letting them have exactly what they want. There's no good reason to let them come back though. Just a chance that they'll harm others.

 dogma wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Yeah, I'd say that's a pretty good summary of what he meant. Or did you miss the fact that talking about "signs that she may re-offend" is something that could have an effect on sentencing, parole decisions, etc?

I didn't. Focus on what happened, not what you think could happen.

 Peregrine wrote:

I really don't see why this is so hard to understand.

I understand your position, I just think it is bad.

 Peregrine wrote:

He wants the punishment to be harsher as a deterrent to crimes committed outside of the US.

No, he wants the punishment of certain US crimes to be harsher.

 Peregrine wrote:

The only way that makes sense is if you feel that the US has a responsibility to stop the bad things ISIS is doing outside of the US. If you don't believe that the US has any responsibility for bad things that happen outside its borders then there's no reason at all to punish our own citizens for trying to join ISIS.

The US has a responsibility for bad things that happen within its borders.

Just ignore peregrine. In his eyes, the police are oppressors, and anything they do inherently reinforces this in his mind. The police could have given her a lollipop and let her go and he'd probably say it was just a PR move to get people to stop resisting their oppression.

 DarkLink wrote:
Just ignore peregrine. In his eyes, the police are oppressors, and anything they do inherently reinforces this in his mind. The police could have given her a lollipop and let her go and he'd probably say it was just a PR move to get people to stop resisting their oppression.

How dare you say that!! Clearly it was a ruse to fatten her up so she can't run as fast in the future to escape them, and to promote diabetes to get more people on Obamacare

Shannon Conley told the judge she was misled while pursuing Islam and learned only after her arrest about atrocities committed by the extremists she was taught to respect.

If this is true, maybe we should seek to educate people instead of punish them.

News like this does not really improve my view of average American intelligence.
You've got to be the most naive people in the world

 Dreadwinter wrote:

Shannon Conley told the judge she was misled while pursuing Islam and learned only after her arrest about atrocities committed by the extremists she was taught to respect.

If this is true, maybe we should seek to educate people instead of punish them.

Since when has ignorance been an excuse?

 Iron_Captain wrote:
News like this does not really improve my view of average American intelligence.
You've got to be the most naive people in the world

What? It isn't like we've cornered the market on these feth-wits.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

Way to take the high road. The way to win a culture war is to demonstrate you have the better culture, or entirely wipe out the other culture. Since glassing large parts of the planet and killing billions of human beings isn't a good option

Actually the threat of utterly obliterating Jerusalem did work the one time it was tried.

4 years to abuse the appeal process and read the quran.

Yay.

Lets be real here. The US prison system primarily turns out better criminals. Sticking folks with strong jihadi sympathies into that sort of a volatile and disillusioned mixture is a BAD idea.

 djones520 wrote:
Since when has ignorance been an excuse?

It's OK. The news never covered anything remotely suspect about ISIS. And why would she research a life changing decision anyway? [/sarc]

 Iron_Captain wrote:
News like this does not really improve my view of average American intelligence.
You've got to be the most naive people in the world

Hence why I don't bother with the news very often.

Four years is plenty of time to ruin her life.