Jeremy Corbyn was right about Jihadi John-if you listened to his victims' families, you'd know that

[CJCRANE]

On the surface, this seems like the perfect opportunity to attack pacifists as weak and anti-patriotic. But take a look at what the victims' families said

I will not lose any sleep or shed any tears over the apparent death of ‘Jihadi John’, also known as Mohammed Emwazi. Graphic reports of the beheadings of two British aid workers, David Haines and Alan Henning, back in 2014 remain prominent symbols of the current struggle against Isis – and Jihadi John was central to the videos of the murders released by the terrorist group. So when Jeremy Corbyn said this afternoon that it would have been ‘far better’ for the militant to have been tried in court rather than killed, I was not surprised at the initial backlash.

On the surface, this looks like just another line for someone to use to attack pacifists as weak and anti-patriotic. But when you take the time to understand the complexity of the situation, it seems that we have only given Jihadi John the honourable killing – the sensational martyrdom - that he sought from the beginning.

David Haines’ widow said after her husband’s passing that the only way families could achieve some form of ‘moral satisfaction’ would be with the capture and imprisonment of the terrorist. The family of murdered American Steven Sotloff hoped that Jihadi John would be ‘caught by American intelligence officials, brought to trial in the United States, and convicted for the crime of beheading their son.’ Elsewhere, the executed James Foley’s mother said that the strike gave her no satisfaction, and that her son was a peacemaker who wouldn’t have supported such state-sponsored murder.

Full article in the Independent UK:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-was-right-about-jihadi-john-if-you-listened-to-his-victims-families-youd-know-that-a6733611.html

[Warren Stupidity]

1. The further away you are from the carnage

the easier it becomes to be a mindless cheerleader for perpetual war.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

3. Conversely, the further you are from the carnage,

the easier it becomes to mindlessly call for ISIS to be allowed to get on with perpetrating it without being stopped.

The choice in the ME at the moment is *not* between perpetual war and peace. It's between perpetual war with and without Western involvement.

[tecelote]

6. With Western involvement we just perpetuate it further and give them more targets.

Obviously, we have not solved anything with our wars.

Who has been converted to our views with these ongoing wars?

[SoLeftIAmRight]

13. I think you might be right

it will be ugly - be the middle east has got to learn to live with themselves - just like Europe

[Warren Stupidity]

14. We created ISIS.

We not only created them, we armed them in our efforts to continue the Cheney doctrine of wiping the slate clean in the middle east, of dethroning Hussein, Qaddafi and Assad and targeting Iran for eventual destruction. We have done that with Obama in office and with many of us mindlessly cheerleading the continuing neocon mideast adventure because "bad guys".

By all means lets continue pouring more weapons and money into Syria, where of course it is all going to the "good" batshit crazy sunni jihadists who will of course only use it to remove Assad from power.

Yes quite the plan.

[tecelote]

5. +1!

[TeddyR]

2. I don't have a single regret about the US vaporizing that dog

The only other option was to leave that animal alive to continue to behead hostages since we are years away from having any chance at arresting any member of ISIS. If they could have arrested him yesterday and then tried and hanged him I would have preferred that but wasn't going to happen

[azurnoir]

4. By killing him we created a martyr a legend a figure who can used for recruitment

capture him put him on trial and he becomes an embarrassment a symbol of defeat

[iandhr]

9. If that happened

People would say how horrible it is boots are back on the ground.

An operation like that would cost either American or Beitsh lives.

[azurnoir]

12. still a trial would have meant more and really not many boots necessary

just good intel

[jalan48]

7. His actions were repulsive and barbaric.

Yet somehow dropping cluster bombs on innocent people, including children, and slicing and dicing them up is less barbaric. It's done in an impersonal way, from a plane high in the sky, so it doesn't create the graphic imagery of someone having their head sawed off. Drones are also more acceptable for this reason, well, unless you happen to have one strike someone you know, then they probably seem pretty barbaric also, to the recipients. Hey, what time is the big game on today?

[NNadir]

8. This horrible person was an active murderer. I generally oppose war but arguably this is a rare...

...case where force was used wisely. I suppose we could have put troops on the ground to arrest this poor excuse for a human being, or we could have allowed him to go on torturing and killing innocent people, but somehow I think this would have resulted in a greater tragedy than this optimized result.

[gratuitous]

10. The lesson will be presented again and again

William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!

Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

It's not a common or popular stand, but it's true nevertheless. We can go on with mindless violence in response to mindless violence, and we will continue to have mindless violence. This is not surprising, unusual, or unexpected.

[BooScout]

11. To get the 'justice' Corbyn wants would require boots on the ground....

....something the West is loathe to do....and something Corbyn himself would never support. ISIS is not interested in negotiating....so what solutions do you have to the situation? Should we just let the world burn down around us?

[Chan790]

17. Corbyn would propose a unity circle singalong around the bonfire.

He is emblematic of why I argue that unilateral absolutist pacifists are evil.

[Demeter]

15. Public Assassination is a pointless and fruitless form of foreign policy

It doesn't reflect well upon the nation that "legalizes murder" and it only inflames the group that was targeted. It's not soccer, it's life or death. A country doesn't get points for how many "tricks" it takes with its deck of villains.

And there's no point in doing it under cover for the adolescents who run the State and Defense and Executive...no bragging rights! Although a real, thought-out foreign policy wouldn't NEED bragging rights, because its success would be the proof of its effectiveness.

[Chan790]

18. I don't know about that.

Following the Munich Olympics attack, Mossad undertook מבצע זעם האל‎ (Mivtza Za'am Ha'el), Operation "Wrath of God", to track-down and assassinate the leadership of Black September as well as anybody had had provided them with funding, logistical or material support.

I don't recall Black September or any of its leadership ever being noteworthy again...other than the news reports about them being shot dead, blown up or killed in a raid. 11 people...they managed to assemble a kill-list of 11 people, get 9 of them and destroy an entire terrorist organization. It seems like it was a highly-fruitful and effective form of foreign policy.

In fact, I think it's probably the kind of tactical response the French would be wise to consider. It's not a secret who is funding Daesh, who does business with Daesh--those Kalashnikovs didn't manufacture themselves or fall from the sky like manna, who provides them with logistical or material support. A lot of good could come of making those that have been making them viable spend the rest of their lives looking over their shoulders. The lifeblood of any terrorist movement is money...kill the funding heart and the brain & hands die.

[Demeter]

20. So, the French are supposed to go after the House of Saud? The Emirates? The Imams?

Not likely. That's WWIII in three easy steps.

Or what if it turns out the US was involved in some way? Not impossible, not even improbable.

Israeli policy is not a good example, IMO. The Israelis are not beloved, in case you hadn't noticed. People don't flee to Israel for freedom, safety or economic opportunity, unless they are Jewish. The oppressed Jewish minority in hostile lands can go to Israel to exert their "privilege of birth" and to further inflame the Middle East by stripping Palestinians of home, job, life itself, but as soon as the Jewish immigrants can afford and wrangle a way, they move to America or other, more peaceful and civilized places.

[Chan790]

23. I have to say I'm not going to lose sleep if they do. n/t

[CJCRANE]

22. Who is funding Daesh? nt

[Chan790]

24. The same people Demeter just listed.

The Emirates and members of the Saudi Royal Family, along with their business relations in the region.

They've not really been secretive about it, though I don't know why it doesn't get more press in the US.

[qazplm]

19. I'd much have preferred

assassinating Saddam to the invasion that we did instead.

[Demeter]

21. The attempt was made --but as a CIA "asset", Saddam knew the drill and the methods

and he escaped the attempt.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4350104.stm

[Binkie The Clown]

16. "You can only be as peaceful as your neighbor allows you to be."

--Chinese Proverb