Should the UK limit movement of citizens to Iraq/Syria?

[robin]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32059813

Personally I think they have every right to go there if they want ... yes we should be promoting the "why IS does not represent the British way" story, but if people want to travel we must let them.

There is a history of British civilians deciding to go fight in civil wars in foreign countries, not to mention providing mercenaries to support all sorts of governments that we might consider to be anti-democratic.

Not so long ago, Britain was being urged to join in the civil war AGAINST the Syrian government (now we're de facto supporting the Syrian government by opposing IS). We did support uprising in various North African civil wars recently.

I also suspect that we're wasting our time trying to fight these traditional military wars - we could dominate by force for decades (incurring significant loss of life), but the moment we walk away chaos will return (whether it's the Taliban, Al Queda (spelling?) or IS). These are essentially civil wars and we would be better off trying to mediate than taking sides. Adopting a non-combative role in these conflicts would also avoid us needing to vilify those that are deciding to go and support IS and would take away a key argument from those persuading these people to travel.

Just my 2p.

Cheers,
Robin

[hendeg]

I can understand the viewpoint that we don't want to let people leave the country so they can train to fight against the UK (whatever 'fight against the UK' means) . I guess what makes it difficult is that these people have the freedom to return to the UK and then be more dangerous from within. It would be a different story if they left and didn't come back. I don't suppose the number wanting to leave in that case would really make a difference.

I'm nowhere near knowledgeable enough to give a qualified opinion on UK military intervention but I think I'm with the general consensus when I say I have a feeling that it's normally the wrong thing to do. There are exceptions of course e.g. Bosnia.

[BiggestNizzy]

Nuke them from space, it's the only way to be sure.

[greyrigg]

Personally I think they have every right to go there if they want ... yes we should be promoting the "why IS does not represent the British way" story, but if people want to travel we must let them.

There is a history of British civilians deciding to go fight in civil wars in foreign countries, not to mention providing mercenaries to support all sorts of governments that we might consider to be anti-democratic.

I agree entirely. All this 'British way' stuff sounds a bit like brainwashing, the whole point of a free society is freedom of thought and expression, you might not like it, but that is what freedom is about.

Malcolm

[Andy G]

I'm happy they go - but they should be surrendering their British Passport when they do so, banned from the UK indefinately and f***ing off period.

Last thing we need is them coming back in to the country causing chaos, murdering and bombing stuff.

[j2 lot]

let them go, just don't let them back.
If only it was so simple.

[tut]

By all means let them go, hopefully they will be killed, if not do not let them back in.

Initially I started a much longer reply then decided that life was too short, the atrocities are distressing, but my attitude now is let them get on with it and sort it out for themselves, as long as oil supply is not affected of course. We have seen from Iraq that once forces leave it returns back to what it was, and the billions spent on training their troops was just a waste of money.

Hearts and minds intervention is all very well, but rarely works.

tut

ps:- slow day at work Robin?

[Sanjøy]

50p says there are more mercs in Syria / fighting ISIS in the middle East than UK born crazies fighting the "good guys".

[robin]

It's the "nuke em from orbit" (tongue in cheek, I know) attitude that provides fuel to the fire. Taking their passports away and/or hoping they get killed doesn't help - for every one that is successfully radicalised (brainwashed, if you prefer) and "sent to war" by the jihadi recruiters, a hundred will stay here, thinking it's not for them; many of those will still have been affected by the radicals and thus have an increased sense of alienation - a key motivating factor in any terrorist act in my opinion.

By taking a more neutral stance you make it less likely that people are alienated and fall into the clutches of the jihadi recruiters - or at least that's my opinion - there are precious few facts.

As to what to do with IS, etc., I don't see what we can do - we've been bombing the crap out of variants of IS for 20 years now - IT ISN'T WORKING - let's try talking to them instead? Just sayin' ....

Cheers,
Robin

[Robbie]

I'm with Andy on this one.

[twisted2fit]

We should end diplomatic relations with the wahabi. Monarchies that finance isis and spread their ideology.. Let them go and come back and then prosecute them if there is proof they have committed acts of terror

[Sanjøy]

There is a slight problem with that plan...

[Ferg]

Depends what you mean by limiting movement. Should people be free to travel where they please, yes. Should the security services be reviewing activity and acting where they feel there is a potential threat, I would also say yes.

In the meantime a program of long term communication and acceptance of culture and difference should make the radicals look further from the median in their own society. This would work if the acceptance could be achieved by all societies involved at all levels. It's that bit I'm sceptical of...sadly.

[pete]

Depends what you mean by limiting movement. Should people be free to travel where they please, yes. Should the security services be reviewing activity and acting where they feel there is a potential threat, I would also say yes.

In the meantime a program of long term communication and acceptance of culture and difference should make the radicals look further from the median in their own society. This would work if the acceptance could be achieved by all societies involved at all levels. It's that bit I'm sceptical of...sadly.

You see it's this sort of reasonableness that is killing threads on the internet.