Jump to content

Experts to discuss threat posed by jihadists returning to Australia


Recommended Posts

Posted

There is a difference between leaving your country and fighting for or with another countries military. In some cases, it may be a requirement for dual citizenship.

If you leave your country and you fight for a country or an organization that actively opposes your home country, that is treasonous. Those doing it should be punished.

ISIS is considered a terrorist organization and those actively supporting it should face the consequences when returning to a western country.

Neat sidestep to accommodate.... you know who. It's not a requirement of the Australian government that you know who go off to fight in terrorist wars. It’s the volunteer’s choice. If they want to be citizens of another country then go and live there permanently and surrender their Australian passports. This seems to be the suggestion certain posters above are advising for returning Muslim fighters. Why the double standards for you know who?

I would strongly suggest that the terrorist wars a certain country engages in are directly opposed to Australia’s and the world’s interests. It is in fact a primary season for the trouble in Iraq today and the creation of the jihadi problem.

All the more reason for Australia to apply universal laws to all its citizens equally.

I consider another army in the Middle East a terrorist organization too...and so do a majority of the countries in the UN General Assembly.

Australia would be wise to keep its nose out of other people’s wars thus making itself a target for terrorists.

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

There is a difference between leaving your country and fighting for or with another countries military. In some cases, it may be a requirement for dual citizenship.

If you leave your country and you fight for a country or an organization that actively opposes your home country, that is treasonous. Those doing it should be punished.

ISIS is considered a terrorist organization and those actively supporting it should face the consequences when returning to a western country.

Neat sidestep to accommodate.... you know who. It's not a requirement of the Australian government that you know who go off to fight in terrorist wars. It’s the volunteer’s choice. If they want to be citizens of another country then go and live there permanently and surrender their Australian passports. This seems to be the suggestion certain posters above are advising for returning Muslim fighters. Why the double standards for you know who?

I would strongly suggest that the terrorist wars a certain country engages in are directly opposed to Australia’s and the world’s interests. It is in fact a primary season for the trouble in Iraq today and the creation of the jihadi problem.

All the more reason for Australia to apply universal laws to all its citizens equally.

I consider another army in the Middle East a terrorist organization too...and so do a majority of the countries in the UN General Assembly.

Australia would be wise to keep its nose out of other people’s wars thus making itself a target for terrorists.

Are you saying Oz should not provide humanitarian aid? Sufficient enough just to provide humanitarian aid in Iraq for Oz to become a target. Won't make any difference if Australia stays out of any military attack on IS.

Militarily Oz is heavily dependent on the US, at the very minimum for logistics & intelligence support. Oz will not be walking away from the alliance any time soon, thus also being a target for Islamic extremists.

Posted

Bottom line is the Australian Government has no BA**S when it comes to stopping persons entering Australia or deporting them, when you read about the murderers leaving or the criminals entering !

At least they could be as tough on these guys as they are on Thai hookers.

Posted

you know who

No. I don't know who. Please don't assume that other people know what you are talking about or want to play guessing games. This is not the games forum.

  • Like 1
Posted

you know who

No. I don't know who. Please don't assume that other people know what you are talking about or want to play guessing games. This is not the games forum.

I know who, it is the Somalia community of Australia.

It would not be you.

Posted

Here we go, two arrests in Brisbane for raising funds for Islamic terrorists in Syria. Unbelievably our governments are still expecting us to believe the following.

This has got nothing to do with Islam, this is about Australians involved in terrorist activity.

Though the arrests were made at an Islamic bookstore and recruitment was being sought for fighters to join IS (Islamic State).

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/two-men-face-terror-charges-as-police-raid-islamic-book-store-at-logan/story-fnihsrf2-1227053771259?nk=1c1ce3e56ea095ea4048bcf141edc942

Yes, like Obama stating "IS has nothing to do with Islam." At a certain point one is forced to consider "Am I wrong? Why do I see something very bad going on and my leadership does not? For those who trust them self it becomes apparent that our leadership is facilitating islamic jihad (after a certain point). Denying the connection of the obvious to islam is purchasing dhimmitude; this is the only thing the islamic world notes by our incredible denial of what they are screaming to us- we are willfully surrendering to dhimmi status.

  • Like 2
Posted

Does anyone believe that if Western coalition leaders publically announce that Islam per se is directly linked to 'terrorism' they will get a friendly reception in the M.E for support against IS? US strategy/tactics, at least for the moment, at a miniumum, is dependant on Pegmersha, PKK & Iraqi ground forces to push IS out of Iraq and keep the Iraqi Sunni tribal extremists at bay from re-occupying lost IS territory. Sometime in the future IS in Syria needs to be addressed. You're not going to get a hell of a lot of ongoing co-operation by directly criticising their religion.

Perhaps the best way to summarise is 'realpolitik', do you disagree?

Posted

I have not been too active in this topic debate.

But I have read just about every post here.

And as it surely must be it is a mixed bag of ideas, beliefs and opinions.

What strikes me in all these posts is that the esteemed participants are not free to express their real thoughts.

This is an undeniable fact sticking out of the bag.

I am not referring to TV rules here. I am referring to the whole World we are but a small part of.

There are certain facts. There are certain Truths. There are clearly two opposing views. There are two mutually exluding forces at war.

Yet they are unspeakable! In the name of one totally wrong dominating concept of the modern time: Political Correctness.

Don't worry. It will pass. Everything eventually passes and changes. Let us hope it will not take too long.

As somebody correctly mentioned this is not a forum for puzzles so let me be clear.

The war is between today's Militant Islam and the rest of civilized World - Christians, Judaists, Buddhists, Atheists, even non-conformist Muslims - summarily "Infidels".

Who lumped all these otherwise different groups of the civilized World into one group of "Infidels" ? - Militant Islam!

What makes this war a loosing battle? - Political Correctness!

One cannot go to war and hope to win without first clearly identifying the enemy and the aims.

I hope I didn't break any TV rules here. wai2.gif

  • Like 1
Posted

Does anyone believe that if Western coalition leaders publically announce that Islam per se is directly linked to 'terrorism' they will get a friendly reception in the M.E for support against IS? US strategy/tactics, at least for the moment, at a miniumum, is dependant on Pegmersha, PKK & Iraqi ground forces to push IS out of Iraq and keep the Iraqi Sunni tribal extremists at bay from re-occupying lost IS territory. Sometime in the future IS in Syria needs to be addressed. You're not going to get a hell of a lot of ongoing co-operation by directly criticising their religion.

Perhaps the best way to summarise is 'realpolitik', do you disagree?

You do have a point, but the price of extending a policy of realpolitik to the Muslim world is to concurrently run a policy of denial with regards to your own citizens. I would add that this denial could be in itself considered realpolitik, considering the panic that would likely ensue if the true nature of Islam was faced (See Sleepwalking into Armageddon by Sam Harris for a perfect summary).

The trouble is there will never be a good time to open this can of worms, so IMHO it's best done sooner rather than later before continued immigration puts us even deeper in the mire. I would not expect Muslim nations to contribute too much towards fighting ISIS as doing so would endanger their own regimes. What I would hope for is that they ruthlessly crush any trace of political Islam from within their Countries, Egypt having made a good start and Algeria being a copybook example. The trouble is the current US policy has been the exact opposite of this, which alas means two more years for political Islam to run with the ball without the. West grasping the metal.

Posted

With any luck there won't be an issue of returning jihadists

Loving the irony

FIVE Britons are among a gang of Islamic State fighters dubbed the “Cream Puff Brigade” locked up in a torture camp after they pleaded to go home because they were disillusioned with jihadi war.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/508134/Cream-Puff-Brigade-JIhadists-locked-up-in-Syrian-torture-camp

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...