So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

[Guy Profumo]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

Anorak Smith wrote: No sooner had I suggested (in jest) producing a list of people it was alright to obliterate by drone strike, David Cameron has drawn up a kill list for us.



Link's not showing up, but it's on the Independent's website, for reference.

Whereas IDS's list is anyone on DLA or claiming Jobseekers'…

[Guy Profumo]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

Anorak Smith wrote: No sooner had I suggested (in jest) producing a list of people it was alright to obliterate by drone strike, David Cameron has drawn up a kill list for us.



Link's not showing up, but it's on the Independent's website, for reference.

Presto Hey!!

[Anorak Smith]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

Thanks Guy

[Ray de Galles]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

E10 Rifle wrote: And also, why is it being treated and announced as news when, seemingly, it isn't. It having already been announced as news in July? The cynical use of the media - and the media's own docile subservience - is almost as worrying

Theories are that the original stories were wrong;

Drone killing of Reyaad Khan? Didn't papers cover that two months ago?

In July, there was widespread media speculation that Reyaad Khan had been killed in an earlier missile attack in Syria but the BBC was unable to confirm those reports at the time.

.

[linus]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

san2sboro wrote: Guy, some people definitely do deserve to be killed. I'm basically against it because of the impossibility of rectifying mistakes and I'd rather they were punished than being given an easier way out, amongst other things.

There are hundreds, possibly thousands of civilians who have been killed recently by drone and jet strikes in Syria and Irak. Of great concern as well is the use of highly toxic depleted uranium, which in heavily bombed cities like Falluja is having a very damaging effect on the population.

[Guy Profumo]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

Anorak Smith wrote: No sooner had I suggested (in jest) producing a list of people it was alright to obliterate by drone strike, David Cameron has drawn up a kill list for us.



Link's not showing up, but it's on the Independent's website, for reference.

I was going respond in all seriousness to be appraised of the names on the list of death.

But fortunately you beat me to it, and prevented a serious loss of temper on my part.

Thanks!

[San Bernardhinault]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

I know it's basically a trivial aside compared to the main issue, but David Cameron's statement that "My first duty as Prime Minister is to keep the British people safe" drives me insane.

It's quite, quite rotten because nobody can say "don't keep the British people safe", yet it basically allows him to do anything. He could quite reasonably ban cars on this basis. Or ban the building of houses. Or anything at all that he wants to.

It also implies that keeping one British person safe is worth more than any number of dead foreigners; and also keeping one British person safe is worth destroying the quality of life of all the others. That safety is the one, overwhelming, dominant goal of running a country, above everything else.

There should be a concerted, organised public take down of anyone, particularly any politician, who uses this or any other version of the "If this saves one life..." linguistic shit to justify whatever they want.

[Sean of the Shed]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

I'm all for Cameron's idea of taking someone out with a drone to preserve British lives. Perhaps a drone strike on number 10 might mean nobody else ends up destitute and contemplating suicide if the next incumbent decides to repeal the fucking bedroom tax.

[ursus arctos]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

I've been on for a while about how the shameless of aping of US practice by British politicians was a revolting development, and now people are dead.

Though I can't recall even a wacko like John Yoo being so bold as to argue that targeted drone strikes of this sort are allowed by Article 51 concepts of self-defence (or self-defense, for that matter).

[Jimski]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

This whole idea of the attorney general saying the thing is legal. I mean that's just bullshit isn't it? He's hardly independent.

Before the Iraq War the then attorney general originally said it wasn't legal, for a multitude of reasons, and then suddenly changed his mind and decided it was.

This whole thing stinks. If the government can't obey (international) law then how can they expect their populace to obey domestic law?

[Patrick Thistle]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

san2sboro wrote:
Anyway, put me in the camp that sheds no tears over a few fascist pricks but is very worried that elected politicians get to choose which of their fellow subjects they get to bump off without trial.

I kind of agree with this. I'm not too worried if people go to Syria and get killed over there and therefore don't come back and blow things up here. But, there should be some process here.

Two things are bugging me. One is, can a country declare war on a group who aren't really a country? i.e. could the UK government put IS on formal notice that they officially at war?

Secondly, should we at least be trying jihadis in their absence before trying to kill them? I'm not sure what evidence would be needed, but we need to know there is some evidence for all the reasons people brighter than me have outlined all over the responsible media.

Reyeed Khan's family at least should get to know why their grandson, son and brother was killed by UK ordnance delivered with no warning.

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

i.e. could the UK government put IS on formal notice that they are officially at war?

Did the UK government ever kill any known or suspected IRA members in the Republic of Ireland, or was that all confined to north of the border (or over here)?

[Patrick Thistle]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

Actually I was thinking earlier about the IRA members who were killed in Gibralter and wondered if that was a similar scenario.

Didn't the IRA declare war on the UK though?

[The Awesome Berbaslug!!!]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

Rogin the Armchair Fan wrote:

i.e. could the UK government put IS on formal notice that they are officially at war?

Did the UK government ever kill any known or suspected IRA members in the Republic of Ireland, or was that all confined to north of the border (or over here)?

It's hard to tell if they assassinated anyone in the republic, but they did plant a series of no warning carbombs in the 70's that killed an awful lot of people. I don't think you can make a meaningful distinction between the actions of Robin Jackson and say the RAF.

[Kevin S]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles#Collusion_between_British_forces_and_ loyalists

http://patfinucanecentre.org/collusion/PFC%20Conclusions%20-%20Lethal%20Allies%20%28Oct%2023%29.pdf

There you go Rogin - you could say the UK used loyalists as the contemporary equivalent of drones...

[ad hoc]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

Apropos of nothing in particular I've just this minute received an invite to go to Damascus to do some training. My contact there says "things are so much better now".

There is a part of me that is tempted, honestly, but there's no fucking way that I could get it past Mrs hoc, so I won't be taking this opportunity.

[Vicarious Thrillseeker]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

ursus arctos wrote: I've been on for a while about how the shameless of aping of US practice by British politicians was a revolting development, and now people are dead

It almost makes one nostalgic for the good old days of indefinite detention in Guantanamo.

[MsD]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

The timing and public nature of the announcements made me wonder if Cameron was seeking to make Corbyn look wet and unpatriotic if he uttered a word of criticism? Otherwise, why bring it up now, and why not operate in a "black ops" stylee in the first place, and cover it up? Not like they can't. Dunno.

[Jimski]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

An odd time to do it though, in that case. Wouldn't it have been better to have waited until Corbyn became Labour leader (if indeed he does)?

[MsD]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

Spose, and the Tories, if we're to believe them, want Corbyn to be the leader. I don't know, it all seems odd.

[Tubby Isaacs]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

Jimski wrote: An odd time to do it though, in that case. Wouldn't it have been better to have waited until Corbyn became Labour leader (if indeed he does)?

They're certain he's won, and are seeking to define him early- like Ed Miliband "stabbing his brother in the back".

I've heard intelligent people saying they didn't like that about Ed. We have to assume they're very competent as this sort of bollocks.

[Jimski]

So, British drone strikes in Syria then...

Gary Younge, speaking sense as ever.