Sally Jones (white widow) killed by drone,

[Stickyfinger]

Breadvan72 said:

Do you suppose that a 12 year old gets to be a murderer by accident? Or that he was born a murderer? The woman took the child off to the Islamofascists when he was some years younger than 12. The fact that he was turned into a murderer is part of the tragedy. He was another victim of the death cult. Terror armies in Africa have child soldiers - or slave soldiers to give them another name, and in WW2 Hitler youth members engaged in combat and committed atrocities. You can warp childten to do terrible things if you get them young enough.

So, and I think we all would agree....the changing of a child into a murderer is the tragic event, I have yet to see anybody disagree with that.

This child was not the target, the mother was. The fact the child died is a sad consequence of it being with its mother, the fact it was a evil little st makes it acceptable that it became a collateral death. War is a total stter, worse when it is caused by equally stty people who use children in this way.

stitched said:

I reiterate that I do not condemn the actions of the drone operators.
However to condemn her son as an evil toerag as he has behaved in the fashion taught to him by his parent.
Whilst viewing the adult drone operators who decided to kill a 12 year old as heroic.
Really?

bks and insulting to people who have an extremely mind blowing job !....the mother was the target, the child was the twisted result of the Mother and the cult she followed, it was acceptable but a dreadful death with ONLY them being responsible.

You should be ashamed to belittle the drone operators.

Edited by Stickyfinger on Sunday 15th October 08:39

[knight]

On a more important note, I drove past Creech AFB in July and watched some drones doing circuits and landings. Never realised they were being controlled operationally from there,

[stitched]

Stickyfinger said:

Breadvan72 said:

Do you suppose that a 12 year old gets to be a murderer by accident? Or that he was born a murderer? The woman took the child off to the Islamofascists when he was some years younger than 12. The fact that he was turned into a murderer is part of the tragedy. He was another victim of the death cult. Terror armies in Africa have child soldiers - or slave soldiers to give them another name, and in WW2 Hitler youth members engaged in combat and committed atrocities. You can warp childten to do terrible things if you get them young enough.

So, and I think we all would agree....the changing of a child into a murderer is the tragic event, I have yet to see anybody disagree with that.

This child was not the target, the mother was. The fact the child died is a sad consequence of it being with its mother, the fact it was a evil little st makes it acceptable that it became a collateral death. War is a total stter, worse when it is caused by equally stty people who use children in this way.

stitched said:

I reiterate that I do not condemn the actions of the drone operators.
However to condemn her son as an evil toerag as he has behaved in the fashion taught to him by his parent.
Whilst viewing the adult drone operators who decided to kill a 12 year old as heroic.
Really?

bks and insulting to people who have an extremely mind blowing job !....the mother was the target, the child was the twisted result of the Mother and the cult she followed, it was acceptable but a dreadful death with ONLY them being responsible.

You should be ashamed to belittle the drone operators.

Edited by Stickyfinger on Sunday 15th October 08:39

You are either being deliberately obtuse or have selective comprehension skills.
None of the words or sentiments you so rudely tried to put into my mouth are even remotely close to the truth.
The mother is not fit to carry that title.
The boy acted in the way he had been taught was correct, according to the law he had been taught was correct.
You may argue that the execution was morally repugnant but that depends on viewpoint.
Morally what difference is there between a murderer executed in accordance with the laws in his state and an executed hostage in accordance with the laws of the state he was in.
I can easily tell the difference, I'm not 12 with scum for a parent.
I never criticised the drone operators, merely pointed out that the 'necessary' statement had no merit.
I actually hope I would have had the resolve to carry out that decision, I am certain I wouldn't want that decision on my shoulders and my sympathy and respect for that individual are absolute.

[Stickyfinger]

stitched said:

You are either being deliberately obtuse or have selective comprehension skills.
None of the words or sentiments you so rudely tried to put into my mouth are even remotely close to the truth.
The mother is not fit to carry that title.
The boy acted in the way he had been taught was correct, according to the law he had been taught was correct.
You may argue that the execution was morally repugnant but that depends on viewpoint.
Morally what difference is there between a murderer executed in accordance with the laws in his state and an executed hostage in accordance with the laws of the state he was in.
I can easily tell the difference, I'm not 12 with scum for a parent.
I never criticised the drone operators, merely pointed out that the 'necessary' statement had no merit.
I actually hope I would have had the resolve to carry out that decision, I am certain I wouldn't want that decision on my shoulders and my sympathy and respect for that individual are absolute.

If I was wrong I will withdraw. Whilst I would not use "heroic" they do get my utmost respect and admiration for the job they do.

You talk of "execution", this is totally wrong, what happened was just a sniper shot, albeit from a longer distance and with a big bullet. Another way of looking at is is a targeted artillery shot or a bomb drop .....because it was onto this specific target is no different to a shot onto a known "headquarters" target.

[stitched]

Stickyfinger said:

stitched said:

You are either being deliberately obtuse or have selective comprehension skills.
None of the words or sentiments you so rudely tried to put into my mouth are even remotely close to the truth.
The mother is not fit to carry that title.
The boy acted in the way he had been taught was correct, according to the law he had been taught was correct.
You may argue that the execution was morally repugnant but that depends on viewpoint.
Morally what difference is there between a murderer executed in accordance with the laws in his state and an executed hostage in accordance with the laws of the state he was in.
I can easily tell the difference, I'm not 12 with scum for a parent.
I never criticised the drone operators, merely pointed out that the 'necessary' statement had no merit.
I actually hope I would have had the resolve to carry out that decision, I am certain I wouldn't want that decision on my shoulders and my sympathy and respect for that individual are absolute.

If I was wrong I will withdraw. Whilst I would not use "heroic" they do get my utmost respect and admiration for the job they do.

You talk of "execution", this is totally wrong, what happened was just a sniper shot, albeit from a longer distance and with a big bullet. Another way of looking at is is a targeted artillery shot or a bomb drop .....because it was onto this specific target is no different to a shot onto a known "headquarters" target.

The 'sniper' anology doesn't really hold, what would the term be if we sent a sniper out with a specific target, more worrying is what effect this would likely have, long term on the sniper?
It must be a lot different with a personalised target. No I truly do not envy the drone controllers.

[Stickyfinger]

stitched said:

The 'sniper' anology doesn't really hold, what would the term be if we sent a sniper out with a specific target, more worrying is what effect this would likely have, long term on the sniper?
It must be a lot different with a personalised target. No I truly do not envy the drone controllers.

A lot of snipers go out with a specific target and spend a lot of time and use extensive intelligence in preparation, it is a primary role and it holds perfectly as an analogy.

[stitched]

Stickyfinger said:

stitched said:

The 'sniper' anology doesn't really hold, what would the term be if we sent a sniper out with a specific target, more worrying is what effect this would likely have, long term on the sniper?
It must be a lot different with a personalised target. No I truly do not envy the drone controllers.

A lot of snipers go out with a specific target and spend a lot of time and use extensive intelligence in preparation, it is a primary role and it holds perfectly as an analogy.

If your statement is true, and this is not an area in which I have knowledge, and the targets are political rather than combat casualties, then they do so in breach of our own terms of engagement and laws

[Fat Fairy]

stitched said:

If your statement is true, and this is not an area in which I have knowledge, and the targets are political rather than combat casualties, then they do so in breach of our own terms of engagement and laws

That will depend on the 'Rules of Engagement' in force at the time.

FF

[Stickyfinger]

This target was not a "political" target....they were part of the "army" we are at war with....

[irocfan]

Breadvan72 said:

Do you suppose that a 12 year old gets to be a murderer by accident? Or that he was born a murderer? The woman took the child off to the Islamofascists when he was some years younger than 12. The fact that he was turned into a murderer is part of the tragedy. He was another victim of the death cult. Terror armies in Africa have child soldiers - or slave soldiers to give them another name, and in WW2 Hitler youth members engaged in combat and committed atrocities. You can warp children to do terrible things if you get them young enough.

Edited by Breadvan72 on Sunday 15th October 07:06

actually BV he may have been a wrong un right from the get go. There are people like that, as I am sure you know. I'm not saying that he was (or indeed wasn't) but it is possible. In the scheme of things - yes it is a tragedy that a 12 y/o does not get to fulfil their potential, one might be forgiven though, in this case, for thinking that that ship had sailed quite some time ago.

[croyde]

Not sure what everyone is arguing about.

She was the target, not the lad. She had it coming, discussion over.

[Digga]

croyde said:

Not sure what everyone is arguing about.

She was the target, not the lad. She had it coming, discussion over.

^This. You go walkabout on railway tracks, you put yourself in danger. You take your child with you, you therefore expose them to precisely the same hazards. It was her choice, but not the child's.

[anonymous-user]

techiedave said:

But BV you couldn't have got him out of that mindset. His own father and grandparents said as much.
He's gone and if his death makes a few others think about what they are getting into and to turn away then something positive will come from it.

You can definately dereadicalise people. There are numerous successful programs running in Africa and the Middle East helping former child soldiers and jihadists. Similar techniques are used with people that have been brainwashed in cults,

It usually involves forms of cognitive behaviour therapy, obviously it takes time though.

It’s not really a practical option in this child’s case but you can make people better who have adopted this kind of behaviour.

[stitched]

Fat Fairy said:

stitched said:

If your statement is true, and this is not an area in which I have knowledge, and the targets are political rather than combat casualties, then they do so in breach of our own terms of engagement and laws

That will depend on the 'Rules of Engagement' in force at the time.

FF

Again I am outside my knowledge base.
I do not think there is state of war relevant to this theatre?
Even if there were a war in progress, I thought targeting individuals for death was not legal? Happy to be corrected mind.

[Stickyfinger]

stitched said:

Again I am outside my knowledge base.
I do not think there is state of war relevant to this theatre?
Even if there were a war in progress, I thought targeting individuals for death was not legal? Happy to be corrected mind.

What ?....targeting individuals for death....how does conflict work then ?

[croyde]

Even if I entered a known war zone as an innocent, I would be fully aware that I could be killed by the enemy or my own side.

She lived by the sword and died by the drone. Boo fekin hoo.

More important stuff to worry about back home then care about some druggy and her kid.

Just been told that my boy, that hasn't hurt a fly, will have to wait 18 months for help with his autism so why should resources be wasted on her already far too gone son.

[turbomoped]

TBH this sounds like the woman on that C4 drama the other month.
All this talk about she was trying to get out and come home does rather raise the question of why not wait till she is back and arrest her like on the TV effort?
A nice feel good story would be dropping deadly gas on those people wrecking the history of the region.
We only got to look at footage of scumbags smashing stuff even though the coordinates of the various relics from history are well know.
You would at least get archeologists onside.

[anonymous-user]

turbomoped said:

TBH this sounds like the woman on that C4 drama the other month.
All this talk about she was trying to get out and come home does rather raise the question of why not wait till she is back and arrest her like on the TV effort?
A nice feel good story would be dropping deadly gas on those people wrecking the history of the region.
We only got to look at footage of scumbags smashing stuff even though the coordinates of the various relics from history are well know.
You would at least get archeologists onside.

At last a voice of reason amongst the hawks of death. I'm totally with you bro. Nick her when she gets off the plane at Gatwick. Totally do-able and would show the world what a tolerant and good bunch of people we are. I like the idea of getting archaeologists onside. I'd never thought of that one myself. I can see how it would work though. Once the ISIS crowd were confronted with a bunch of archaeologists explaining about their history and heritage to them it would change their minds. No doubt in my mind they would put down the rifles and pick up a hand trowel and one of those little brushes they use and start checking out all the old stuff.

[DaveH23]

Whilst I have not seen Eye in the Sky I have seen Drone with Sean Bean.

Whilst I sit firmly in the camp that is glad this scum is no more, I am not so sure I agree with drone strikes.
Survaillence yes but to actually end peoples lives at the click of a button whilst sat thousands of miles away. Some thing doesn't sit right with me.

[Biker 1]

DaveH23 said:

Whilst I sit firmly in the camp that is glad this scum is no more, I am not so sure I agree with drone strikes.
Survaillence yes but to actually end peoples lives at the click of a button whilst sat thousands of miles away. Some thing doesn't sit right with me.

I don't see any difference between a remote controlled drone or a fighter jet being controlled by its pilot, apart from the obvious in that the risk of losing the pilot is nullified.
The kid & any others flambed or vaporised in the immediate vicinity of the strike are 'collateral damage' - I'm guessing the powers that be think that this is a price worth paying. Is it legal? Is it moral? I'm not sure. Should 'we' be involved in the first place? Probably not.