Coalition F-16 downed over ISIS, pilot captured

[Broomstick]

You don't have to actually sign an international agreement to observe its rules. It would certainly be wonderful if ISIL observed the Geneva conventions, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

[Thanas]

Simon, I think arguing with an attorney about legal definitions of things is generally a bad career move.

I honestly am not that big of an expert on the law of war though, so I won't speak from authority here.

You're a lawyer? I always thought you're some kind of history researcher.

Yes, that is my current position and one I'd like to continue for the rest of my live.

However, given the market, I wanted to have something to fall back on so I did Jura first.

[Zilkar]

I was not aware that ISIS had signed the convention, so this is a moot point anyway. You cannot violate a law you don't have...

Actually, under international law and the Law of Armed Conflict an accused can be held to account even if the nation or organization has not actually signed or ratified the applicable statutes.

[Beowulf]

I was not aware that ISIS had signed the convention, so this is a moot point anyway. You cannot violate a law you don't have...

You must follow Customary International Law, even if you haven't signed anything agreeing to any of it. That's what "customary" means. The Geneva Conventions have been acknowledged as international law by everyone for so long that that apply to everyone, even non-signatories, because everyone understands that they are international law. Just like the 3 mile limit for international waters. There's no formal agreement stating such. It just is. Diplomatic immunity is similar. People came to the conclusion that diplomats should be immune to local laws well before it got codified into an international treaty.

[Ubiquitous]

Has anything more been reported on this pilot? This was all over the news for a day or so, and then, nothing.

[Zilkar]

Ubiquitous, I have checked a number of ME news sites and have not seen anything further. I am going to hope that this means they are in the process of either a) negotiating his release, or b) finalizing the rescue package.

[Borgholio]

The pilot was just executed by being burned alive.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... pilot.html

[Haminal10]

Well that's a new low.

Things like this are making it reeeeeeeally hard to feel bad about anything done in retaliation to members of ISIS...

[The Romulan Republic]

I'd rather we not sink to their level and start torturing and murdering our captives.

That said, I fully support fighting against them.

[Borgholio]

Things like this are making it reeeeeeeally hard to feel bad about anything done in retaliation to members of ISIS...

Jordan flat out said a week ago that they would fast-track the execution (judgement) of all ISIS prisoners they captured if the pilot is not returned alive.

Well...I guess let the hangings begin.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I'd rather we not sink to their level and start torturing and murdering our captives.

Oh wait, we already do that...


Sorry. Really bitter about that. Still, so much for being held as a POW.

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, I can't say I'm happy about some of the shit that happened after 911. Though to the best of my knowledge they never burned anyone alive at Guantanamo. Not that that's saying much.

[Joun_Lord]

Its strange the at ISIS kills pretty much all their captives. Most terrorist groups capture people and then hold them for leverage in negotiations (be it for money or prisoner exchanges), as human shields, or just to have a continuing source of propaganda.

ISIS just kill fucks everyone. Its for propaganda purposes, sure, but pretty limited propaganda. They get a guy/gal/FUCKING CHILD and then behead them like they are goddamn barbarians (but that would be insulting to actual barbarians) on film and thats it.

I do wonder if they do their killings to try to provoke a response from the international community. Best way to get more people to behead, burn alive, or if they are feeling merciful enslave is to get people pissed off enough to send dudes in the area, not to mention the propaganda boon having western pig dogs trampling about in their western pig dog Altama boots in the ME.

[Elheru Aran]

The executions, for the most part, have not necessarily been out of hand; generally they have been after demands by ISIS were not met. Whether the demands were reasonable is quite another story. They are violent revolutionary ideologues who are currently running the roost; they do it because they know that (for now) they can largely get away with it. And as far as provoking the West into sending a military boots-on-the-ground response, well, I suspect that the region is starting to get very close to the point where they would actually welcome such an intervention... the big question is when it will become politically viable for the West to do so because frankly there's not much chance otherwise, as sad and fucked up as that is.

[K. A. Pital]

I would say that reacting to this with 'well, we can do whatever we want to them now since they're so barbaric' is not only morally questionable, but also a perfect propaganda tool for ISIS recruitment.

[Irbis]

Its strange the at ISIS kills pretty much all their captives. Most terrorist groups capture people and then hold them for leverage in negotiations (be it for money or prisoner exchanges), as human shields, or just to have a continuing source of propaganda.

ISIS just kill fucks everyone. Its for propaganda purposes, sure, but pretty limited propaganda. They get a guy/gal/FUCKING CHILD and then behead them like they are goddamn barbarians (but that would be insulting to actual barbarians) on film and thats it.

That's the thing - they do not. In fact, they release captives, or even whole groups, you just don't hear about it in news because only demonising enemies these days sells. Two first links for example:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/j ... tives-iraq

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/s ... late-mosul

As for provoking international reaction, I don't know. I'd say the killings are just revenge by proxy, the only way ISIS can show their supporters they still fight, by washing dishonour with blood (and Jordanians about to do the same in response). The pilot dying in especially gruesome way because they deemed token response to western bombing was more important for morale than prisoner exchange they discussed with Jordan for some time.

[link]

Daily Fail? *sigh* Really? There were no better, less rabidly non-objective sources...?

[cosmicalstorm]

Well, I can't say I'm happy about some of the shit that happened after 911. Though to the best of my knowledge they never burned anyone alive at Guantanamo. Not that that's saying much.

Actually the CIA did send prisoners to prisons in places like Uzbekistan where boiling water executions are known to occur.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/01/inter ... print&_r=0

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, I can't say I'm happy about some of the shit that happened after 911. Though to the best of my knowledge they never burned anyone alive at Guantanamo. Not that that's saying much.

Actually the CIA did send prisoners to prisons in places like Uzbekistan where boiling water executions are known to occur.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/01/inter ... print&_r=0

Really? If so, that's pretty disgusting.

[Borgholio]

Daily Fail? *sigh* Really? There were no better, less rabidly non-objective sources...?

Are they that bad?

[Purple]

Daily Fail? *sigh* Really? There were no better, less rabidly non-objective sources...?

Are they that bad?

From my admittedly limited understanding they are the british equivalent of Fox News.

[Borgholio]

From my admittedly limited understanding they are the british equivalent of Fox News.

Oh fuck me.

[Thanas]

Don't worry, the Guardian has the same headline, so it is still true.

[Broomstick]

So does Al-Jazeera

I don't grasp the mental process of someone who would deliberately burn someone alive, and don't particularly care to achieve that viewpoint. However, I have to wonder if their situation is such that they can only continue to exist by continual battle and plunder. Thus, well-publicized, gruesome executions would serve to continue to rile up their enemies (pretty much everyone not them) and thus supply the on-going war they requires for their purposes.

Meanwhile, by exchanging some captives for money or whatever, with a very real threat of execution, might allow for larger ransom demands being paid.

[Gandalf]

I don't grasp the mental process of someone who would deliberately burn someone alive, and don't particularly care to achieve that viewpoint.

It's not hard. If one sees their enemy as being less than human, anything is possible. Inflict pain and suffering to presumably deal with one's own pain. Think of how many people wanted a nuclear apocalypse over the ME after 11/9, or pretty much any standard internet tough guy business.

People feel wronged, and they're taking it out on their (sometimes relatively) powerless societal others. The object of torture is torture.

[Grumman]

However, I have to wonder if their situation is such that they can only continue to exist by continual battle and plunder. Thus, well-publicized, gruesome executions would serve to continue to rile up their enemies (pretty much everyone not them) and thus supply the on-going war they requires for their purposes.

I don't think that is credible. If you want plunder, you don't want to rile up your enemies into mounting a costly defense - you want them to just roll over and give you what you want, or run away, leaving what you want. They could be trying to force the latter, thinking that if they bloody a few more noses America & Co will back off and let them get back to the genocide and looting.