Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A deal that let hundreds of IS fighters and their families escape from Raqqa

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 100 posts

Re: A deal that let hundreds of IS fighters and their families escape from Raqqa

#81

Post by jacobr »

chmod775 wrote: post #69
Dolores12 wrote: post #33

It was so nice of United States to make sure none of ISIS fighters were harmed. It is just unbelievable. They make deals with terrorists.

I never understood how any armed muslim automatically becomes a "terrorist" in the eyes of the world. Most ISIS fighters aren't terrorists.

I never understood how some people consider "terror" to only be acts of terrorism in Western countries, thus reaching the conclusion that local fighters are somehow not terrorists.

If you want to use a narrow definition of terrorism, such as "participating in purposeful killing of civilians to cause terror and further your political goals", 100% of ISIS fighters are guilty. Dozens die or are hurt daily by a huge number of mines, booby traps, suicide bombs and attacks explicitly targeting civilians in Syria, Iraq, and across the world. This happens inside and outside of ISIS controlled territory.

Civilians are in no way collateral damage for ISIS, they are direct targets of genocide, sexual slavery and simply random mass murders.

Re: A deal that let hundreds of IS fighters and their families escape from Raqqa

#82

Post by icebraining »

emn13 wrote: post #71
icebraining wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is whether it's acceptable to kill a bunch of innocents now (certainly the children, probably many of the women and possibly even some men) to avoid an hypothetical attack in the future. If this was just about ISIS fighters, I'd agree with you, but that's not what the report described.

Considering women innocents (I'm assuming you mean non-combatants) is pretty absurd, IMHO. As in: they're certainly aware of what they're involved in; and their participation contributes significantly to the problem, and to the degree that they're forced to stay: that probably goes for most of those present: desertion isn't something any army takes lightly. And although the children cannot be at fault, I doubt they'l…

Joining an army and then being prevented from deserting is one thing, but how many of these women have had no choice in the matter since the start? Hell, how many have been outright kidnapped? Seems absurd to assume every adult there is necessarily an accomplice.

Re: A deal that let hundreds of IS fighters and their families escape from Raqqa

#83

Post by jacobr »

This was an agreement between local tribes and the Syrian Democratic Forces to limit the already immense destruction of Raqqa and protect civilians that were held as human shields.

If the Syrian Democratic Forces and the US to just say "No survivors!" and release the MOAB they would likely have a very hard time gaining the trust of the local tribes and communities in the future.

"This was a local solution to local issue. Coalition did not fully agree, but respected our partners decision." - https://twitter.com/OIRSpox/status/930166228727066626

Re: A deal that let hundreds of IS fighters and their families escape from Raqqa

#84

Post by bjl »

Zpalmtree wrote: post #79
boomboomsubban wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Continued fighting would have killed thousands of more civilians, while France and Great Britain have had under a thousand terrorism related deaths since 1970. How isn't this obvious?

Because we value our own citizens higher than the lives of terrorists?

The vast majority of people killed in Syria were not terrorists.

Re: A deal that let hundreds of IS fighters and their families escape from Raqqa

#86

Post by Udik »

aedron wrote: post #66
frandroid wrote: post #14

Basically, either you let ISIS escape, or you completely flatten the city to get rid of them. I mean considering the way Raqqa looks now, I'm not sure it was effective in preventing much destruction, but if you have an opportunity to save a large city, you try to.

So intercept the convoy and fight them honorably, or whatever you believe is the better alternative. I hope you are not suggesting that they should just be getting a free pass because they brought their wives and kids in tow. At the very least track them and pick them out whenever the opportunity arises. It's not like the U.S. does not have any intelligence capabilities in the region. I'll tell you what I believe: Th…

While I agree with you on the real motives and goal of the US (even if I believe they're mixed and confused, and not as clear cut as you present them), I still find unacceptable the talk of total annihilation, not to mention the actual killing of thousands of people, women and children included. Yes, even if they're armed, the aim should be victory, not massacre.

Re: A deal that let hundreds of IS fighters and their families escape from Raqqa

#87

Post by tryingagainbro »

status wrote: post #72

People are still in denial of the double game US government is playing in Syria. The same way one couldn't deny that US government trained and supplied Talibans with stinger rockets. The very same people that now US condemn as terrorist and fight with. The Talibans were the good freedom fighters when they fought with Russia now they are the bad once what is this? "It also seems like you're willfully ignoring the hist…

No Iranian and no Russian influence. ISIS and others may seem as a temporary thing that will go away after a few bombings but keeping Russia out of ME and Iran contained is very important. Israel wants the same, coincidentally ;)

Re: A deal that let hundreds of IS fighters and their families escape from Raqqa

#88

Post by w458cmau »

jacobr wrote: post #83

This was an agreement between local tribes and the Syrian Democratic Forces to limit the already immense destruction of Raqqa and protect civilians that were held as human shields. If the Syrian Democratic Forces and the US to just say "No survivors!" and release the MOAB they would likely have a very hard time gaining the trust of the local tribes and communities in the future. "This was a local solution to local is…

Is it a local issue if those who were let go (with weapons and ammunition) immediately take up their weapons in a different part of the region?

Re: A deal that let hundreds of IS fighters and their families escape from Raqqa

#89

Post by chmod775 »

jacobr wrote: post #81
chmod775 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understood how any armed muslim automatically becomes a "terrorist" in the eyes of the world. Most ISIS fighters aren't terrorists.

I never understood how some people consider "terror" to only be acts of terrorism in Western countries, thus reaching the conclusion that local fighters are somehow not terrorists. If you want to use a narrow definition of terrorism, such as "participating in purposeful killing of civilians to cause terror and further your political goals", 100% of ISIS fighters are guilty. Dozens die or are hurt daily by a huge numb…

Using that "narrow" definition most countries around the world, including the US, have engaged or are engaging in terrorism, thus making the lot of them terrorist groups?

Bombings of cities during war time, indiscriminately killing civilians, sometimes as a show of power to pressure the opposing side to surrender, wouldn't make the whole military a terrorist group.

North Korea's treatment of their citizens doesn't make the whole country, or their military, or their police, a terrorist group.

At times countries like the US have killed more civilians in a single day than ISIS killed in the past 6 years[1][2]. Do I consider them terrorist? No.

In the war in Syria, the Assad regime killed more civilians than ISIS by an order of magnitude[2]. Do I consider them terrorist? No.

All three countries would be considered terrorist by your definition.

I don't buy it. Just because of terrorist acts by a few, the whole group doesn't become a group of terrorists.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_a...

[2]: http://vdc-sy.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/June-report-Eng...

Re: A deal that let hundreds of IS fighters and their families escape from Raqqa

#90

Post by boomboomsubban »

Zpalmtree wrote: post #79
boomboomsubban wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Continued fighting would have killed thousands of more civilians, while France and Great Britain have had under a thousand terrorism related deaths since 1970. How isn't this obvious?

Because we value our own citizens higher than the lives of terrorists?

Civilians aren't terrorists, though your own citizens might be.
Post reply on HN