Dutch jihadists should die before returning to Netherlands: Prime Minister Rutte

[Deleted]

I debated whether to post this since I could not determine if it falls outside the rules. (*)

However, it seems to be an important evolution of not just anyone's opinion, but that of the head of state of a core EU country and may reflect directly on policy and the lives of people.

So, here it is: http://www.nltimes.nl/2015/03/06/dut...inister-rutte/

Prime Minister Mark Rutte thinks it is better if Dutch jihadists who traveled to join the fight in Syria and Iraq die there instead of returning to the Netherlands.
...
The Prime Minister is certain that the majority of Dutch people agree with him. “Because what do these people who travel to Syria and Iraq do? They go there to commit the most horrible attacks, to learn how to build bombs, how to take away a lot of lives. Then they come pack to commit those attacks in our society.” Rutte stated that he would prefer to stop jihadists traveling to those countries, but if he had to choose, he would rather they die there.

Transcript of the debate in the video (even more interesting):

HOST: Mr. Pechtold [Alexander Pechtold, leader of the Democrats 66 party], you just challenged someone? Who?
PECHTOLD: The Prime Minister [Mark Rutte], who says that people should rather die than appear in court.
HOST: Okay, why don't you both come to the table and if you don't interrupt each other too much, I won't get involved. Mr. Pechtold, you can begin.
PECHTOLD: Ok, I prepared myself for this opinion and I thought "Wilders is absent" [referring to Geert Wilders, leader of the right-wing Party for Freedom], but it appears that his thoughts are shared with the PM. Naturally, what you have stated is nuanced, but you should thoroughly understand this statement: people should rather die than have them come here, in a country where international law and the promotion thereof are in the national constitution - in your constitution - and I find you really can't say "go die in the desert instead of coming here to court to stand for your actions".
RUTTE: Mr. Pechtold, I know with certainty that the majority of the Netherlands stands with me on this. Because what do these people who go to Syria or Iraq do? They go there to commit the most terrible attacks, to learn how to make bombs and ultimately take many lives. They then return to finally also apply that type of attacks in our society. I do not want this. So we should prevent their departure [to conflict zones], and when they have left, then you should be able to take their Dutch citizenship. But in the end, if I have the choice, then I would make the choice I just made, as would all of the Netherlands.
PECHTOLD: Yes, you'll have people back you on this. But I question whether a Prime Minister shouldn't defend that a country in which we uphold the "Rechtsstaat" [roughly translates to "state based on justice and law"], shall never tolerate that people should die instead of appearing in court. Let's take a look at those who left and those who are returning. I just stated, with the hardened, the recruiters, I have no consideration/respect. But there are also indoctrinated girls with them. Native Dutch, "autochtone" as we call them now, whose families are pulling their hairs out wondering "how do we get them back". You say, about all these people - and the thirty children, because entire families left to fight - "get bombed, die in the sandbox" instead of, and that is what I would prefer, not have them die as martyrs and come to a court to be judged responsible for your actions.
RUTTE: Mr. Pechtold, when you leave, you know precisely where you're going. Then you know that you are about to participate in a completely illegal, criminal organization that is focused on one thing: to kill as many people as possible. We've seen the terrible images of decapitations on TV. Our own soldiers, in our fighter jets, also with your support...
PECHTOLD: Certainly.
Rutte: ... are busy fighting ISIS in Iraq, from the air, and they can also be attacked by Dutch citizens, who went there to fight. I find that terrible, and I think it is crucial that we do anything we can, to prevent people from returning here and be capable of placing bombs and committing attacks. We have to protect this country. We have the "zwaardmacht" [fighting capability], we have the duty as politicians, especially myself as PM, to protect this country against these elements, and I will do that to my dying breath.

Source

(*) Something that also resonated with me is a story I read earlier on the BBC - Broken dreams for woman forced to flee IS-held Syria. This exceprt in particular:

Soon afterwards, she managed to flee the country by using another woman's ID. The drive to the Turkish border was a terrifying experience, she says.

"I still remember the beheaded bodies on the road.

"In the car there were two children who cried when they saw [them]", she adds. "The heads were lined up on both sides of the road. It was horrific."

[Deleted]

Where exactly is the problem?

[Sledfang]

Where exactly is the problem?

Jihadist in society is the problem.

Unless you somehow think the problem is getting smaller and going away.

[Deleted]

Where exactly is the problem?

It is because in some countries, e.g. Sweden apparently, they allow (former) fighters including those who are citizens to come back and even be fully re-integrated into society with specific benefits in some cases, like being paid to complete university degrees. There may be no consequences at all either before they leave, while they are away or after they return...

Countries/states are still trying to figure out how to deal with this major problem. Some are much slower to act or have not decided how to act.

[Deleted]

I agree with him.

[Vestig3]

Eventho i didnt vote for VVD last elections i do agree with him on this matter, let them die in syria/iraq there is no place for them back here.

[Kalis]

I don't think too many tears would be shed if British jihadists, or terrorists of any persuasion, died in some foreign field, so I can see the point of the Dutch PM.

If they do come back then you deal with them, if they don't, well hey ho, shit happens, no great loss.

[Adam Jensen]

(*) Something that also resonated with me is a story I read earlier on the BBC - Broken dreams for woman forced to flee IS-held Syria. This exceprt in particular:

What the fuck is wrong with these people?

[Suggs]

What fucking gets me about the UK is there trying so hard to keep these radicalized scumbags in the country and i simply do not get it.
If someone has been radicalized then don't hold them back let them get on the first plane out of the country to syria and never let them back in ever, not even in a body bag.
This is the problem right here. There trying to cage an animal and what happens to caged animals????....ye ye you have all heard the saying.
Trying to keep these cunts locked up here will make them bring the war to our own streets, this will still happen im sure with the odd case but what we do not want is these scumbags roaming the streets, get the fuckers out on the next boat or plane, preferably ones that have faulty engines or a hole in the bottom, lets face it the death will not be as brutal as the one they face in syria for there almighty allah.

Tldr - let them go and face death in another country , we do not want them here.

[Independent voter]

Becoming radicalized is different from becoming a criminal. A radical can change his views over time. That said I'm not sure if I would want them back in the country either.

[Deleted]

This is the problem right here. There trying to cage an animal and what happens to caged animals????

They become fat and lethargic until they die of old age?

[Sledfang]

They become fat and lethargic until they die of old age?

Geuss who is paying to fatten them up.

[Deleted]

Becoming radicalized is different from becoming a criminal. A radical can change his views over time. That said I'm not sure if I would want them back in the country either.

Agreed. In fact, there is a famous, educated and eloquent ex-radical in the UK who is running to be an MP. He is a considered a role model by some and hated so much by extremists and others (e.g. George Galloway), that he has received numerous death threats: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maajid_Nawaz

However, in this case, the situation is quite different from any normal "rehabilitation" presumptions. Even if the reality is that there may be 1 out of every 100 radicals or better who is a Maajid Nawaz, is it an acceptable risk to society and complete innocents (including future generations of potential radicals) to have returned not only those who have been radicalized but have also put in the huge commitment and resolve to go fight and prepare to die for those totally opposed to every single core value of their original country? ...

[Dezerte]

It is because in some countries, e.g. Sweden apparently, they allow (former) fighters including those who are citizens to come back and even be fully re-integrated into society with specific benefits in some cases, like being paid to complete university degrees. There may be no consequences at all either before they leave, while they are away or after they return...

That sounds like bullshit.

[Deleted]

That sounds like bullshit.

Oh really? Care to comment on this then, please?

http://speisa.com/modules/articles/i...jihadists.html
http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/komm...-is-krigare-1/
http://www.svt.se/nyheter/regionalt/...per-is-krigare

[Hiricine]

The jihadists are taking innocent hostages, cutting heads off, setting people on fire, etc. Helping them, even if you're against all of their heinous acts and simply want to fight in a more "legitimate" sense means you will still help them in their even less moral conduct.

Though if you read the transcript I think his view is more nuanced and specific than OP would suggest. He states, that instead of allowing people to come back and face the Netherlands justice system, he would rather just "exile" everyone who left from the country. Put another way, hed rather not sentence and imprison everyone who attempts to come back, he'd rather leave them where they are, and that the crime of fighting for ISIS is punishable by exile or death.

[zealo]

That sounds like bullshit.

But its not. Örebro in particular is on that track.

OT: People that find travelling to join ISIS and becoming a terrorist a viable option should have their citizenship and right to live in the country stripped upon leaving at a minimum.

[Dezerte]

Oh really? Care to comment on this then, please?

http://speisa.com/modules/articles/i...jihadists.html
http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/komm...-is-krigare-1/
http://www.svt.se/nyheter/regionalt/...per-is-krigare

This is one municipality, though. And they mention that this does not mean returning jihadists should not face prison-time.

[Deleted]

The only way jihadists should return is in a box after looking down the business end of a cruise missile. Everybody was up in arms here last week about three British girls who went off to join ISIS. Good fucking riddance.

[Deleted]

Perfectly agree. They should all die there.
Only they won't. Some will be back and we need a plan B in action. Otherwise they'll spread.

- - - Updated - - -

It is because in some countries, e.g. Sweden apparently, they allow (former) fighters including those who are citizens to come back and even be fully re-integrated into society with specific benefits in some cases, like being paid to complete university degrees. There may be no consequences at all either before they leave, while they are away or after they return...

Countries/states are still trying to figure out how to deal with this major problem. Some are much slower to act or have not decided how to act.

That's actually a very good plan.
Not very popular maybe but very effective.
It's an ideology problem, show them their ideology is wrong.

You can't put them in jail forever. They'll infect others with their extremism.