Is this much different from going on jihad?

[Pannonian]

In the RTR forums, there is a thread asking, "Would you join your countrys army?". One of the posters, someone living in London, replied "I wont join the british army but i will join the IDF (Israeli defence force) when i make Aliya (Going up - immergrating) to Israel".

I'm wondering, what are the ethics of someone, presumably currently a British citizen, proclaiming his loyalty to another country, with the stated aim of joining that other country's military in the future? How should the British government view this? How should the average British citizen view this?

[rory_20_uk]

As a British subject I've no problems with that. He is leaving to take part in the armed forces of another soverign nation. He is not leaving to join a guerilla / terrorist organisation.

Assuming that he is not disloyal to the UK it doesn't worry me. There are many times I've said "if you don't like it here, leave". At least he's doing that.

[Marshal Murat]

I would think it's his choice. Unless Israel is threatening London in some way, shape, or form, it okay.

[scotchedpommes]

In terms of the opinion of the British citizen, I would think reaction could depend
significantly on the individual's view of the IDF. Perhaps some view this kind of
action as taking up a worthy 'cause' in the same manner as a Muslim might view
joining forces which seek to fight a Jihad. Or a worthy cause to take up precisely
because they perceive the enemy of the IDF to be those same Jihad fighters.

In that sense, I feel I can empathise in some way, but I cannot say I view them
in much a different light to the Jihad fighter who might go to the Middle East to
kill Israelis.

Couldn't see the British government attempting to stop this in any way, as to
whether they should [assuming they were ever in a position to do so], I think
so, yes.

[Pannonian]

As a British subject I've no problems with that. He is leaving to take part in the armed forces of another soverign nation. He is not leaving to join a guerilla / terrorist organisation.

Assuming that he is not disloyal to the UK it doesn't worry me. There are many times I've said "if you don't like it here, leave". At least he's doing that.

Let's hope our armed forces never get involved in a peacekeeping mission in that region that will result in him firing on them.

[Lord Winter]

There is a difference, Israel is at least as civil as possible in war and doesnt target or take cover by civilians. To me it seems the same as some one immigrating to another country and then joining there military for the faster citizenship track.

[rory_20_uk]

To compare joining the IDF to joining a Jihad would only be applicable if there were no Muslim states with armies. I'd feel the same if a Muslim joined the Egyptian army, or the Syrian army, or the Iranian Army.

Of course, if peacekeepers were required or war was declared his nationality would have no bearing whatsoever. He chose to wear the (then) enemy's fatigues and he can therefore die in them.

[Pannonian]

There is a difference, Israel is at least as civil as possible in war and doesnt target or take cover by civilians. To me it seems the same as some one immigrating to another country and then joining there military for the faster citizenship track.

Shouldn't one be loyal to the country one is a citizen of, at least until one moves to that other country? Eg. what would your view be of an American kid who looks forward to the day when he's old enough to move to Iran to join the Iranian military?

[Lord Winter]

Shouldn't one be loyal to the country one is a citizen of, at least until one moves to that other country? Eg. what would your view be of an American kid who looks forward to the day when he's old enough to move to Iran to join the Iranian military?

I agree with Rory here. As long as we're not at war with Iran the U.S. shouldn't stop him from a humen rights standpoint. If he wants to move to a different country and give up his american citizenship the government shouldn't stop him (unless if its war time). However at this point, if your fighting for another country you should at least give up your citizenship.
Besides nobody has a choice about which country they are born into. Immegrating and becoming a citizen of said country even joining that said countries army should be legal.

Counter question just because you are born into a certain country, does that require a blind loyalty?

[Pannonian]

I agree with Rory here. As long as we're not at war with Iran the U.S. shouldn't stop him from a humen rights standpoint. If he wants to move to a different country and give up his american citizenship the government shouldn't stop him (unless if its war time). However at this point, if your fighting for another country you should at least give up your citizenship.
Besides nobody has a choice about which country they are born into. Immegrating and becoming a citizen of said country even joining that said countries army should be legal.

Counter question just because you are born into a certain country, does that require a blind loyalty?

While you still live there, yes. Not to the extent that you have to accept the culture, religion, government policies, etc. of that country. But certainly to the extent that the country's military has first dibs on you if you are of that bent. There's nothing to stop him from moving abroad and joining another country's military while he's there, but if he should ever fire on a British soldier or citizen, we should demand he be handed over to be tried for treason.

[Papewaio]

Of course, if peacekeepers were required or war was declared his nationality would have no bearing whatsoever. He chose to wear the (then) enemy's fatigues and he can therefore die in them.

Or get wounded and then patched up by us.

=][=

Saying a Jihad (I assume the modern terrorist version) is equivalent of joining the army of a democratic nation... is the same as saying terrorists are equal to soldiers. That IMDHO is rather disgusting.

In general if someone wants to go to another country that is a nominal ally and join its army it is not an issue. Plenty of commonwealth armies have soldiers who are from other commonwealth nations. I know of several people who have served in the IDF and then came back to Australia to do university and work. I even know one who served in the IDF and then the Australian Army.

From what I have seen, Israel gets treated like a defacto Commonwealth nation so it isn't an issue in Australia.

I also have worked with people who were raised in Australia and went back to Turkey to do as they perceived their duty. I also know Taiwanese who are in the same situation.

[scotchedpommes]

There's nothing to stop him from moving abroad and joining another country's military while he's there, but if he should ever fire on a British soldier or citizen, we should demand he be handed over to be tried for treason.

Such a demand would be rather pointless, would it not? If he has joined a
foreign military force and is firing on British forces, it would be unlikely that he
would be handed over by his new home country.


As for the comments on comparing joining the IDF to those who would join
a Jihad, if you referring to my initial post, I would stress that I said so with
a view specifically to those fighting the Israelis. Also focusing on the opinion
of the IDF. I have seen nothing which leads me to believe that the IDF does
not, or would not target civilians.

[Pannonian]

Or get wounded and then patched up by us.

=][=

Saying a Jihad (I assume the modern terrorist version) is equivalent of joining the army of a democratic nation... is the same as saying terrorists are equal to soldiers. That IMDHO is rather disgusting.

In general if someone wants to go to another country that is a nominal ally and join its army it is not an issue. Plenty of commonwealth armies have soldiers who are from other commonwealth nations. I know of several people who have served in the IDF and then came back to Australia to do university and work. I even know one who served in the IDF and then the Australian Army.

From what I have seen, Israel gets treated like a defacto Commonwealth nation so it isn't an issue in Australia.

I also have worked with people who were raised in Australia and went back to Turkey to do as they perceived their duty. I also know Taiwanese who are in the same situation.

Have those armed forces ever shot Australian citizens, not by accident, then tried to cover up the incident? The IDF has done so to British citizens, most recently a chap who was filming a documentary about the troubles there.

[Papewaio]

And the British military has never, ever once even thought about let alone shot one of its one citizens, particularly troublesome journos in a place of troubles...

[Pannonian]

And the British military has never, ever once even thought about let alone shot one of its one citizens, particularly troublesome journos in a place of troubles...

That's a matter for the British government, British legal system, etc. to settle. Last year, a British family, after years of pushing, finally got the IDF to admit that the soldier who killed their daughter knew she was unarmed at the time he fired the shot. They complained that the British government had betrayed its responsibilities when they refused to pressure the Israeli government to explain or properly investigate the incident, forcing them to take up the matter themselves.

If something happens within Britain, there is a whole legal infrastructure in place to deal with the incident. If something happens in a foreign country, such due process may not exist, and it should be the British government's responsibility to represent their citizens. After all, isn't this what they pay their taxes for?

[Papewaio]

A person is generally tried for treason for attacking their state.
For killing the citizens of a state, one is charged with murder if that is appropriate.

So a UK citizen who works for a foreign army (and stays a UK citizen), and then murders a UK citizen could possibly be tried for murder as long as it doesn't effect the State. In all likely hood the state will put its best interests first before that of individuals, so it may ignore the murder in favour of better trade rights for instance. Now if it benefits the state it will try the person for treason, it generally will try and have good evidence, but don't rely on that in an election year.

[Pannonian]

A person is generally tried for treason for attacking their state.
For killing the citizens of a state, one is charged with murder if that is appropriate.

So a UK citizen who works for a foreign army (and stays a UK citizen), and then murders a UK citizen could possibly be tried for murder as long as it doesn't effect the State. In all likely hood the state will put its best interests first before that of individuals, so it may ignore the murder in favour of better trade rights for instance. Now if it benefits the state it will try the person for treason, it generally will try and have good evidence, but don't rely on that in an election year.

That's a good enough explanation for me.

[rory_20_uk]

Such a demand would be rather pointless, would it not? If he has joined a
foreign military force and is firing on British forces, it would be unlikely that he
would be handed over by his new home country.


As for the comments on comparing joining the IDF to those who would join
a Jihad, if you referring to my initial post, I would stress that I said so with
a view specifically to those fighting the Israelis. Also focusing on the opinion
of the IDF. I have seen nothing which leads me to believe that the IDF does
not, or would not target civilians.

Armies follow laws. Terrorists don't Joining the IDF does not mean you are signing up to go and slaughter Palestinians - it may be your reason, but equally might not be. Joining a terrorist organisation has a stated aim. Generally to kill a group or religion, and usually any people will do.

In WW2 many acts by the allies were questionable. The bombing of Dresden was done not by pilots who wanted to incinerate women and children, but people who joined the RAF / USAAF. They then followed their orders and did their duty. They could equally be sent to dogfight the enemy, drop supplies for the Allied Terrorists (whoops - resistance) or whatever. Big difference.

[AntiochusIII]

In WW2 many acts by the allies were questionable. The bombing of Dresden was done not by pilots who wanted to incinerate women and children, but people who joined the RAF / USAAF. They then followed their orders and did their duty. They could equally be sent to dogfight the enemy, drop supplies for the Allied Terrorists (whoops - resistance) or whatever. Big difference.

After WW2, many German officers didn't escape unscathed, despite them merely following the orders of their superiors -- the Nazi regime. Nuremberg sort of disagrees with your view in this.

Of course, it still is different from joining a terrorist organization whose only existence is for the destruction of something. So I might just misread your post.

As for the case at hand. Well, I don't really mind, personally; but obviously that's some interesting question about national sovereignty and the responsibilities of citizenship. Not something I have a slew of answers for.

[Incongruous]

There is a difference, Israel is at least as civil as possible in war and doesnt target or take cover by civilians.

Oh, really?

Oh that's right, as an army under the control of a recognized state, which means that the civilians it kills can be claimed as collateral.

Just like that old woman, who received a bullet through her head, compliments of Isreals occupation and state terrorism.

Perhaps, you may want to read more on the subject, before you use it so freely.

[rory_20_uk]

After WW2, many German officers didn't escape unscathed, despite them merely following the orders of their superiors -- the Nazi regime. Nuremberg sort of disagrees with your view in this.

Ah yes. They lost the war didn't they? The allies did no wrong anywhere in the entire war. Us, blame the loosers for everything? Never!

Should allies have bombed Japanese cities with incendries, killing masses of Civilians merely as Japan had no industrial areas? Or as I said Dresden? It was legal as we said so - and on both sides soldiers did what they were told to do. On the German side we apportioned blame, on ours medals. Such is war.

[Xiahou]

I'm wondering, what are the ethics of someone, presumably currently a British citizen, proclaiming his loyalty to another country, with the stated aim of joining that other country's military in the future? How should the British government view this? How should the average British citizen view this?

Maybe someone should read up on the Eagle Squadron...

[Banquo's Ghost]

While you still live there, yes. Not to the extent that you have to accept the culture, religion, government policies, etc. of that country. But certainly to the extent that the country's military has first dibs on you if you are of that bent. There's nothing to stop him from moving abroad and joining another country's military while he's there, but if he should ever fire on a British soldier or citizen, we should demand he be handed over to be tried for treason.

OK, I am now officially intrigued - and should I be worried?

I'm a citizen of the Irish Republic. As was my right, I joined HM Army and as a British officer, orchestrated elements of the fight against Irish republican terrorists (as I saw them) or patriots (as they saw themselves). I shot two Irish citizens personally. I also had cause to act against British terrorists/patriots.

On leaving HM Forces, I accepted an offer from the IDF to join in a capacity that also took actions against terrorists/patriots from both sides of the border. I am still a reservist in the IDF.

Am I a traitor, and if so to which nation? Can you illuminate the exact nature of my treasonous motives?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

For the very confused, the Irish Defence Force is also an IDF.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Maybe someone should read up on the Eagle Squadron...

I awaiting the trial of Beau Geste and his brother too.

[Fisherking]

So it is ok for others to join your military but not someone else's?

Gurkhas seem to come to mind. Yes also Eagle Squadron and a few others over the years.

Not that it matters much but the guy can't get into the IDF without speaking Hebrew.

[rory_20_uk]

Well, as you say, one man's Traitor is another's hero.

Extremists are likely to view any act against what they perceive as their cause as traitorous behaviour. Often those opposed will view the same acts as heroism.

That goes for religious extremists, different branches of religions, hostile countries - you name it.

[English assassin]

'm wondering, what are the ethics of someone, presumably currently a British citizen, proclaiming his loyalty to another country, with the stated aim of joining that other country's military in the future? How should the British government view this? How should the average British citizen view this?

I don't see this as especially complicated. So long as he doesn't get himself into a position that requires loyalty to the UK (by which I mean him trying to work at MI5, not the basic "loyalty" of obeying our laws, paying his taxes and so on which I do expect and which I do not think is in issue) then what is the issue? Is this really any different to me saying I want to emmigrate to Oz? (Not that I do, awful beer)

This is quite different from saying that he wants to live in the UK but live under Israeli law. Then I would tell him to bog off to Isreal. Which, err, is exactly what he proposes to do. So fair play to him.

What about all of the migrant workwers who work here and send their wages "home"? Should we get upset that they are not spending their money in our economic and thereby supplying good old British jobs? of course not.

This sort of thing is inevitable in a globalised world, and it may well be that the sooner we primarily identify with things other than a nation state the better. Not that England* isn't top, of course.

*ironically a nation but not a state, before some pedant points this out

[Pannonian]

OK, I am now officially intrigued - and should I be worried?

I'm a citizen of the Irish Republic. As was my right, I joined HM Army and as a British officer, orchestrated elements of the fight against Irish republican terrorists (as I saw them) or patriots (as they saw themselves). I shot two Irish citizens personally. I also had cause to act against British terrorists/patriots.

On leaving HM Forces, I accepted an offer from the IDF to join in a capacity that also took actions against terrorists/patriots from both sides of the border. I am still a reservist in the IDF.

Am I a traitor, and if so to which nation? Can you illuminate the exact nature of my treasonous motives?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

For the very confused, the Irish Defence Force is also an IDF.

What would have been your view had you been ordered to deploy in a situation where you might be facing off against Irish troops? That's not such an outlandish scenario - remember Israel was pushing for European troops to provide a peacekeeping force between Israel and Lebanon, and one of the issues raised was whether German troops might not fancy shooting back against Israelis. If this chaps joins the Israeli Defence Force, which invades Lebanon or Palestine or Syria, and British troops are sent in as peacekeepers to oversee the following ceasefire, would he ask for a transfer to a less sensitive area of Israel, or would he happily fire on British troops?

BTW, he hasn't yet replied.

[Banquo's Ghost]

What would have been your view had you been ordered to deploy in a situation where you might be facing off against Irish troops? That's not such an outlandish scenario - remember Israel was pushing for European troops to provide a peacekeeping force between Israel and Lebanon, and one of the issues raised was whether German troops might not fancy shooting back against Israelis. If this chaps joins the Israeli Defence Force, which invades Lebanon or Palestine or Syria, and British troops are sent in as peacekeepers to oversee the following ceasefire, would he ask for a transfer to a less sensitive area of Israel, or would he happily fire on British troops?

That's easy, because I considered it carefully before deciding to join. My commission was from Her Majesty and I served the British government. In the event that Irish troops attacked British interests, I would have defended my men and carried out my orders.

In fact, we had several "confrontations" with Gardai - not quite troops, but official representatives of the Republic.

My decisions were based on what I felt was right at the time. I would not have joined the British Army of the 1920s for instance, I would have opposed it. In a different context, were I a German in the last war, I hope I would have had the courage to refuse service in the German army and seek to oppose the evil regime as a member of the allied effort. I would not have seen this as a treasonous act in any way.

The world is not made up of simple black and white scenarios as you would have it. This fellow has considered his options and feels that his personal ethics would be fulfilled by serving in the Israeli Defence Force. I imagine that he would have considered the various implications, as I did.

I very much doubt that he would "happily" fire on British peacekeepers (few soldiers are "happy" about firing on anyone, let alone in that situation) but I imagine he would do so if ordered. After all, his reasonable expectation would be that the "peacekeepers" would not be trying to engage in a war with Israel. Should such an Israeli incursion happen despite the peacekeeping force, you can be pretty sure British troops would be pulled out PDQ.

This does not make him a traitor to the United Kingdom.

[Pannonian]

That's easy, because I considered it carefully before deciding to join. My commission was from Her Majesty and I served the British government. In the event that Irish troops attacked British interests, I would have defended my men and carried out my orders.

In fact, we had several "confrontations" with Gardai - not quite troops, but official representatives of the Republic.

My decisions were based on what I felt was right at the time. I would not have joined the British Army of the 1920s for instance, I would have opposed it. In a different context, were I a German in the last war, I hope I would have had the courage to refuse service in the German army and seek to oppose the evil regime as a member of the allied effort. I would not have seen this as a treasonous act in any way.

The world is not made up of simple black and white scenarios as you would have it. This fellow has considered his options and feels that his personal ethics would be fulfilled by serving in the Israeli Defence Force. I imagine that he would have considered the various implications, as I did.

I very much doubt that he would "happily" fire on British peacekeepers (few soldiers are "happy" about firing on anyone, let alone in that situation) but I imagine he would do so if ordered. After all, his reasonable expectation would be that the "peacekeepers" would not be trying to engage in a war with Israel. Should such an Israeli incursion happen despite the peacekeeping force, you can be pretty sure British troops would be pulled out PDQ.

This does not make him a traitor to the United Kingdom.

Let's see his reply then.

What happened to the British and American citizens who were found in Afghanistan when we invaded that country? Wasn't at least one of them a bona fide fighter? Since he/they were fighting in support of the established government of Afghanistan of the time, and we were the invaders, the terrorist card can hardly be used. The only difference might be if we were formally at war with Afghanistan. So what should the status of these people be?

FWIW, this doesn't mean I support efforts made against us in Afghanistan, or that I denigrate our efforts there. On the contrary, imo any British citizen found fighting against our troops should be summarily shot. If they survive to face due process, they should count themselves lucky.

I very much doubt that he would "happily" fire on British peacekeepers (few soldiers are "happy" about firing on anyone, let alone in that situation)

You don't know him then. His sig used to be the slogan of a group that has been proscribed by the Israeli government as terrorists. He posted a eulogy last year to the spiritual inspiration for said group, that made Adrian II go off his rocker.