Radical Islam: Internment of Suspected Terrorists as a Potential Solution?
Brodie Tuck 4th June 2017
In light of the London terror, in which dozens were injured and at least six people were killed, there is still more meaningless rhetoric from officials, begging the question, of how best to deal with the threat of radical Islam?
After the horrific violence against women and children, one rather severe option is increasingly being discussed, internment of suspected terrorists and terror sympathizers.
This would involve the imprisonment of suspected terrorists and sympathizers to internment camps, similar to measures that were used against the Japanese and Germans during WWII.
Unsurprisingly, drastic actions have drastic results, and this would almost certainly cut down on the number of potential jihadists roaming the streets. Whilst also serving to reduce the number of terror attacks being committed against innocent Brits who are fed up with their children being the victims.
As Tommy Robinson said, in light of the latest attack on Londoners,
“…I have said time and time again if we don’t get this issue dealt with, then the British public will. They will end up taking matters into their own hands.” [1]
The public is fed up with watching their children being maimed and murdered by Islamic terrorists, but is internment the best option?
We have already established that internment has been used during WWII and other periods of conflict, it is an absolute method, which largely produces absolute results.
With that in mind, what are some factors to consider in the use internment?
· Heavy reliance on government: Internment is a government initiative; therefore its effectiveness is directly tied to the government’s ability, and commitment to implementing it. If the government is held to the fire, results will follow, if the public abates then the internment program is doomed to be a big waste of taxpayers money.
· Who is destined for internment? Presumably terror watch lists, no fly lists or other similar registry of suspected persons would serve as the litmus test for the internment of a person. With that in mind, who decides what constitutes an offense, or what warrants being placed on one of these lists? We must ensure that these lists are not used merely to silence dissenters.
· Set a clear timeframe: If internment is to be employed to combat the threat of radical Islam, then it needs to be utilised in conjunction with other policies that seek to remedy the situation. For example, internment in conjunction with orders to expel any known terrorist or known terrorist sympathizer from the country is a viable option. Indefinite internment camps are just a recipe for disaster and social unrest.
These are not the sole factors that should be taken into consideration, however they offer a good foundation of what is involved in implementing an internment of potential terrorists.
Internment of potential terrorist threats and the subsequent expulsion of the offenders from the country is increasingly becoming a desirable option for many citizens who are fed up with the current state of inaction. As the frequency of attacks increases, simultaneously people’s tolerance begins to wane, and if officials continue to do nothing, then the responses to attacks will only become more and more radical.
Officials are postponing action, which in turn is going to lead to a far more severe reaction when the bubble eventually bursts.
We can only hope that action is taken before it comes to something far more radical, and far less democratic. As unpalatable as internment may seem to some, perhaps it is the most humane and reasonable way to address this issue before it truly bubbles over into something far more sinister.
[1]