ISIS fighter Khaled Sharrouf's wife and children are seeking to return to Australia. Three other Australian men associated with Islamic State and Jabhat al-Nusra in Syria now also want to come home.

Personally I think these people have a lot of gall to even use the word 'home'. They chose to sneak over to Syria, get involved with one of the most brutal fighting forces in recent history, and now want to come back to Australia. No one has any idea what their true intentions are.

These people could be planning to blow themselves up in a Sydney shopping mall. They could be planning to martyr their children in some grotesque plan we cannot fathom. What ever their agenda, its seems pretty damn selfish and I hope our government is not going to honour their request.

Too bad if Sharrouf's wife is sick of it, she should of thought about that before she went. Her dilemma doesn't have to be ours. Why isn't she seeking refuge inside one of the wonderful holy states of Islam?

My question to OLO is should Australia allow these people to return or not?

My own answer is "tough luck lady; you and your kids are not welcome, not now or ever." To the three men, "come back if you are willing to spend the next 30 years in prison, otherwise maybe try Yemen or perhaps Afghanistan might be another nice alternative."

Dear ConservativeHippie,

Our PM has vowed that foreign
fighters should face the full force of the law if they
return to Australia. And, he's indicated - that the lady
in question will face the full force of the law.

I can't understand any parent who would take their
children into a war zone.

//My question to OLO is should Australia allow these people to return or not?//

No. We're just going to lock them up, at considerable expense to the taxpayer (me). I can think of better uses for my taxes. If they wanted to go abroad we should do our best to assist them to stay abroad.

My first thought would be that if the Australian Government wants to revoke the citizenship of Isis fighters wanting to return to Australia, they would have to have proof (? a guilty verdict from a trial) before they did this, surely?

Would such proof be the onus of the Syrian legal system, or of the Australian one?
So, if they decide they should be tried by an Aussie court, then they would need to be brought home first.

Do we know for sure that this wife and children of the known terrorist are actually terrorists themselves?
Do we punish Aussie kids for the sins of their parents?
I think we are better than that.
Let them come home for a fair trial, and then jail them if they are guilty.

If posting photos of yourself and your kids holding up the head of some poor soul its enough proof for you Suse, then we may as well also pay their expenses for a First Class flight back and throw in a hero's parade while we are at it.

Come on Suse, being open minded and non-judgemental is one thing, but not assuming these people broke the law is just plain head in sand thinking.

Given the so called 'justice' some of our judges dish out, these ISIS fighters will probably be given a $100 fine and a suspended sentence if they are allowed a trial.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/aussie-khaled-sharrouf-teaches-sons-to-torture-girls-after-he-rapes-them/story-fni0cx12-1227193884267

I get Suseonline's point but wonder how that works in practice. Other than material which has been posted online how do we get evidence and witnesses out of that area to take part in a trial here? How do we deal within our existing legal system with children who have been part of the kind of brutality those kids have been part of and still take reasonable precautions against their future choices.

I'm undecided about Sharroufs wifes role in actual terrorism but given his history of extremism here and her apparent willingness to stand by that she is not someone I want back in this country.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/threat-to-lucas-heights-not-the-first/2005/11/14/1131951095332.html

It is not a simple issue, there are grave risks when we bypass our own legal processes especially the presumption of innocence but it's also a reality that those laws are not well designed to deal with the kind of situation involved here.

I don't have answers I'm happy with either way but sit a little more comfortably with leaving them to the consequences of choices they (or their parents) made than with exposing others to the serious long term risk that family poses to others if allowed back into Australia.

R0bert