"Amman at night in 2007" di Jim Greenhill from Arlington and Durango, USA - 091027-A-3715G-096. Con licenza Pubblico dominio tramite Wikimedia Commons.
Okay, Jordan moved so fast with the executions of two "Jihadis" that this is pretty much old news now; past the expiration date of wondering what's going to happen next. But what's worst than Islamic State executions is the fact that they did it fast enough to make both prisoners pawns in this chess game they're playing with extremists.
Why is it worst? Islamic State isn't old enough as a state to get past the point of authenticity just yet. They're a bunch of psychopaths murdering people at random and all the time. Jordan is a constitutional monarchy which, is half modernized and half ancient history; well, all ancient history since it has a king. Which is the only reason the fast track to execution makes any sense.
But in the context of modern law, it's absolutely ridiculous. Obviously they did it as a "fuck you" to Islamic State but, they didn't really care. I hope this isn't the "Earth-shattering response" they were talking about.
Because Islamic State doesn't care. If they did murder the pilot on January 3rd, why would anyone have thought there would have been an exchange? Sure, it looks that way in hindsight but did anyone really look at the footage of the pilot when he was captured and not think he was fucked?
Earlier I posted something about the Islamic State might be forcing some of us to change minds when they commit these atrocities. There was a comment on the original post that said:
JamesHxstatic
To which I said:
JamesHxstatic
Jordan doesn't have that moral consensus, which is pretty plain to see.