JEREMY Corbyn, the Labour leadership frontrunner, has questioned the point of the British military action in Syria that killed Isis militants Reyaad Khan from Cardiff and Ruhul Amin from Aberdeen.
The left-winger said he would not have authorised the drone attack that killed the Islamist extremists and insisted David Cameron had "some very difficult questions to answer about the legality of what he did".
Khan and Amin were killed in an unprecedented targeted air strike by an RAF drone on August 21 in the Isis stronghold of Raqqah.
Earlier this week, the Prime Minister said the attack was justified on the grounds of "self-defence" because Khan specifically was involved in orchestrating a number of plots to attack "high-profile public commemorations" over the summer.
Defence Secretary Michael Fallon has insisted the Government would "not hesitate" to take similar action against others on a reported "kill-list" of Isis extremists.
But Mr Corbyn, Chairman of the Stop the War Coalition, questioned the legal basis for the use of drones when details of the operation emerged and has now suggested there was no point in targeting the jihadi.
He told ITV News: "I'm unclear as to the point of killing the individual by this drone attack."
The potential election of Mr Corbyn as Opposition leader on Saturday could make it harder for the UK Government to obtain parliamentary approval for military action in Syria; although Tory Ministers have hinted they could still attract sufficient Labour support.
Asked about Mr Corbyn's comments, Mr Cameron's spokeswoman said: "The Prime Minister set out very clearly in the House that (Khan) posed a threat to Britain and the lives of British people. The Prime Minister is clear that it is important that people across the country understand the threat posed by Isil."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel