Observation of the day! Best bet is to, as best the West can, to ensure it doesn't spread. The ME is is a cluster-fuck of epic proportions.
No. I think if you read back over my posts, I have tried to argue for the "beyond reasonable doubt" yardstick for action. This is not a phrase that Cameron has used. Indeed, it would seem that this (ie it is Assad responsible) has not been proven beyond reasonable doubt, and thus he is innocent until proven guilty. I don't have a problem thinking he is probably is guilty - but you can't just start bombing people because you don't like them. In any case, guilty or not, I find this slightly irrelevant if you don't know what action you could take to get a behaviour change / help innocent Syrians / prevent the use of chemical weapons. It would seem that quite a few intelligent commentators agree with me that launching a few cruise missiles is not a credible solution to the problem and will do more harm than good. It should come as no surprise that the Americans immediately think that bombing people is the first option choice to get what they want. That's pretty much what they think about everything - and also why they all want a gun at home. The only real joke in all this is that it leave the Americans with the Peace Monkeys as their only ally prepared to blow something up. Freedom Fries, anyone?
From the Beeb again, talking of the Americans: "A senior administration official has told the BBC that they will continue to consult with the UK government, whom they call "one of our closest allies and friends".But the official adds: "President Obama's decision-making will be guided by what is in the best interests of the US. He believes that there are core interests at stake for the US and that countries who violate international norms regarding chemical weapons need to be held accountable." In other words, America could go it alone." It is interesting how they talk about "American interests" and I seem to remember yesterday, politicians talking about "UK interests". I can't see how national interests could have anything to do with this, when it is supposedly about humanitarian action to save innocent Syrians. So interesting when politicians make these mistakes and the mask slips.
feels like momentum for anything is waning? wouldn't want to see the smile on that AlQ operative's face when he finally brakes down that door to Syria's chemical weapons depot...
Agree. Now here's a thought ..... the UK represents a tiny 0.87% of the world population.....what the hell are we doing playing global policeman? Those days are long gone, we simply cannot afford it now without getting further in debt. Consider this, every month this country is still borrowing to survive and getting ever deeper in debt to the rest of the world. Yes, our national borrowing debt is increasing! We need to concentrate on our own internal financial/social problems, which are massive. MoneyWeek magazine implies that, unless we, by some miracle, dramatically start to pay our way in the world economy, we need to cut expenditure by huge amounts to live within our means. To get a handle on how much we are living beyond our means and the size of the problem it represents something like no more state funded pensions for anyone (old age and public sector) or equally staggering actions in benefits/health etc etc. The Commons vote to stay out of this is a welcome wake up call.
I think this is one of those situations where there are strong arguments at both ends of the spectrum and very little in the middle. I do not think that we should ignore the use of chemical weapons yet if we bomb Syria it is an act of war, what would it achieve and where would it end ? It is depressing to think that it is all just global chess where winning (or survival) is the only objective but it is beginning to look that way.
We still keep seeing people saying the war on Iraq was illegal yet Saddam gassed Kurds during his time in power and it wasn't considered a good enough reason (on it's own) to remove him from power. Is that so different from the scenario in Syria at the moment? My personal view on it is that action should be taken to prevent further use of chemical weapons but not until the culprits have been identified beyond reasonable doubt and at that point it should be a multi national force acting under UN guide lines.
it fucking stinks watch kids getting killed just go in under a UN flag and sieze the chemical weapons no need to bomb the shit out of them they will soon roll over with the when us flex thier miltary might !
If the UK isn't going to get involved in this why are British troops suddenly being sent to Cyprus this weekend on "standby"? This hasn't been reported on the news btw. The son of a friend, who is in the forces, was told on Thursday he was leaving for Cyprus on Saturday. Cyprus is 300 miles from Syria.
The UN is a lot of countries. The UN Security Council is a much smaller group of countries. Even these cannot decide on anything and are rarely in agreement. Were Russia and China to actually work with the States, France UK - you could get something done. They won't, so you can't. The UN is thus completely toothless. It's a sad state of affairs. The idea of talking out disagreements, instead of shooting them out is a good one. But people just aren't mature enough to take the opportunity.
Whilst I agree that the use of chemical weapons, especially against children, is completely unacceptable the numbers of troops that would be required to secure a country the size of Syria to an extent where conflict could be stopped is WAY beyond anything that the US or Britain would be prepared to commit. "Going in under the UN flag" is also a complete non-starter - by the time the UN has formulated a plan, agree a resolution, got together enough countries that agree, got the Russians and the Chinese to remove their veto and "gone in" the whole country will probably be a smoldering wasteland. Unfortunately I don't have a simple answer - I don't believe that there is a simple solution - but I do know that random and indiscriminate bombing by the US will surely make things worse, in the short-term and in the long-term. Britain is, in reality, a tiny country on the edge of Europe - it's about time we stopped believing that we are still a world power and that we should be acting as part of a global police-force sorting out the rest of the world's problems...
To be strictly accurate those are a three Armoured Personnel Carriers and some Self Propelled Guns, not actually tanks... ( And no, they are not Leopard 2 tanks... Leopard 2 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) And a Ford Transit, and what appear to be Puch Styer 4x4's...
