Bombing Syria - the poltics

Deja vu or what?

 

The only person I have heard against, is Dianne Abbott. Listen carefully, so in 10 years time when the Millepede says he was always against it, why the #uck don't you say anything NOW.
Same applies to Clegg and all other spineless politicians.

 

I would think that the SAS will already be in Syria gathering intelligence about the chemical weapons and other targets.

 

You obviously think that bombarding your own people with nerve gas is of no consequence then!

Les

 

Fair point. I do think however, we should align ourselves with Europe, not the trigger happy USA.

 

So when the next terrorist attack happens on home ground with the attackers being home grown using our attacking of Syria as their motivation are we Muslims still going to be told its our fault, we should do more and all the rest of the tirade everyone comes out with?

 

Why are they bothering with the UN if, as Hague has stated, they are going to intervene regardless of what the UN says?

As for Milliband.... he says he will oppose action unless compelling evidence that the chemical attacks were carried out by Assad is provided. He had to say something sensible eventually!

 

Yes they will be and unfortunately there will be no winners. When the world cried out after a million people were butchered with machetes in Rhoanda we all asked why nothing was done sooner and if we go into Syria we end up with the same mess as Iraq and if we do nothing and they gas half the population just because they can we have to live with the fact that we could have stopped it.

What a choice the worlds leaders have

 

I agree with EM on this. There is no rush and the UN team should be allowed to finish their work

 

not sure we should be allowing a few nut jobs decide what our foreign policy should be.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23870810

 

Our countries are on there knees, and havent got money to sort out there own problems.. but yet have the money to go sort out another Countries mess.

 

The very first line of which hasn't been proven!

It's WMD and 45 minutes all over again!

 

Not enough evidence , so they'll just have make something up. , again

 

why?

 

It might be worth putting a lot more pressure on Russia, China and Iran to tell Assad to stop using chemicals weapons. Even they cannot justify their use so it might just work. I say might but it's worth a go. Use of social media in a big way might help?

David

 

Hopefully the UN inspectors will be able to establish who initiated the chemical attack. Cameron quite rightly back tracked his decision for immediate intervention until then, however, looks like the US won't and is likely continue their plan for military action. And there I thought the US war mongering Bush mentality was over with the Obama administration.

 

A good bit of political manouevering by Cammo.
Now, if we do go to 'war' he can blame Parliament for making the decision instead of him shouldering the blame solo.
If the USA go in, they will then guide* the UK to follow them.

*= Political/trade blackmail.

 

Word is that USA will not go in on their own.

Very possible that UN inspectors will not be able to identify who was responsible. Possibly a rogue commander on gov't side.

I think it is doubtful that UK will go in. Milliband is probably right to ask for UN report first.

Today will be interesting in Westminster but no vote on military action.

David

 

I love the way you spin stuff like this. He had to back down due to Labour's refusal to support his frankly incomprehensible desire to get stuck in without proper evidence. So the only person the term 'quite rightly' can be used about here is actually Ed Milliband (for once)

 

No the spin is only in your tiny mind. How is highlighting Cameron's U turn (again!) in any way supportive of his decision, I used the term "quite rightly" to point out his initial stupid knee jerk decision to intervene without a UN resolution was completely wrong. You can go back and read my previous posts on where I stand with Syrian intervention.

Why don't you post something constructive instead of trying find every opportunity to troll my posts whenever it contains the words "Cameron" or "tory" and try to ruin another thread. Get over yourself!

 

Describing Obama as a 'war monger' is just ridiculous. Please explain how on earth you came to that conclusion?

 

Oh for goodness sake, now it plays the holier than thou card!!! Your post made no mention of Milliband who was the catalyst in said U-turn.... that says it all.

Most intelligent people on here can see you for what you are. Forum rules preclude me from stating what that is sadly!

 

Forum rules

That's never bothered you before, have you turned over a new leaf?????

 

Thank goodness for that

dl

 

Well I guess that counts you out then.

 

Ignoring the idiot posting above still trying to get a rise as usual let's get back to the matter in hand.

I have just been watching Milliband's interview from this morning and he is talking complete sense. Cameron has accused him of playing political games with a sensitive issue, but that is just a stupid comment. No surprise there!

Cameron needs to look at why he needs Labour's support... because he has a large number of MPs and some of his junior ministers who were not prepared to vote for his motion to intervene immediately. Indeed some had said they would resign rather than vote for it.

So that's a good proportion of his own party and the public that don't want it... he won't of course get the message so he had better be nice to Milliband as Ed holds the key to his overwhelming desire to go to war!

 

Shouldn't it be a Free vote so that MPs can truly reflect the wishes of their constituents?

Why is it a Party matter?

David

 

The party whip is a wonderful thing isn't it. It's basically so the parties can say we are for or against this 'as a party'. Sometimes MPs are 'allowed' a free vote, but not on something like this. The problem Cameron has is that a good few Tories seem to be ready to defy the party whip over it.... which is why he needs Milliband to come on board in case that happens

 

In the first place I don't think we can stand by and see people being murdered indiscriminately by the use of nerve gas. Believe me that is an awful way to get killed too-real torture for those poor people and children suffering the effects!

I think that firstly as Millimetre says, we must await the findings of the UN inspectors. It may be that the elapse of time has caused any evidence to deteriorate of course but Sarin will be a heavy gas as is necessary for its tactical use and they may find traces at low levels in convenient holes on the ground.

If they do find uncontrovertible evidence of the use of nerve gas then that is of course an unforgiveable action. It would be an uncaring use of force and cannot be justified of course.

I personally believe that the only fair way to deal with it is to bring the man responsible to the Court of The Hague and to give him a trial that he cannot claim to be unlawful.

Les