Syria

PaulF81

TruckerT wrote: »

Western governments should be under no obligation at all to offer support to any nation/population/religion/ethnic group which is not willing to 'sign up' to the wstern way of life. The only reason we need to keep on the right side of middle-eastern countries is because they have oil. But oil is a fossil fuel, and we are supposed to be finding alternatives.

We can only threaten Syria because we have superior weapons. But Syria is being armed by Russia. So why don't we threaten Russia?

We should leave the middle east to its own chosen path, and just make sure that they do not threaten our own well-being.

Recently, it is the behaviour of the western banking system which has posed the biggest threat...

TruckerT

I think that the government should support the side that provides the most stability, together with protecting the promise you find in any uk passport. I suggest this is what most people in the forces would support, not some flit in support of the people they have been fighting a decade.

Wahabbist nutters who cut off the heads off missionary priests don't fit in with this model. I would personally be quite happy to see them gassed, I don't see how it's any different to shrapnel or a bullet. Here lies a lesson to anyone who chooses to live in the 6th century; evolution happens. If you throw spears and they throw modern weapons, YOU LOSE! Kind of a hard lesson in Darwinism for these troglodytes if you ask me.

As this civil war is noting like civil, we should sit back, support the refugees and let nature take its course. Assad will win and hopefully massacre all the foreign nutters that tried to overthrow him. Saves us or the USA using a predator and expensive satellite bandwidth when it could be used better for watching match of the day.

PaulF81

grizzly1911 wrote: »

I am not sure what Syria is fighting for or if it is even Syria (government and rebels) that started it.

You seemed to suggest they (whoever they maybe), should only be supported if they signed up to the western way of life.

The rebels argue they want 'democracy'. What they actually want is women ilocked up at home n Burkas, Extreme sharia law and no westerners in their country. Oh, a return to 6th century ideals to boot. On the coast of the med. Didn't work so well in Libya, Egypt or Iraq, so why the hell we think its going to work in Syria, a country that up to now, had no issues or beef with the uk (assad worked in the uk and has an english wife, not to mention, we and the french put his family in power) I don't know. Oh hang on....

This will lose the Russians an important naval support port, but will offer the Americans the chance to potentially incite Iran to step up to honour a mutual defence pact they have with Syria, signed in 2005.

No guesses what happens next.

TruckerT

PaulF81 wrote: »

The rebels argue they want 'democracy'. What they actually want is women ilocked up at home n Burkas, Extreme sharia law and no westerners in their country. Oh, a return to 6th century ideals to boot. On the coast of the med. Didn't work so well in Libya, Egypt or Iraq, so why the hell we think its going to work in Syria, a country that up to now, had no issues or beef with the uk (assad worked in the uk and has an english wife, not to mention, we and the french put his family in power) I don't know. Oh hang on....

This will lose the Russians an important naval support port, but will offer the Americans the chance to potentially incite Iran to step up to honour a mutual defence pact they have with Syria, signed in 2005.

No guesses what happens next.

Interestingly, the current difficulties facing western governments about whether or not to attack Syria were largely created by the democratic processes of the UK parliament.

TruckerT

PaulF81

Indeed. Wasn't a fan of democracy. Then again, I always fell foul of it. Typical luck and sentiment changes...

Granariesgirl

Very interesting thread, thanks TruckerT.

I know a fair bit about the region & its conflicts - not just from sitting in a UK armchair either - & my opinion is STAY OUT OF IT! Don't touch this conflict with a ten-foot bargepole & keep well away.

How can the people who looked on while Israel used white phosphorous against Arab civilians, bombing a clearly marked UN school*; who have done nothing to stop illegal settlement building in the Israeli Occupied Territories & 50 years of human rights abuses by the Israeli Government suddenly find that as soon as it happens the other side of the border between Arabs, it is "inhumane"?

Pray tell me, all you who cry out for intervention in Syria, why you are all so silent on Israeli war crimes?

Is it because Israelis look more Western & therefore can do as they please to people who are viewed as different from us? Or is it because all the media have told you you ought to be shocked by this & nothing else?

What about stopping human rights abuses in Zimbabwe, Rwanda, Somalia? Why not intervene in Chechnya or Kosovo?

Do you REALLY think that Obama et al give a damn about Syrian kids dying - surely you can't be that naive? :doh:

No, they have probably been asked by Israel to intervene: if Syria goes up in flames & Assad's army is non functional, Israel can keep hold of the illegally occupied Golan Heights & maybe steal a bit more land "for security".

I can't imagine anyone from Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Egypt or Turkey is under any illusions about why the USA wants to intervene either...

The added advantage for the USA & France is that it will give them an opportunity to show off any new weapons (especially shipborne - not so easy in Afghan) in an actual combat situation, which will be great for future arms sales to other nations & thus for the economy. :cool:

And finally, the USA is trying to provoke Iran into a conflict so it can turn large parts of that country into glass & then control the oil. You can bet your bottom dollar that POTUS won't be worried about the humanitarian when he's bombing the sh%t out of Iran... & starting WW3! _pale_

I wish I were wrong but I think if we interfere there, we will be starting Armageddon.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

It's fairly certain that French intervention against Assad won't provoke Muslim fundamentalists into attacking French targets.
They'll welcome the help.

Yup. And when they've finished fighting Assad, they'll turn the weapons on France, the USA & anyone else when it suits them without batting an eyelid, like tribes in the region have done countless times before! Does NOBODY read history anymore? :wall:

TruckerT wrote: »

They tell us that it is for 'humanitarian' reasons, but they could have said that many times in the recent past, and they continue to pick and choose which war crimes they are willing to get excited about.

They tell us that 'democracy' is the only way forward, and that any regime which will not embrace democracy is unacceptable.

The Western world has weapons of mass destruction, and it uses them to threaten countries which will struggle to defend themselves.

Hear, hear! Well said. :T

*Wikipedia:"There are multiple international laws that could be seen to regulate white phosphorus use. Article 1 of Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons defines an incendiary weapon as 'any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons through the action of flame, heat, or combination thereof, produced by a chemical reaction of a substance delivered on the target'. The same protocol prohibits the use of said incendiary weapons against civilians (already forbidden by the Geneva Conventions) or in civilian areas."
US Command College Battle Book: " (4) Burster Type White phosphorus (WP M110A2) rounds burn with intense heat and emit dense white smoke. They may be used as the initial rounds in the smokescreen to rapidly create smoke or against material targets, such as Class V sites or logistic sites. It is against the law of land warfare to employ WP against personnel targets."
Haaretz on War Crimes: http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/when-war-criminals-walk-free-1.458055

CLAPTON

Granariesgirl wrote: »

Very interesting thread, thanks TruckerT.

I know a fair bit about the region & its conflicts - not just from sitting in a UK armchair either - & my opinion is STAY OUT OF IT! Don't touch this conflict with a ten-foot bargepole & keep well away.

How can the people who looked on while Israel used white phosphorous against Arab civilians, bombing a clearly marked UN school*; who have done nothing to stop illegal settlement building in the Israeli Occupied Territories & 50 years of human rights abuses by the Israeli Government suddenly find that as soon as it happens the other side of the border between Arabs, it is "inhumane"?

Pray tell me, all you who cry out for intervention in Syria, why you are all so silent on Israeli war crimes?

Is it because Israelis look more Western & therefore can do as they please to people who are viewed as different from us? Or is it because all the media have told you you ought to be shocked by this & nothing else?

What about stopping human rights abuses in Zimbabwe, Rwanda, Somalia? Why not intervene in Chechnya or Kosovo?

Do you REALLY think that Obama et al give a damn about Syrian kids dying - surely you can't be that naive? :doh:

No, they have probably been asked by Israel to intervene: if Syria goes up in flames & Assad's army is non functional, Israel can keep hold of the illegally occupied Golan Heights & maybe steal a bit more land "for security".

I can't imagine anyone from Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Egypt or Turkey is under any illusions about why the USA wants to intervene either...

The added advantage for the USA & France is that it will give them an opportunity to show off any new weapons (especially shipborne - not so easy in Afghan) in an actual combat situation, which will be great for future arms sales to other nations & thus for the economy. :cool:

And finally, the USA is trying to provoke Iran into a conflict so it can turn large parts of that country into glass & then control the oil. You can bet your bottom dollar that POTUS won't be worried about the humanitarian when he's bombing the sh%t out of Iran... & starting WW3! _pale_

I wish I were wrong but I think if we interfere there, we will be starting Armageddon.



Yup. And when they've finished fighting Assad, they'll turn the weapons on France, the USA & anyone else when it suits them without batting an eyelid, like tribes in the region have done countless times before! Does NOBODY read history anymore? :wall:



Hear, hear! Well said. :T

*Wikipedia:"There are multiple international laws that could be seen to regulate white phosphorus use. Article 1 of Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons defines an incendiary weapon as 'any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons through the action of flame, heat, or combination thereof, produced by a chemical reaction of a substance delivered on the target'. The same protocol prohibits the use of said incendiary weapons against civilians (already forbidden by the Geneva Conventions) or in civilian areas."
US Command College Battle Book: " (4) Burster Type White phosphorus (WP M110A2) rounds burn with intense heat and emit dense white smoke. They may be used as the initial rounds in the smokescreen to rapidly create smoke or against material targets, such as Class V sites or logistic sites. It is against the law of land warfare to employ WP against personnel targets."
Haaretz on War Crimes: http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/when-war-criminals-walk-free-1.458055

a very fair minded, even handed review of the complex middle eastern situation

Granariesgirl

CLAPTON wrote: »

a very fair minded, even handed review of the complex middle eastern situation

Ooh man, I think I've just been zinged! :rotfl:

Maybe I was a little harsh but the West has looked on & done NOTHING for YEARS while innocent people have died : Jews, Christians, Muslims, men, women & children. It p#sses me off... :mad:

It wasn't meant to be a review of the situation because anyone who is commenting on it should have a grasp of that anyway - it was my OPINION!

CLAPTON

Granariesgirl wrote: »

Ooh man, I think I've just been zinged! :rotfl:

Maybe I was a little harsh but the West has looked on & done NOTHING for YEARS while innocent people have died : Jews, Christians, Muslims, men, women & children. It p#sses me off... :mad:

It wasn't meant to be a review of the situation because anyone who is commenting on it should have a grasp of that anyway - it was my OPINION!

quite

it's a complex situation which you have trivialised.

your (strongly) felt opinion is part of the problem and sadly not part of the solution

Granariesgirl

CLAPTON wrote: »

quite

it's a complex situation which you have trivialised.
your (strongly) felt opinion is part of the problem and sadly not part of the solution

That was utterly pompous & patronising...in what way have I "trivialised" this situation?

I have probably forgotten more about this particular part of the world than you will ever know...

So let's have a proper adult debate about it if you can actually manage more than supercilious statements & chippy comments.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Granariesgirl wrote: »

That was utterly pompous & patronising...in what way have I "trivialised" this situation?

I have probably forgotten more about this particular part of the world than you will ever know...

So let's have a proper adult debate about it if you can actually manage more than supercilious statements & chippy comments.

Oh here we go....

I lived there for many years too.

And am well aware of the vagaries of middle eastern politics, western bias, and Israeli manipulation of anyone who'll listen.

Just to be clear, I think we should stay well away from 'regime change' in Syria, precisely because the alternative is worse for both Syrians and Western countries.

That doesn't however mean I think we should let either side get away with use of weapons of mass destruction against civilian targets.

A punitive strike would be justified, full blown intervention would not.

And yes, I do think Israel is badly in need of a good spanking, for a number of human rights violations. But it also serves western interests to maintain the status quo in the balance of power in the middle east, so it's not likely to happen any time soon.