four-wheel-drive Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 As I see it over the many years that we have been poking our noses in to othere peoples problems there are only a hand full of times that we have improved the life of the people living there the same can be said for feeding starving people with all of the money that people have given why are the people still starving. I often think what would life be like if the Germans had not made us wast all of our money defending ourselvs in ww1 & 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted August 31, 2013 Author Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) That's about my view of it, it's easy to sit back safe and sound in Dorset and say let Assad continue gassing people but should it be ok in this day and age? Yes it's the Middle East but were it to happen closer to home the response would be different. And its equally easy to sit safe and sound in Hertfordshire demanding other people go out and kill on your behalf to give you the satisfaction of feeling you've "done something". Your response is simplistic in the extreme. Firstly, do you seriously imagine Assad has not anticipated events and has not planned things to his advantage, by, for example, moving his defences around to use the trapped civilian population as human shields, just as Saddam Hussein did, twice, just as the Taliban continue to do? Let the yanks kill them for us. Better PR than doing it ourselves with Sarin. Secondly, Assad has hinted he is prepared to take retaliatory action designed to drag other countries in the region into the conflict. Thirdly, there is no end game in sight with remote strikes. The Vietnamese wrote the book on defeating a superior military power that has interested itself in your private civil war. Its called "not losing for long enough" and it works. What happens when these fabled surgical strikes don't work? They never have yet and Assad has air supremacy. This is no Irag or Afghanistan. Edited August 31, 2013 by Gimlet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchman Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 Did you hear that thinly veiled insult to the UK during the Kerry White House speech....." we will go forward with our oldest ally, the French ".........proberly refering to the help they gave America during the war of independence....it was the only way they could get back at Britain........smells like it now If the **** hits the fan on this one...if i was an american i would be thinking "who is gaurding my derriaire on this one" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted August 31, 2013 Author Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 Did you hear that thinly veiled insult to the UK during the Kerry White House speech....." we will go forward with our oldest ally, the French ".........proberly refering to the help they gave America during the war of independence....it was the only way they could get back at Britain........smells like it now If the **** hits the fan on this one...if i was an american i would be thinking "who is gaurding my derriaire on this one" Is this the same America that refused to help Britain in 1939, preferring to wait until the Japanese had kicked sand in its face and the British had broken the Luftwaffe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunnerbob Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 Good luck to the Yanks if they are going to put their faith in the "surrender monkeys"...they may well need it ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchman Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 and the same french that were selling exocets to the argentines before and during the falklands...albeit... the last batch ..they were persuded not to hand over the activation codes The french are up to something, cant figure it out yet...proberly something to do with trade Heard an interesting story the other day about the frogs from a diary written by one of their own......jean paul sartrre......... in 1939 when war was declared a large part of the french army was sent to the german franco boarder to face the boche......the french populace was evacuated 10 mies away from the boarder....the invasion never came that way...but the army stayed there............ reason...... the army had looted their own peoples houses, thinking that the impending battle would cover it up..(which never came)...the govt found out and left the army there to stop the people returning to find out what their army had done...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timmytree Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) The deaths of civilians in any conflict are abhorrent but this situation is like any other conflict in the Middle East, insurgents fighting in civilian clothes from residential areas using ordinary people as shields. These people don't think like we do, they don't act like we would. Every time we intervene in that area we are fighting a losing battle, Iraq has swallowed money and lives for what? Is it stable and safe? Afghanistan is an absolute bloody shambles of internal fighting and always has been. Winston Churchill commented that the place would cost us money and we'd get nothing back was right 80 years ago and is still right now. It's all about religion, a twisted series of differing views by nations whose idea of settling differences is to blow each other up or behead anyone who doesn't agree with them. I don't want to see more civilian deaths, but neither do I want to see more of our soldiers coming back in bodybags trying to protect the people who in all likelihood rejoiced at 9/11 and the London bus bombings. We have enough trouble and turmoil at home without trying to make peace in an impossible situation elsewhere. Edited August 31, 2013 by timmytree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deker Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 The french are up to something, cant figure it out yet...proberly something to do with trade Probably starting to build French\USA relations ready to leap in when\if we leave the eurozone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fern01 Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 I will bet my mortgage that within days of the 'surgical' air strikes a blown up hospital / school or similar with dozens of wailing people will be shown on Arab TV WE are well out of this as whoever ends up in power will be just as bad if not worse than Assad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchman Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 I will bet my mortgage that within days of the 'surgical' air strikes a blown up hospital / school or similar with dozens of wailing people will be shown on Arab TV WE are well out of this as whoever ends up in power will be just as bad if not worse than Assad. aye to that......end of subject Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted August 31, 2013 Author Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 Probably starting to build French\USA relations ready to leap in when\if we leave the eurozone EU. [sorry. couldn't help myself] Possibly. Hollande may also be resorting to the time-honoured tactic of using war or the talk of war to divert attention away from the catastrophic mess his government has made of running his own country. "Look everybody, over there. Something jolly serious is happening. Phew! That was close, they were nearly onto us there." Its a popular political parlour game greatly enjoyed by useless Governments around the world. Spain and Argentina are particulary enthusiastic players. I think Obama has also displayed his unfitness for international statesmanship. When he anounced in advance his "red line", the use of chemical weapons, he handed on a plate both to the Islamist forces fighting Assad who want this conflict to spread and engulf the whole region sweeping away the established political order, and to Assad's Shia Baathists who would love to rouse a sleeping Iran to action on their side, a golden opportunity to achieve both ends simultaneously. An opportunity which the evidence would suggest has been grasped eagerly by both sides, with Mr Obama obligingly playing the American sucker. Here we go again. Its like charades at Christmas. No-one really enjoys it but we play it anyway because it's what we've always done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) im pleased we are not involved we cant afford it. aid would be acceptable in the form of food and medical supplies when they are needed if we are to do anything. i think this vote against it will make it very hard now for governments to commit troops in dodgy wars in the future as the practice of the pm making the decision to go to war now seems to have been changed. Edited August 31, 2013 by overandunder2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subsonicnat Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 I find it quite remarkable, Where were we when Saddam gassed the villages full of Kurds, he wiped out whole places, We did nothing then,. But Obarma opened his mouth with the words Red Line, It will make him look a right fool not to do anything now. If he sends missiles into Syria, it may be the excuse for Iran to throw some at Israel, then the whole world will be involved, we never learn, it will all be down to TALKING in the end anyway. its the only way to stop it then: 89% of the UK said NO. America doesn`t really want to get involved either, But Red lines are not forgotten easily by the people who are looking for weakness.. We will see, it could be the powder keg that the middle east has been sitting on for years:: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laird Lugton Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 with Mr Obama obligingly playing the American sucker. Or is he? Some might say it's a calculated gamble to get the region to implode....... Buy shares in Halliburton methinks..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchman Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 I find it quite remarkable, Where were we when Saddam gassed the villages full of Kurds, he wiped out whole places, We did nothing then, . But Obarma opened his mouth with the words Red Line, It will make him look a right fool not to do anything now. If he sends missiles into Syria, it may be the excuse for Iran to throw some at Israel, then the whole world will be involved, we never learn, it will all be down to TALKING in the end anyway. its the only way to stop it then: 89% of the UK said NO. America doesn`t really want to get involved either, But Red lines are not forgotten easily by the people who are looking for weakness.. We will see, it could be the powder keg that the middle east has been sitting on for years:: The frightening thing is.....if the other hardline islam contries start kicking off and deciede to have a go at israel...israel know full well they cannot fight a war on 3 fronts...thats when things get serious, cause they will lesson the odds and start sending nuc's off.........we know this already as Kerry on his last visit to israel said he would support the jews decision to protect themselves with nuc's........... the taliban in afganistan are getting busy and keeping everyone busy over there, perhaps they smell something in the air ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 I find it quite remarkable, Where were we when Saddam gassed the villages full of Kurds, he wiped out whole places, We did nothing then, . But Obarma opened his mouth with the words Red Line, It will make him look a right fool not to do anything now. If he sends missiles into Syria, it may be the excuse for Iran to throw some at Israel, then the whole world will be involved, we never learn, it will all be down to TALKING in the end anyway. its the only way to stop it then: 89% of the UK said NO. America doesn`t really want to get involved either, But Red lines are not forgotten easily by the people who are looking for weakness.. We will see, it could be the powder keg that the middle east has been sitting on for years:: Where were we with Srebrenica etc etc seems some feel we should just standby and watch these atrocities go on and on, the world banned chemical weapons nearly a hundred years ago and stated they would police that ban so there is your "red line", that's why we supposedly have the UN but seeing has that has turned into a pacifist talk shop ran by hand wringers and lefties some one somewhere has to take a stand, and that maybe the yanks and if they do then stand-back because we will be involved like it or not. Seems the Arab spring is now an Arab nightmare, just wait till Israel gets dragged in. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted August 31, 2013 Author Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 The problem is, by adopting the stated princple that when atrocities occur the West must get involved, atrocities are invited from those who would goad the West into conflict. Where is the Arab world, or the non-Arab Muslim world in this? Who has supplied and continues to supply either side with weapons? The UN is an utter waste of time and space. Where they get the United bit from is anyone's guess. It is a form of pretend world government designed by and for people who are constitutionally incapable of making decisions, but greatly addicted to the beanfeast of conferencing. This conflict, like most if not all Middle Eastern conflicts is being fought by proxy. The region is a bear pit surrounded by interested parties betting on the result. The willingness of America and its allies to wade in unasked is part of the fuel which keeps the sorry process going. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeds chimp Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 Simple really.... When the rich wage war...... it's the poor that die.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mick miller Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) the world banned chemical weapons nearly a hundred years ago and stated they would police that ban so there is your "red line"... KW Nowt happened when they were used in Burma so why the fuss now? Edited August 31, 2013 by mick miller Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchman Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 Just to throw a spanner in the works.......obama wants to put it to the senate....to approve........it would be a ****** if they said no !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bicykillgaz Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 That's about my view of it, it's easy to sit back safe and sound in Dorset and say let Assad continue gassing people but should it be ok in this day and age? Yes it's the Middle East but were it to happen closer to home the response would be different. Same as its easy to sit a say we should go to war when it won't be you going to die or you getting bombed. No this shouldn't be happening but it is, always has and always will as that's the nature of the area only thing that changes is the weapons they use. Im with putin on this here is no proof Assad napalmed them poor people the same as there is no proof the freedom terrorists didn't do it to prompt this reaction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holly Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 Just to throw a spanner in the works.......obama wants to put it to the senate....to approve........it would be a ****** if they said no !! that would leave it to the french , Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted August 31, 2013 Author Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 that would leave it to the french , Who were Syria's (effectively colonial) rulers from 1922 until a UN mandate forced them out in 1946.... And they've never been happy about that.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Scholl Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) Just to throw a spanner in the works.......obama wants to put it to the senate....to approve........it would be a ****** if they said no !! They probably will say no. We (the American public) don't want to get involved in Syria either. We intervened in Libya and Egypt (indirectly). And as soon as they ousted the government, they turned right around and spit in our face. The Syrians will do the exact same thing. Edited August 31, 2013 by Dr_Scholl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subsonicnat Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 They probably will say no. We (the American public) don't want to get involved in Syria either. We intervened in Libya and Egypt (indirectly). And as soon as they ousted the government, they turned right around and spit in our face. The Syrians will do the exact same thing. Thats it in a nutshell mate: Iran wants to drag Israel in, sucker punch: The Russsians are just really p.......... at getting their country torn in half, they want to drag it back together, hence the old guard Putin rattling his Sabre and looking grim: They would love America to get really dragged into it, Bring Korea on board and all the scum they can pull together ... Maybe even Argentina would like to take the Falklands back while we are Busy elsewhere eh, Scores would tried to be evened all over the world.. Thought I would never see a world war for myself,, Maybe I was Wrong, and not so wise after all: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.