Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Oh yes, one of those serious topics.

 

So, Syria. I see on Telegraph

 

"Britain is planning to join forces with America and launch military action against Syria within days in response to the gas attack believed to have been carried out by President Bashar al-Assad’s forces against his own people."

 

Where's this one going to end up I wonder?

 

Hopefully they won't be too stretched, what with Gibralta to deal with as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

We do like to get ourselves into some tangles!! UK and US Forces becoming involved will do nothing but bring us even more dislike and suspicion from middle eastern people. Hezbollah of Lebanon are involved on the Syrian govt side, they hate the west already.....Iraq has been a roaring success and it doesn't look like Afghanistan is gonna end anytime soon. Why do we keep getting involved in these things?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is difficult to stand by and watch the atrocities happening. Of course someone has to do something about it, as usual it falls on the US and UK...

I have brothers still in the military, i am hoping they don't put troops on the ground.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada... :wave: Today's funny...

 

 

Seriously though... Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I say stay out of it and let "them" continue to do what they have done for millennia.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why the UK?

 

And not France, Germany, etc etc........

 

The French would surrender before they started, the Germans...well they like starting wars

Link to post
Share on other sites

The time of empire building is over. The UK has enough problems at home that would be better solved before sending our young men and women over to die in a place where they aren't wanted.

 

Isn't this what the UN was meant to be for? Sorting out international disputes?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I'd like to see the UN handle stuff like this, if it is generally agreed that intervention is needed in cases like this.

 

I'd also like to see some actual evidence of who it was that used chemical weapons, before the rest of the world goes in and starts killing people.

 

I suspect I will be disappointed on both counts, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And the Daily Mail today tells us this about him

 

As West debated air strikes on Syria, where was peace envoy Blair? On a yacht in the Mediterranean

Tony Blair jetted to the Med as news broke of chemical attacks

Middle East 'Special Envoy' visited Saint Tropez and luxury yachts

Blair was 'having meetings with various people,' spokesman said

 

So it's probably not true, but.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wherever the US goes.....the UK and Oz are not far behind

 

Canada used to be like that too... oddly we told the US to stuff it when they asked us to go to Iraq. We definitely went balls deep in Afghanistan though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

UN Peace Envoy to the Middle East, Tony Blair, has this to say about Syria...

 

 

"Meanwhile, former prime minister Tony Blair has warned enduring controversy over the decision to invade Iraq in 2003 should not stop politicians from helping the Syrian people.

 

Avoiding military intervention could result in "a nightmare scenario" for the West in the Middle East, he wrote in the Times."

 

:shifty:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia has warned of "catastrophic consequences" for Syria and other regions within the Middle East if military intervention is taken in response to alleged chemical attacks last week.

 

In a statement, foreign ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said: "Attempts to bypass the Security Council, once again to create artificial groundless excuses for a military intervention in the region are fraught with new suffering in Syria and catastrophic consequences for other countries of the Middle East and North Africa."

 

Iran has also since warned against foreign military intervention in Syria after US Secretary of State, John Kerry, last night accused Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian regime of deliberately unleashing chemical weapons on its own citizens in a statement.

 

Iranian foreign ministry spokesman, Abbas Araqchi warned there would be "perilous consequences" for the region if a military attack is carried out, according to the Guardian.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Russia has warned of "catastrophic consequences" for Syria and other regions within the Middle East if military intervention is taken in response to alleged chemical attacks last week.

As opposed to the picnic the Syrian people have enjoyed so far?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Russia has warned of "catastrophic consequences" for Syria and other regions within the Middle East if military intervention is taken in response to alleged chemical attacks last week.

As opposed to the picnic the Syrian people have enjoyed so far?

 

Yes..........it would probably mean that the Lebanese, Israeli and Iranian people would then enjoy that same picnic. The Jordanians, the Turks and if it spreads to Turkey.....its got a toe-hold into Europe......Egypt could expand its craziness. Get involved and the conflict spreads........we'd (the royal we, westerners) be fighting everyone else, who were also fighting....everyone else. The Muslims against the infidels, the jews against the Muslims, the Suuni's against the Shiite's and all of them attacking the western armies whether overtly or covertly......it would be a huge clusterf##k.

 

Intervention hasn't really made the Iraqi or the Afghani peoples lives a picnic up till now, no reason to think it'd help the Syrian people

Link to post
Share on other sites

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...