Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Not enough proof they say but when we do help often it doesn't go well and costs billions so there may be multiple reasons for not getting involved. " I agree. We need to stop trying to intervene in the Middle East and let them sirt out their own problems. We only ever seem to make it worse. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We don't need another war, it makes me sad to see what's happening there though "  more guns wont help | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't believe for one minute that this commons defeat will stop UK military intervention if the Prime Minister and his military advisors deem it absolutely necessary. " Me neither. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't believe for one minute that this commons defeat will stop UK military intervention if the Prime Minister and his military advisors deem it absolutely necessary. Me neither." Cameron is ' convinced ' ....by what ?....who ?..The hammers cocked on this ...hope I'm wrong | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"some people in a far off land are tragically killing one another ..some in allegedly ghastly circumstances ...The solution ? ...bomb them ..kill more of them ...( and some of ours ) ....when we've had enough ...and they are still killing eachother ..we will walk away and say ' now what The fuck do we do ? ' ....why don't we ask that now and save some grief ?...shock and awe ?....shame and dismay ....we need leaders ...not showmen " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"...another dossier like the last one?" Yeah cos we'll fall for that one again. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I could be wrong, but it popped into my head, that the real reason we could be going to war (and Cameron, Clegg and Milliband are drifting this way, brainwashing us, creating a sense of inevitability) is because if we dont do something, Israel will which would ignite the whole region. They cannot risk 1 dirty chemical rocket going their way, and their army is one of the best in the world, so retaliate they would (so would any small country in their shoes) " I agree to a certain extent in that it certainly helps Israel. It is also about isolating Iran even further (I think they had signed a pipeline deal with syria to get their oil and gas to the med. so would be able to break the economic embargo). Iran is also Israel's arch enamy so it is a win win situation for syria to be neutralised as a power base. I would disagree with the Israeli army being one of the best in the world. It USED to be but not any more. It has proved itself to be excellent at 'police' actions in Gaza where it came up against nothing heavier than rifles, RPGs and mortars. However when the IDF attacked Hezbollah in lebanon in 2006 they struggled to make the advances they were used to in the past and Israel called a cease fire as soon as it was given the opportunity by the UN (who they usually ignore). This is worrying in itself as Israel has nukes | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
That is all.... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Don't suppose it will be worth Syria joining the Eurovision Song Contest any time soon. " They could do a duet with Israel | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A referendum on military action? That is why we democratically elect governments, to make these sort of decisions on our behalf. It is ridiculous to suggest the electorate get a vote on matters like this." | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thought this was a swinging site not sky news " Ignore the thread if it doesn't interest you.... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A referendum on military action? That is why we democratically elect governments, to make these sort of decisions on our behalf. It is ridiculous to suggest the electorate get a vote on matters like this." My point was that the news are reporting that the 'people' have spoken and decided we don't want to intervene in Syria. Ok, MP's are democratically elected by the people, but the MP's themselves have made their own decision on whether or not they agree with intervention, and haven't consulted the 'people' to come to their conclusion. We say its a democracy, but in effect this decison's been taken by individuals and not the 'people'. I know thats how our democracy works, but it doesnt meant to say its right.... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If he is indeed genuinely 'convinced' then it will be as a result of military intelligence received from advisors......." its not hard to guess where The advisors will hail from , and it won't be long before we hear sound bites along The line of 'jeopardising The special relationship ' | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Seems Cameron has lost the Commons vote for military intervention in Syria according to the latest news from the Guardian. " 39 coalition MPs voted against him. A good nights work. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If he is indeed genuinely 'convinced' then it will be as a result of military intelligence received from advisors......." Yes, just like the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thought this was a swinging site not sky news " And this is the lounge.  I hate posts like this, should we all just talk about sex all the time? Why don't people just ignore threads that they have no interest in? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If he is indeed genuinely 'convinced' then it will be as a result of military intelligence received from advisors......." I think you'll find that the intelligence given to his advisors advised that there is no clear evidence of who carried out the attack and that the best option is to wait for the UN. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If he is indeed genuinely 'convinced' then it will be as a result of military intelligence received from advisors....... Yes, just like the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq..." Yes exactly like Iraq, there has never been a British Prime Minister who hasn't had a whole raft of military advisors. It's how the prime minister of the day acts on this advice, we will never know the exact content of advice that Blair received on WMD's, the parliamentary inquires never fully released all data offered up to Blair at the time of the crisis. The Official Secrets Act covers up all sorts. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If he is indeed genuinely 'convinced' then it will be as a result of military intelligence received from advisors....... I think you'll find that the intelligence given to his advisors advised that there is no clear evidence of who carried out the attack and that the best option is to wait for the UN." We (the public) will never be made fully aware of what that Intelligence consists of, and we can't really expect to know every detail of National Security matters. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A very sad day for British politics. Not because Cameron cannot attack Syria, on that parliament made the right decision. Not even because parliament defeated the government, it was right to do so. The most humiliating part of this whole sorry debacle is that the PM brought this on himself. There was no need to try to rush this vote through the house, but Cameron after all his (and Hague's) hawkish rhetoric wanted to grandstand and look like the "world leader" that he is not. For that he has now paid the price. Labour and Milliband don't exactly come out of this smelling of roses either. Milliband should have either supported the government or not, but whichever way he should have been honest about his intentions from the beginning. As Malcolm Rifkind rightly pointed out the Labour amendment was almost identical to the government motion, and it was nothing more than a tool to try to make Milliband look the statesman that he isn't, and never will be. A very sad and humiliating day." You must have watched a different Commons debate than I did on TV last night then, did you miss the Labour amendment (voted down by the house) that preceded the vote? The amendment that called for no military action before the UN Inspectors had reported back, and the Security Council had voted in favour of military action? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"There hasn't been a power grab like this by Parliament since the lead up to the English civil war. (Not suggesting a civil war is coming) It's not just the impact on world affairs but the impact on internal politics that is incredible. The Prime minister had no need to seek approval in terms of powers but be did and it was refused. A stunning turn of events. " A stunning turn of events, yes, but you are a little out on the dates. The last time parliament defeated the government on a matter of war was in 1782. George III and his government wanted to carry on fighting the Americans during the war of independence. Parliament voted against and the PM resigned. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A very sad day for British politics. Not because Cameron cannot attack Syria, on that parliament made the right decision. Not even because parliament defeated the government, it was right to do so. The most humiliating part of this whole sorry debacle is that the PM brought this on himself. There was no need to try to rush this vote through the house, but Cameron after all his (and Hague's) hawkish rhetoric wanted to grandstand and look like the "world leader" that he is not. For that he has now paid the price. Labour and Milliband don't exactly come out of this smelling of roses either. Milliband should have either supported the government or not, but whichever way he should have been honest about his intentions from the beginning. As Malcolm Rifkind rightly pointed out the Labour amendment was almost identical to the government motion, and it was nothing more than a tool to try to make Milliband look the statesman that he isn't, and never will be. A very sad and humiliating day. You must have watched a different Commons debate than I did on TV last night then, did you miss the Labour amendment (voted down by the house) that preceded the vote? The amendment that called for no military action before the UN Inspectors had reported back, and the Security Council had voted in favour of military action? " Yes we probably did watch different versions. In the one I watched Labour's stance on any security council vote was "to offer greater "conditionality" and "sequencing" on the role to be played by UN weapons inspectors and the UN security council. No mention that the security council "had to vote in favour of military action" Milliband couldn't use that argument because he knows too well that the security council will never vote for military action against Syria while the Russians are sat on it. Read the government motion, and the Labour ammendment and you will find very little difference between the two. Yes Cameron was trying to grandstand, but so was Milliband. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A very sad day for British politics. Not because Cameron cannot attack Syria, on that parliament made the right decision. Not even because parliament defeated the government, it was right to do so. The most humiliating part of this whole sorry debacle is that the PM brought this on himself. There was no need to try to rush this vote through the house, but Cameron after all his (and Hague's) hawkish rhetoric wanted to grandstand and look like the "world leader" that he is not. For that he has now paid the price. Labour and Milliband don't exactly come out of this smelling of roses either. Milliband should have either supported the government or not, but whichever way he should have been honest about his intentions from the beginning. As Malcolm Rifkind rightly pointed out the Labour amendment was almost identical to the government motion, and it was nothing more than a tool to try to make Milliband look the statesman that he isn't, and never will be. A very sad and humiliating day. You must have watched a different Commons debate than I did on TV last night then, did you miss the Labour amendment (voted down by the house) that preceded the vote? The amendment that called for no military action before the UN Inspectors had reported back, and the Security Council had voted in favour of military action? Yes we probably did watch different versions. In the one I watched Labour's stance on any security council vote was "to offer greater "conditionality" and "sequencing" on the role to be played by UN weapons inspectors and the UN security council. No mention that the security council "had to vote in favour of military action" Milliband couldn't use that argument because he knows too well that the security council will never vote for military action against Syria while the Russians are sat on it. Read the government motion, and the Labour ammendment and you will find very little difference between the two. Yes Cameron was trying to grandstand, but so was Milliband." Taken directly from the Labour amendment presented to the House yesterday..... 'The UN Security Council, having considered and voted on this matter in light of the report of the Weapons Inspectors and the evidence submitted' | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I have no problem accepting the will of the British people or accepting the outcome of the process we use to determine their opinion…. The petty jousting between the supporters of the various political parties does not interest me one little bit, nor am I concerned about any effect this might have in how Britain is perceived on the world stage,,, There are more than enough countries out there who possess the military capability to intervene in Syria should they have the will and constitutional process to instigate such action. So although it’s now clear the British electorate has demonstrated their will not to get involved militarily. I hope that we as a nation will once again prove to the world that we are the leaders in showing true compassion by providing humanitarian support for the innocent victims of this unfolding tragedy… " I pretty much agree with you on that, but the way the British government and opposition handled the debate and vote was foolish and humiliating. It should never have happened in the first place. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Seems Cameron has lost the Commons vote for military intervention in Syria according to the latest news from the Guardian. " no votes will stop it, If the US go in we will . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A very sad day for British politics. Not because Cameron cannot attack Syria, on that parliament made the right decision. Not even because parliament defeated the government, it was right to do so. The most humiliating part of this whole sorry debacle is that the PM brought this on himself. There was no need to try to rush this vote through the house, but Cameron after all his (and Hague's) hawkish rhetoric wanted to grandstand and look like the "world leader" that he is not. For that he has now paid the price. Labour and Milliband don't exactly come out of this smelling of roses either. Milliband should have either supported the government or not, but whichever way he should have been honest about his intentions from the beginning. As Malcolm Rifkind rightly pointed out the Labour amendment was almost identical to the government motion, and it was nothing more than a tool to try to make Milliband look the statesman that he isn't, and never will be. A very sad and humiliating day. You must have watched a different Commons debate than I did on TV last night then, did you miss the Labour amendment (voted down by the house) that preceded the vote? The amendment that called for no military action before the UN Inspectors had reported back, and the Security Council had voted in favour of military action? Yes we probably did watch different versions. In the one I watched Labour's stance on any security council vote was "to offer greater "conditionality" and "sequencing" on the role to be played by UN weapons inspectors and the UN security council. No mention that the security council "had to vote in favour of military action" Milliband couldn't use that argument because he knows too well that the security council will never vote for military action against Syria while the Russians are sat on it. Read the government motion, and the Labour ammendment and you will find very little difference between the two. Yes Cameron was trying to grandstand, but so was Milliband. Taken directly from the Labour amendment presented to the House yesterday..... 'The UN Security Council, having considered and voted on this matter in light of the report of the Weapons Inspectors and the evidence submitted'" That is correct, but if you read it in full you will find that it doesn't say anywhere that the SC has to "vote in favour" as you originally quoted. I have copied from Hansard below, and if you read point (d) it leaves Milliband in the clear to bypass the SC as the use of chemical weapons can circumvent the SC in international law. Milliband knows this and that is why I call it grandstanding. From Hansard. (a) the UN weapons inspectors, upon the conclusion of their mission in the Eastern Ghutah, are given the necessary opportunity to make a report to the Security Council on the evidence and their findings, and confirmation by them that chemical weapons have been used in Syria; (b) compelling evidence is produced that the Syrian regime was responsible for the use of these weapons; (c) the UN Security Council has considered and voted on this matter in the light of the reports of the weapons inspectors and the evidence submitted; (d) there is a clear legal basis in international law for taking collective military action to protect the Syrian people on humanitarian grounds; (e) such action must have regard to the potential consequences in the region, and must therefore be legal, proportionate, time-limited and have precise and achievable objectives designed to deter the future use of prohibited chemical weapons in Syria; and (f) the Prime Minister reports further to the House on the achievement of these conditions so that the House can vote on UK participation in such action, and that any such vote should relate solely to efforts to deter the use of chemical weapons and does not sanction any wider action in Syria. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So although it’s now clear the British electorate has demonstrated their will not to get involved militarily. I hope that we as a nation will once again prove to the world that we are the leaders in showing true compassion by providing humanitarian support for the innocent victims of this unfolding tragedy… " Que the people who are opposed to overseas aid! If I was being reeeeeeeaallyy cynical, I'd say look out for a "Syrian backed Al-Qaeda terrorist attack" at a british military base or city in the near future. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I have no problem accepting the will of the British people or accepting the outcome of the process we use to determine their opinion…. The petty jousting between the supporters of the various political parties does not interest me one little bit, nor am I concerned about any effect this might have in how Britain is perceived on the world stage,,, There are more than enough countries out there who possess the military capability to intervene in Syria should they have the will and constitutional process to instigate such action. So although it’s now clear the British electorate has demonstrated their will not to get involved militarily. I hope that we as a nation will once again prove to the world that we are the leaders in showing true compassion by providing humanitarian support for the innocent victims of this unfolding tragedy… I pretty much agree with you on that, but the way the British government and opposition handled the debate and vote was foolish and humiliating. It should never have happened in the first place." I think if there has been any failure where we as a nation must accept criticism…… That criticism can only be self -derived, because it is beyond compression to entertain that any other nation could criticise the genuine intent behind the British peoples willingness to even consider making an intervention while the rest of the world is still undecided themselves,,, We may well feel embarrassed ,,,,but we certainly have no reason to feel humiliated  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So although it’s now clear the British electorate has demonstrated their will not to get involved militarily. I hope that we as a nation will once again prove to the world that we are the leaders in showing true compassion by providing humanitarian support for the innocent victims of this unfolding tragedy… Que the people who are opposed to overseas aid! " haha OMG yeah,,,..Yikes I'd better polish up my Rasssssssssssspberry gun and break out a new whoopee cushion in readieness,,,,,, Sox is armed and dangerous,,,   | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"We (Britain)are not the peacekeepers, minders or shepherds of the world - neither are the USA (though they struggle to see that). Our leaders have to stop believing that it falls to us, hanging on the coattails of the USA to resolve the problems created in countries with dictatorships, juntas and unstable political or religious infrastructures. We cannot afford another war. We don't have the money, the troops or the resources to keep doing this - Cameron saw to that when he took a knife to the armed forces to try to reduce the national deficit - now he wants what left of our troops to once again go and sort out someone else bloody mess - all on us, our shoulders. NATO. Let them act in situations such as this - a measured and unified response from the 28 member states which form it. USA, UK and the other members can funnel their troops and resources into this, rather than individual countries going off gung-ho thinking they are protecting the world from 'bullies', but then finding themselves mired in the shit for 10 years. " Spot on | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Humiliated? Embarrassed? ............." Just two of the things Cameron will be feeling this morning as he awaits the visit from the men in grey suits. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Humiliated? Embarrassed? A bit like the difference between the government bill and Labour's amendment. Not a lot." Yeah you know. it’s like the huge difference between being humiliated by a much better opponent or the feeling of embarrassment experienced by a good side putting in a poor performance …… Totally different situations.... and the British people deserve respect.... So yeah I'll stand by embassassment rather than humiliation,,... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Humiliated? Embarrassed? ............. Just two of the things Cameron will be feeling this morning as he awaits the visit from the men in grey suits." Fair point Onny, but I think the red ties will be knocking on Millibands door as well. As an aside. I thought for a moment that Milliband and Balls had joined UKIP. Those purple ties looked quite good on the opposition front bench.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Humiliated? Embarrassed? ............. Just two of the things Cameron will be feeling this morning as he awaits the visit from the men in grey suits. Fair point Onny, but I think the red ties will be knocking on Millibands door as well. ........." I doubt they'll need to knock on his door. He'll hear their cheers through the woodwork. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Seems Cameron has lost the Commons vote for military intervention in Syria according to the latest news from the Guardian. no votes will stop it, If the US go in we will ." I'm with you on this Jo , there will be a set of circumstances where we are ' forced '. to respond ...I'm sure The contingency plan will have been written well before it was offered to parliament . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"............ However the one thing that stands out to me is that British and American warships are on their way, for me that basically means we will strike whether sooner or later it will happen. .......... " Doesn't always follow. Sometimes the sight or even the possibility of one of HM Ships offshore is enough to concentrate minds. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"............ However the one thing that stands out to me is that British and American warships are on their way, for me that basically means we will strike whether sooner or later it will happen. .......... Doesn't always follow. Sometimes the sight or even the possibility of one of HM Ships offshore is enough to concentrate minds." And the arrival in theatre of The Russian vessels should give great indication of just how high The stakes are The concentatrtion of minds must start now ...not as we are watching aircraft unload The fallen . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As usual, Soxy makes more sense than anything I've seen or read anywhere else. Personally, I think parliament made the wrong decision - brought about by too much arrogant posturing by Cameron and the vile Hague, but also an.understandable reluctance following the debacle that was Iraq. If the US and its allies stop being "The World's Policeman", then international treaties become worthless and the Assad's of today and tomorrow will be far less disinclined to make war by any means. I know who I would rather have policing the world" Ok it's not the job of any individual country to police the world that is what the UN and NATO are for. Through these organisations you get a balanced response from a group of nations as Apposed to one or two want to swing their weight around. Also means the burden both financial and to human lives is shared. To be honest the politics of yesterday is pretty much irrelevant as has been mentioned war ships already on route air strikes had been planned for the weekend so troop/equiptment movement has begun. Sadly I fear we will be in this by the end of next month | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Rather pathetic to see Miliband claiming that we shouldn't make the mistakes we made in Iraq ............." Pathetic? Perhaps. Enormously satisfying to see Cameron humiliated BY HIS OWN SIDE though | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What's tragic about the Tories being thrown into disarray?" You see I don't look at this situation as some political game where brownie points are scored by belittling the efforts or intent of either side of a political divide in this country... There’s a much bigger issue that needs sorting out right now!!!... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What's tragic about the Tories being thrown into disarray? You see I don't look at this situation as some political game where brownie points are scored by belittling the efforts or intent of either side of a political divide in this country... There’s a much bigger issue that needs sorting out right now!!!... "Like who'll be the next Tory leader? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The armed forces has been decimated by cuts and we would struggle to hold onto the Falklands and Gibraltar !!!! Leave the Middle East alone , it's a powderkeg. Sad for the innocents. Sunni and Shia are happy to annihilate each other. Is Iraq , Afghanistan and Libiya a better place !!!! If we intervene just another excuse for the Muslim militants to terrorise and threaten the west. It won't be Cameron or Obama that gets blown up or subject to a chemical biological attack it will be the innocent public of this country!!!! Also why risk another Cold War with China and Russia Syrias main backers !!!! Sad but true the Middle East is still back in the Middle Ages , life is cheap there. It may be morally right to do something but the consequences if we do could be far reaching!!!! We are not a world power anymore !!!! We should put more into securing our borders, controlling immigration, increasing M15 and M16 and renew our nuclear deterrent !!! and build our national defence to make this country safer and have something in the cupboard to back up all this political rhetoric !!!!! " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What's tragic about the Tories being thrown into disarray?" You must be loving this . However we need strong and influential government Whoever is in power ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What's tragic about the Tories being thrown into disarray? You see I don't look at this situation as some political game where brownie points are scored by belittling the efforts or intent of either side of a political divide in this country... There’s a much bigger issue that needs sorting out right now!!!...
Like who'll be the next Tory leader?"haha,,, hey Onny if you're ever reincarnated as a dog chewing a bone !.... There will be no taking it way from you! lol | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What's tragic about the Tories being thrown into disarray? You must be loving this . .........." Every moment. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Rather pathetic to see Miliband claiming that we shouldn't make the mistakes we made in Iraq ............. Pathetic? Perhaps. Enormously satisfying to see Cameron humiliated BY HIS OWN SIDE though "Maybe _nny, but irrespective of your political persuasion isn't this about people being gassed and murdered, not jeering cabinet members laughing....yes openly laughing at the vote results. Actually the only victory is for British democracy. A vote took place and the result was declared. I'd say that's a victory for any party ? Think ill flip the channel to cbeebies, all these children being gassed kindda makes me uncomfortable having to see it....ooo look, in the night garden is on, feel better now not seeing all that nasty stuff. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" .......... Enormously satisfying to see Cameron humiliated BY HIS OWN SIDE though
Maybe _nny, but irrespective of your political persuasion isn't this about people being gassed and murdered, not jeering cabinet members laughing....yes openly laughing at the vote results."Well it OUGHT to be but Cameron chose to make it a pissing game, which he spectacularly lost. "Actually the only victory is for British democracy. A vote took place and the result was declared. I'd say that's a victory for any party ? ........." I'm sure Cameron slept better knowing it was a victory for British democracy. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Rather pathetic to see Miliband claiming that we shouldn't make the mistakes we made in Iraq ............. Pathetic? Perhaps. Enormously satisfying to see Cameron humiliated BY HIS OWN SIDE though
Maybe _nny, but irrespective of your political persuasion isn't this about people being gassed and murdered, not jeering cabinet members laughing....yes openly laughing at the vote results.
Actually the only victory is for British democracy. A vote took place and the result was declared. I'd say that's a victory for any party ?
Think ill flip the channel to cbeebies, all these children being gassed kindda makes me uncomfortable having to see it....ooo look, in the night garden is on, feel better now not seeing all that nasty stuff." | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
".......... Oh well …….quel du mage and all that, I'm sure they think they know whats best !!! "Izzat French for 'what would the Auld Whore think?'. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
".......... Oh well …….quel du mage and all that, I'm sure they think they know whats best !!!
Izzat French for 'what would the Auld Whore think?'."I dunno mate.... I don't speak the lingo... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The Lords debate was also interesting. So many ex military and foreign secretaries saying we need to find another way. If we can afford to send in military why can't we use that money to help Jordan deal with the refugees? " This,,,, | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I'm dissapointed in the commons vote tonight. What sort of message does it send to Assad in Syria? He knows that the allies will be very reluctant to intervene because of what happened in Iraq...thats why hes started using these chemical weapons now. He'll keep using them aswell until he's stopped. There's no ideal solution to end this, but i personally feel we should be behind some sort of intervention to show Assad that he can't get away with it. On the news they are saying the people have spoken....no...the MPs have made their own individual minds up on the issue...I certainly can't remember being consulted on my views on this...so the decision is only technically 'democratic', and it doesnt reflect the will of the people until a referendum has been held. I'll get off my soap box now.
That is all...."Totally agree with this. Why make international law if no one polices it. As one of the founding members of the UN I feel we have an obligation to act on this war crime. If the international community lets this slip what's next? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
".......... If we can afford to send in military why can't we use that money to help Jordan deal with the refugees? " The surest way to cause revolt in Whitehall is to suggest moving money from one budget to another. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
People need to look at the broader picture.
We the West bomb Assads military machine, with so called precision bombing, surgical strikes!!!
It only takes one to go amiss and innocents are killed. Do you think China the worlds now greatest power and Russia will stand by and watch!!! They would bomb and strike at the rebels, then what !!!!
Plus the have and will continue to supply Assad with state of the art weaponry. The rebels are fighting amongst themselves and some are so extreme that they would relish a larger conflict for what peace, no !!! To further their own interests.
Sounds like a potential Vietnam, with NATO on one side and the communists on the other !!!!
Britain is military and politically weak and at present we can only pick fights with our mates behind us. Well I don't call the USA France and Germany mates, more like fair weather friends. How many times has this country risked all for others!!!! Is Europe grateful for our sacrifices during two world wars!!! No the don,t give a shit.
Every country is out for itself it's about time we adopted a bit more of that attitude!!!! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I'm dissapointed in the commons vote tonight. What sort of message does it send to Assad in Syria? He knows that the allies will be very reluctant to intervene because of what happened in Iraq...thats why hes started using these chemical weapons now. He'll keep using them aswell until he's stopped. There's no ideal solution to end this, but i personally feel we should be behind some sort of intervention to show Assad that he can't get away with it. On the news they are saying the people have spoken....no...the MPs have made their own individual minds up on the issue...I certainly can't remember being consulted on my views on this...so the decision is only technically 'democratic', and it doesnt reflect the will of the people until a referendum has been held. I'll get off my soap box now.
That is all....
Totally agree with this. Why make international law if no one polices it. As one of the founding members of the UN I feel we have an obligation to act on this war crime. If the international community lets this slip what's next?"FFS they haven't let it slip they are just waiting on this ever so small detail called evidence !!!! Evidence of what has been used Evidence of who used what has been used Evidence of where it came from. Oh sod trying to actually prove anything let just go in a blow shit up  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Just a thought but there is nowt to stop us arming the rebels as this is different just about from direct military action." Yes, because arming the rebels worked out so well in other conflicts - Mujahideen anyone? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Just a thought but there is nowt to stop us arming the rebels as this is different just about from direct military action. Yes, because arming the rebels worked out so well in other conflicts - Mujahideen anyone? "
Was just thinking the same and who are these rebels I've seen a lot of talk about different factions being involved.
Stinger missile anyone | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" There is no need to use troops as air strokes targetted at areas where chemical weapons are stored etc are legitimate targets and this is best way to deter them. It will not stop the civil war but will reduce the chemical attacks. " just a thought.. when one drops HE on a stockpile of chemical weapons how do you contain the aftermath..? and lets just suppose they don't only have Chemical weapons stored on their own, some pretty nasty Biological stuff about which once in the atmosphere are a different issue.. also his 'nasties' wont be where they used to be, they will be in bunkers under schools and hospitals possibly.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What's tragic about the Tories being thrown into disarray? You must be loving this . .......... Every moment." I wouldn't gloat too much Onny. Millibands turn will come, sooner rather than later. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Having another read through all this I now kind of like the idea of a referendum however in the small print of the voting slip. it should contain a binding contract stating that those who vote for military action if successful will be joining the fight if they are incapable of doing so then son or daughter partner will have to go in their place." That would certainly concentrate a few minds
I've also read through most of the thread again and very few seem to think about what comes next.
OK so let's say that Cameron won last nights vote and sometime next week our Sub. and a few American ships start lobbing cruise missiles at Syria.
Let's also imagine (unlikely though it is) that by doing this we manage to dislodge Assad and the rebels then take over the country.
Then rebel group A says that we are going to run the country, rebel group B says not on your life, rebel group C along with T and W say that they are the true government and so on, all the way down to Z and beyond.
Rebel group X sponsored by Alky Ada trip up over some unused gas and rockets and think that the great prophet would be happy if they lobbed a few at the other rebel groups, and while they are at it chuck a few at Israel.
In the meantime more and more Syrian bodies are piling up and the conflict spills over into Jordan and Lebanon.
Israel is now understandably a bit pissed off and launches a few air strikes at various rebel groups, prompting Iran to attack Israel.
Israel nukes Iran...............
Assad is an Evil dictator as was Saddam, but does anyone think that any of the rebel groups will be any different?
Sometimes it's better the devil you know. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Also why risk another Cold War with China and Russia Syrias main backers !!!! Sad but true the Middle East is still back in the Middle Ages , life is cheap there. It may be morally right to do something but the consequences if we do could be far reaching!!!! We are not a world power anymore !!!! We should put more into securing our borders, controlling immigration, increasing M15 and M16 and renew our nuclear deterrent !!! and build our national defence to make this country safer and have something in the cupboard to back up all this political rhetoric !!!!! " Against a threat from who exactly?? Does anyone else have the theme from Team America run through their head whenever this sort of situation crops up now. FUCK YEAH! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ok lets dispel myth ....the strikes which the UK and US want to do are not intended to over throw any government or help opposition forces....under international law ..(which these strikes would be perfectly legal...without UN or SC backing.. now it has been determined a chemical strike HAD taken place) are intended to destroy syrian ability to carry out future chemical attacks ....personally i think the concequences of sitting back and doing nothing...doesnt bare thinking about "OK so we give Assad a bloody nose, then what? Either he will tough it out and still be there, we finish up putting boots on the ground for god knows how many years, or something similar to the scenario I described above. Whichever way it pans out we lose. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" OK so we give Assad a bloody nose, then what? Either he will tough it out and still be there, we finish up putting boots on the ground for god knows how many years, or something similar to the scenario I described above. Whichever way it pans out we lose." Ok we do nothing...sit on our hands and ignore the fact someone is using chemical weapons on its people and getting away with it ..also its neighbouring countries are all sitting with itchy trigger fingers on potentionally even move devastating weapons of mass destruction.......that scenario scares me more | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ok lets dispel myth ....the strikes which the UK and US want to do are not intended to over throw any government or help opposition forces....under international law ..(which these strikes would be perfectly legal...without UN or SC backing.. now it has been determined a chemical strike HAD taken place) are intended to destroy syrian ability to carry out future chemical attacks ....personally i think the concequences of sitting back and doing nothing...doesnt bare thinking about "Would like to see the evidence of these chemical attacks you are so sure took place and the evidence you have that proves Assad was responsible. Also the comment about un not doing anything for 2yrs so are you suggesting that the un should step in as soon as and every time a country has un rest | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What's tragic about the Tories being thrown into disarray? You must be loving this . .......... Every moment. I wouldn't gloat too much Onny. Millibands turn will come, sooner rather than later." His turn in No 10? May 2015 I reckon. Till then I'll just enjoy every minute of Cameron's discomfort. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
".............the UN will never sanction military action "At least not while Russia has a veto. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The UN have already come out and said there WAS a chemical attack and all signs point to assad ....then came out and said they want more time in there......the UN will never sanction military action "Yes a chemical attack and SIGNS POINT towards Assad is not hard evidence is it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What's tragic about the Tories being thrown into disarray? You must be loving this . .......... Every moment. I wouldn't gloat too much Onny. Millibands turn will come, sooner rather than later. His turn in No 10? May 2015 I reckon. Till then I'll just enjoy every minute of Cameron's discomfort." the country just cannot afford another 13 years of labour can we?,just about ruined us and we are still trying to recover from the 13 years of lining labours pockets.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What's tragic about the Tories being thrown into disarray? You must be loving this . .......... Every moment. I wouldn't gloat too much Onny. Millibands turn will come, sooner rather than later. His turn in No 10? May 2015 I reckon. Till then I'll just enjoy every minute of Cameron's discomfort. the country just cannot afford another 13 years of labour can we?,just about ruined us and we are still trying to recover from the 13 years of lining labours pockets. "Actually events that come to fruition during the term of one govt are often the aftershock of a previous govt. Many of Labour's tribulations came from the machinations of Thatcher's time in office | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What's tragic about the Tories being thrown into disarray? You must be loving this . .......... Every moment. I wouldn't gloat too much Onny. Millibands turn will come, sooner rather than later. His turn in No 10? May 2015 I reckon. Till then I'll just enjoy every minute of Cameron's discomfort. the country just cannot afford another 13 years of labour can we?,just about ruined us and we are still trying to recover from the 13 years of lining labours pockets.
Actually events that come to fruition during the term of one govt are often the aftershock of a previous govt. Many of Labour's tribulations came from the machinations of Thatcher's time in office"You really are clutching at straws ......! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What's tragic about the Tories being thrown into disarray? You must be loving this . .......... Every moment. I wouldn't gloat too much Onny. Millibands turn will come, sooner rather than later. His turn in No 10? May 2015 I reckon. Till then I'll just enjoy every minute of Cameron's discomfort. the country just cannot afford another 13 years of labour can we?,just about ruined us and we are still trying to recover from the 13 years of lining labours pockets.
Actually events that come to fruition during the term of one govt are often the aftershock of a previous govt. Many of Labour's tribulations came from the machinations of Thatcher's time in office
You really are clutching at straws ......!"An opinion which you are thoroughly entitled to hold and one which I'm thoroughly entitled to be at variance with! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How did Thatcher get in here? She's dead! "I wish we could be certain about that. I reckon she's been one of the undead for about the last 10 years. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How did Thatcher get in here? She's dead!
I wish we could be certain about that.
I reckon she's been one of the undead for about the last 10 years."holy fuck... zombie thatcher. .now that is scary | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I could be wrong, but it popped into my head, that the real reason we could be going to war (and Cameron, Clegg and Milliband are drifting this way, brainwashing us, creating a sense of inevitability) is because if we dont do something, Israel will which would ignite the whole region. They cannot risk 1 dirty chemical rocket going their way, and their army is one of the best in the world, so retaliate they would (so would any small country in their shoes) So we are obliged to do a small scale strike to avert a larger war, perhaps? Just some thoughts. I would rather have peace, but you only get that in life if you talk softly and carry a big stick... "The Israeli state (not Jews) the state is the main aggressor in that area. A so called suicide bomber comes for the West Bank or wherever and detonates on a bus (albeit regrettable) and then Israel retaliates with air strikes in Palestinian residential areas and say its a weapons factory. Like fuck. The Balfour deceleration not only created a homeland for Jewish people but it stole vast swathes of land from the Palestinian state. And who's to blame for the problems today??? Just because you challenge the legitimacy of a war or intervention of whatever era doesn't mean you're a traitor or not a patriot!! Was it legitimate to get involved in WWi or WWii and destroy an empire? No I don't think so. The UK is already in serious economic difficulty. We don't need to be paying out more. That said decent people and decent countries should be helping innocent people. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"a sad day...... it will go down as the day when britain in the face of seeing innocent women and children being victims of chemical attack turned its back and say "not my problem".. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.".... Edmund Burke never a truer word said......" what about the UN..? should we at least not wait till we have proof before we start hitting the tit on launching cruise missiles against what..? maybe we should tag along with the US as we have done during the last disastrous decade where we have accomplished what exactly..? what good have we done in Iraq and Afghanistan..? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"a sad day...... it will go down as the day when britain in the face of seeing innocent women and children being victims of chemical attack turned its back and say "not my problem".. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.".... Edmund Burke never a truer word said......" well said | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"a sad day...... it will go down as the day when britain in the face of seeing innocent women and children being victims of chemical attack turned its back and say "not my problem".. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.".... Edmund Burke never a truer word said...... what about the UN..? should we at least not wait till we have proof before we start hitting the tit on launching cruise missiles against what..? maybe we should tag along with the US as we have done during the last disastrous decade where we have accomplished what exactly..? what good have we done in Iraq and Afghanistan..? Glad you mentioned the UN. If we wait for them to get involved and do something, there'll be nothing left of Syria and its people by the time they get their act together! The UN are incapable of doing anything cos of the veto's of Russia and China, and so they'll keep on seeking 'dialogue' whilst Assad does what he likes... That's why its important someone does something now, to try and prevent any further barbaric war crimes. That's what Cameron was trying to do, and at least he had the balls to stand up for what he thought was right! " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"a sad day...... it will go down as the day when britain in the face of seeing innocent women and children being victims of chemical attack turned its back and say "not my problem".. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.".... Edmund Burke never a truer word said...... well said "All well and good, but unfortunately recent history has shown that good men trying to interfere in the running of countries that are rife with sectarian rifts just ends up in more bloodshed. Would it not be better to let the sides battle it out until a natural equilibrium is reached, rather than end up peace keeping there for a few years only to leave and the factions start on each other again. Which by the way is the likely outcome when all leave Afghanistan. You cannot stop human beings fighting. It is that simple. Every tribe hates some other tribe because they have more food/oil/water/land/power etc. So just let them get on with it as it's never going to get any better. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"a sad day...... it will go down as the day when britain in the face of seeing innocent women and children being victims of chemical attack turned its back and say "not my problem".. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.".... Edmund Burke never a truer word said...... what about the UN..? should we at least not wait till we have proof before we start hitting the tit on launching cruise missiles against what..? maybe we should tag along with the US as we have done during the last disastrous decade where we have accomplished what exactly..? what good have we done in Iraq and Afghanistan..? Glad you mentioned the UN. If we wait for them to get involved and do something, there'll be nothing left of Syria and its people by the time they get their act together! The UN are incapable of doing anything cos of the veto's of Russia and China, and so they'll keep on seeking 'dialogue' whilst Assad does what he likes... That's why its important someone does something now, to try and prevent any further barbaric war crimes. That's what Cameron was trying to do, and at least he had the balls to stand up for what he thought was right! " the UN is not a perfect institution by any means... so we do what..? leave the UN and act alone or in a 'coalition of the willing' perhaps.. how do you think Iran, China and Russia will react..? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"a sad day...... it will go down as the day when britain in the face of seeing innocent women and children being victims of chemical attack turned its back and say "not my problem".. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.".... Edmund Burke never a truer word said...... what about the UN..? should we at least not wait till we have proof before we start hitting the tit on launching cruise missiles against what..? maybe we should tag along with the US as we have done during the last disastrous decade where we have accomplished what exactly..? what good have we done in Iraq and Afghanistan..? Glad you mentioned the UN. If we wait for them to get involved and do something, there'll be nothing left of Syria and its people by the time they get their act together! The UN are incapable of doing anything cos of the veto's of Russia and China, and so they'll keep on seeking 'dialogue' whilst Assad does what he likes... That's why its important someone does something now, to try and prevent any further barbaric war crimes. That's what Cameron was trying to do, and at least he had the balls to stand up for what he thought was right! the UN is not a perfect institution by any means... so we do what..? leave the UN and act alone or in a 'coalition of the willing' perhaps.. how do you think Iran, China and Russia will react..? " How do you think Assad will react if we do nothing? There's no easy option, but i'd rather be in the camp that trys to protect innocent people from being attacked with chemical weapons, than those who'd rather hide from confrontation because of possible future repercussions. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"War generates a lot of money, they couldn't give a shit about who's life is at a stake, they do it for revenue. Syria is rich in oil and gas, if America can get control of that they will be able to keep their economy afloat, power their war machines for longer and keep their country going. Zionist fucks, to hell with them all "Seriously it's got fuck all to do with oil they don't have that much. They don't export what they produce as they use it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"a sad day...... it will go down as the day when britain in the face of seeing innocent women and children being victims of chemical attack turned its back and say "not my problem".. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.".... Edmund Burke never a truer word said...... what about the UN..? should we at least not wait till we have proof before we start hitting the tit on launching cruise missiles against what..? maybe we should tag along with the US as we have done during the last disastrous decade where we have accomplished what exactly..? what good have we done in Iraq and Afghanistan..? Glad you mentioned the UN. If we wait for them to get involved and do something, there'll be nothing left of Syria and its people by the time they get their act together! The UN are incapable of doing anything cos of the veto's of Russia and China, and so they'll keep on seeking 'dialogue' whilst Assad does what he likes... That's why its important someone does something now, to try and prevent any further barbaric war crimes. That's what Cameron was trying to do, and at least he had the balls to stand up for what he thought was right! the UN is not a perfect institution by any means... so we do what..? leave the UN and act alone or in a 'coalition of the willing' perhaps.. how do you think Iran, China and Russia will react..? How do you think Assad will react if we do nothing? There's no easy option, but i'd rather be in the camp that trys to protect innocent people from being attacked with chemical weapons, than those who'd rather hide from confrontation because of possible future repercussions. " by all accounts both sides have used chemical weapons several times during the past 2 yrs.. and there has been no grandstanding by Politicians.. explain to me if you can the difference in the slaughter of innocents on both sides by 'conventional' means, the barbarity of executions, rape and torture which has gone on in that time also and the latest atrocity.. estimates are about 100,000.. your bit about being in one camp is offensive fella, have served this country and my community and never hid from doing my duty.. keyboard warriors are only slightly less expert than keyboard global strategists.. and if your so keen to be in one camp, buy a one way ticket to Turkey and cross the border.. sure the rebels would welcome you with open arms.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Kerry's not half the speaker Obama is." I think he spoke very well and had someone in our government given such a concise appraisal of the situation, yesterdays vote might have had a completely different outcome..... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"a sad day...... it will go down as the day when britain in the face of seeing innocent women and children being victims of chemical attack turned its back and say "not my problem".. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.".... Edmund Burke never a truer word said......" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"a sad day...... it will go down as the day when britain in the face of seeing innocent women and children being victims of chemical attack turned its back and say "not my problem".. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.".... Edmund Burke never a truer word said......" What you actually mean is that sense has somewhat incredibly managed to prevail for once over the idiots who think firing missiles fixes everything. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"a sad day...... it will go down as the day when britain in the face of seeing innocent women and children being victims of chemical attack turned its back and say "not my problem".. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.".... Edmund Burke never a truer word said......" It never ceases to amaze me whenever a Yank, any Yank spouts this load of bollocks. In my lifetime, incl. Vietnam and currently Afghan and Pakistan, the US Military, under Government orders, have killed more innocent women and children than one would care to count. And just what becomes of good men, like Edward Snowden, Bradley Manning, Michael Hastings et al who seek to expose the truth and the evil that the US Military/Government do? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have a feeling that Iran will become more open with respect to their nuclear capablities, which they have gone to great lengths to deny. Iran will possibly now think - what will the West do now and if they start aiming nuclear war heads towards Israil. The Commons's No vote could be the catalyst in the near future..." The Israelis don't need the west to handle any threat from Iran, their own nuclear deterant is more than enough to keep Iran in check. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"a sad day...... it will go down as the day when britain in the face of seeing innocent women and children being victims of chemical attack turned its back and say "not my problem".. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.".... Edmund Burke never a truer word said...... what about the UN..? should we at least not wait till we have proof before we start hitting the tit on launching cruise missiles against what..? maybe we should tag along with the US as we have done during the last disastrous decade where we have accomplished what exactly..? what good have we done in Iraq and Afghanistan..? Glad you mentioned the UN. If we wait for them to get involved and do something, there'll be nothing left of Syria and its people by the time they get their act together! The UN are incapable of doing anything cos of the veto's of Russia and China, and so they'll keep on seeking 'dialogue' whilst Assad does what he likes... That's why its important someone does something now, to try and prevent any further barbaric war crimes. That's what Cameron was trying to do, and at least he had the balls to stand up for what he thought was right! the UN is not a perfect institution by any means... so we do what..? leave the UN and act alone or in a 'coalition of the willing' perhaps.. how do you think Iran, China and Russia will react..? How do you think Assad will react if we do nothing? There's no easy option, but i'd rather be in the camp that trys to protect innocent people from being attacked with chemical weapons, than those who'd rather hide from confrontation because of possible future repercussions. by all accounts both sides have used chemical weapons several times during the past 2 yrs.. and there has been no grandstanding by Politicians.. explain to me if you can the difference in the slaughter of innocents on both sides by 'conventional' means, the barbarity of executions, rape and torture which has gone on in that time also and the latest atrocity.. estimates are about 100,000.. your bit about being in one camp is offensive fella, have served this country and my community and never hid from doing my duty.. keyboard warriors are only slightly less expert than keyboard global strategists.. and if your so keen to be in one camp, buy a one way ticket to Turkey and cross the border.. sure the rebels would welcome you with open arms.." Just how I feel when I see all these people bang on about how WE should do something meaning not them but the boys and girls in uniform It's so easy to say when you've only ever seen combat and its victims in movies or in the news a whole different story when you have lived it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"a sad day...... it will go down as the day when britain in the face of seeing innocent women and children being victims of chemical attack turned its back and say "not my problem".. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.".... Edmund Burke never a truer word said...... what about the UN..? should we at least not wait till we have proof before we start hitting the tit on launching cruise missiles against what..? maybe we should tag along with the US as we have done during the last disastrous decade where we have accomplished what exactly..? what good have we done in Iraq and Afghanistan..? Glad you mentioned the UN. If we wait for them to get involved and do something, there'll be nothing left of Syria and its people by the time they get their act together! The UN are incapable of doing anything cos of the veto's of Russia and China, and so they'll keep on seeking 'dialogue' whilst Assad does what he likes... That's why its important someone does something now, to try and prevent any further barbaric war crimes. That's what Cameron was trying to do, and at least he had the balls to stand up for what he thought was right! the UN is not a perfect institution by any means... so we do what..? leave the UN and act alone or in a 'coalition of the willing' perhaps.. how do you think Iran, China and Russia will react..? How do you think Assad will react if we do nothing? There's no easy option, but i'd rather be in the camp that trys to protect innocent people from being attacked with chemical weapons, than those who'd rather hide from confrontation because of possible future repercussions. by all accounts both sides have used chemical weapons several times during the past 2 yrs.. and there has been no grandstanding by Politicians.. explain to me if you can the difference in the slaughter of innocents on both sides by 'conventional' means, the barbarity of executions, rape and torture which has gone on in that time also and the latest atrocity.. estimates are about 100,000.. your bit about being in one camp is offensive fella, have served this country and my community and never hid from doing my duty.. keyboard warriors are only slightly less expert than keyboard global strategists.. and if your so keen to be in one camp, buy a one way ticket to Turkey and cross the border.. sure the rebels would welcome you with open arms.." So why did you join the Armed forces for | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't springs to mind" ??? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't springs to mind ???" If you send it the troops your slated if you don't your slated no win situation | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't springs to mind ??? If you send it the troops your slated if you don't your slated no win situation " I genuinely believe most the country would back no troops in on this one | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't springs to mind ??? If you send it the troops your slated if you don't your slated no win situation I genuinely believe most the country would back no troops in on this one" Yes your prob right, but there will still be those who want to sent them in to protect those who need protecting And also the fact our armed forces are not big enough to go into Yet another conflict | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't springs to mind ??? If you send it the troops your slated if you don't your slated no win situation I genuinely believe most the country would back no troops in on this one" Totally irrelevant, we elect governments to make these decisions..... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't springs to mind ??? If you send it the troops your slated if you don't your slated no win situation I genuinely believe most the country would back no troops in on this one Totally irrelevant, we elect governments to make these decisions....." Your right but they also need to listen to those that voted them in | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't springs to mind ??? If you send it the troops your slated if you don't your slated no win situation I genuinely believe most the country would back no troops in on this one Totally irrelevant, we elect governments to make these decisions....." Are you quite sure? Does the electorally registered populace not vote for a candidate/Political Party of their choosing? The resulting party with the largest majority or coalition on board are then invited by HM the Queen to form THE Government of the day? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't springs to mind ??? If you send it the troops your slated if you don't your slated no win situation I genuinely believe most the country would back no troops in on this one Totally irrelevant, we elect governments to make these decisions....." Very true doesn't mean we have to agree with them. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't springs to mind ??? If you send it the troops your slated if you don't your slated no win situation I genuinely believe most the country would back no troops in on this Totally irrelevant, we elect governments to make these decisions....." Of course public opinion is relevant at least two of the Tory MPs that voted against the bill tabled by the government because of opposition in their constituency . If your view is correct why debate anything ! All we need do at any time is shrug our shoulders ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"War generates a lot of money, they couldn't give a shit about who's life is at a stake, they do it for revenue. Syria is rich in oil and gas, if America can get control of that they will be able to keep their economy afloat, power their war machines for longer and keep their country going. Zionist fucks, to hell with them all
Seriously it's got fuck all to do with oil they don't have that much. They don't export what they produce as they use it. "Syria has one of the largest natural gas and oil reserves in the world behind Qatar. The main reason America wants to get involved is to do with gas pipeline that was to run from Qatar through Iraq and onto Syria and Turkey and into Europe, but Syria did not agree. America want to control the worlds oil price, without it the petrodollar goes down and with that so the US sinks | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"War generates a lot of money, they couldn't give a shit about who's life is at a stake, they do it for revenue. Syria is rich in oil and gas, if America can get control of that they will be able to keep their economy afloat, power their war machines for longer and keep their country going. Zionist fucks, to hell with them all
Seriously it's got fuck all to do with oil they don't have that much. They don't export what they produce as they use it.
Syria has one of the largest natural gas and oil reserves in the world behind Qatar. The main reason America wants to get involved is to do with gas pipeline that was to run from Qatar through Iraq and onto Syria and Turkey and into Europe, but Syria did not agree. America want to control the worlds oil price, without it the petrodollar goes down and with that so the US sinks"Please give me the links to this info as everything I've read indicates they don't have much. I would love to be proved wrong. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't springs to mind ??? If you send it the troops your slated if you don't your slated no win situation I genuinely believe most the country would back no troops in on this one Totally irrelevant, we elect governments to make these decisions..... Your right but they also need to listen to those that voted them in " Governments make critical decisions, probably on a weekly if not daily basis, they are mandated to govern and make those decisions without consulting the electorate every time a difficult decision needs to be made. We let them know at the ballot box if their decisions were not ones that we agree with, we can hold protests and demonstrations, we can lobby our MP, but we have no say on critical decision making in mid term of any elected government. That's why we elect governments | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"War generates a lot of money, they couldn't give a shit about who's life is at a stake, they do it for revenue. Syria is rich in oil and gas, if America can get control of that they will be able to keep their economy afloat, power their war machines for longer and keep their country going. Zionist fucks, to hell with them all
Seriously it's got fuck all to do with oil they don't have that much. They don't export what they produce as they use it.
Syria has one of the largest natural gas and oil reserves in the world behind Qatar. The main reason America wants to get involved is to do with gas pipeline that was to run from Qatar through Iraq and onto Syria and Turkey and into Europe, but Syria did not agree. America want to control the worlds oil price, without it the petrodollar goes down and with that so the US sinks"That's not true though, OPEC have poured cold water on Syrian oil reserve claims. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" And what about Harriet Harmans infamous "Court of Public Opinion" eh? Only when we're winning lol." Didn't she ultimately get it right re Fred? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"War generates a lot of money, they couldn't give a shit about who's life is at a stake, they do it for revenue. Syria is rich in oil and gas, if America can get control of that they will be able to keep their economy afloat, power their war machines for longer and keep their country going. Zionist fucks, to hell with them all
Seriously it's got fuck all to do with oil they don't have that much. They don't export what they produce as they use it.
Syria has one of the largest natural gas and oil reserves in the world behind Qatar. The main reason America wants to get involved is to do with gas pipeline that was to run from Qatar through Iraq and onto Syria and Turkey and into Europe, but Syria did not agree. America want to control the worlds oil price, without it the petrodollar goes down and with that so the US sinks"Too right about the Petrodollar. Wouldn't it also be a hoot if the Chinese appointed baliffs and seized the US warships and jets in the Gulf. Through International Law first of course. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" And what about Harriet Harmans infamous "Court of Public Opinion" eh? Only when we're winning lol. Didn't she ultimately get it right re Fred?" Fred the banker? Probably so, but surely there should be more capacity than just the one case. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"War generates a lot of money, they couldn't give a shit about who's life is at a stake, they do it for revenue. Syria is rich in oil and gas, if America can get control of that they will be able to keep their economy afloat, power their war machines for longer and keep their country going. Zionist fucks, to hell with them all
Seriously it's got fuck all to do with oil they don't have that much. They don't export what they produce as they use it.
Syria has one of the largest natural gas and oil reserves in the world behind Qatar. The main reason America wants to get involved is to do with gas pipeline that was to run from Qatar through Iraq and onto Syria and Turkey and into Europe, but Syria did not agree. America want to control the worlds oil price, without it the petrodollar goes down and with that so the US sinks
That's not true though, OPEC have poured cold water on Syrian oil reserve claims."Thank you I'm not the only one | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" And what about Harriet Harmans infamous "Court of Public Opinion" eh? Only when we're winning lol. Didn't she ultimately get it right re Fred? Fred the banker? Probably so, but surely there should be more capacity than just the one case." As I recall she was talking about Fred though I don't doubt there were/ are other worthy candidates. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If we go to war we have to live with the consequences, if we don't we have to accept the consequences. I believe we should be funding Arabic peace keepers not committing our own troops - yet." The middle eastern countries don't need our money and would be more than capable of policing their own region , but it seems they don't like each other and many like the west UK and USA even less Send in our troops ? I wouldn't want the life of any of my family put at risk over this , therefore don't expect others to be put at risk ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"They only rank somewhere the mid 30s of countries with oil production capacity,,, "What about natural gas my good sir.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"War generates a lot of money, they couldn't give a shit about who's life is at a stake, they do it for revenue. Syria is rich in oil and gas, if America can get control of that they will be able to keep their economy afloat, power their war machines for longer and keep their country going. Zionist fucks, to hell with them all
Seriously it's got fuck all to do with oil they don't have that much. They don't export what they produce as they use it.
Syria has one of the largest natural gas and oil reserves in the world behind Qatar. The main reason America wants to get involved is to do with gas pipeline that was to run from Qatar through Iraq and onto Syria and Turkey and into Europe, but Syria did not agree. America want to control the worlds oil price, without it the petrodollar goes down and with that so the US sinks
Too right about the Petrodollar.
Wouldn't it also be a hoot if the Chinese appointed baliffs and seized the US warships and jets in the Gulf. Through International Law first of course."But has already been said no oil well nothing worth a mention lol Under what law ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"They only rank somewhere the mid 30s of countries with oil production capacity,,,
What about natural gas my good sir.. "Again embargoes trade sanctions and such like can achieve the same result | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"War generates a lot of money, they couldn't give a shit about who's life is at a stake, they do it for revenue. Syria is rich in oil and gas, if America can get control of that they will be able to keep their economy afloat, power their war machines for longer and keep their country going. Zionist fucks, to hell with them all
Seriously it's got fuck all to do with oil they don't have that much. They don't export what they produce as they use it.
Syria has one of the largest natural gas and oil reserves in the world behind Qatar. The main reason America wants to get involved is to do with gas pipeline that was to run from Qatar through Iraq and onto Syria and Turkey and into Europe, but Syria did not agree. America want to control the worlds oil price, without it the petrodollar goes down and with that so the US sinks
Too right about the Petrodollar.
Wouldn't it also be a hoot if the Chinese appointed baliffs and seized the US warships and jets in the Gulf. Through International Law first of course.
But has already been said no oil well nothing worth a mention lol
Under what law ? "The international law that the US ignores when it doesn't suit them, eg unlawful rendition, murder of their opponents etc. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't springs to mind ??? If you send it the troops your slated if you don't your slated no win situation I genuinely believe most the country would back no troops in on this one Totally irrelevant, we elect governments to make these decisions..... Your right but they also need to listen to those that voted them in Governments make critical decisions, probably on a weekly if not daily basis, they are mandated to govern and make those decisions without consulting the electorate every time a difficult decision needs to be made. We let them know at the ballot box if their decisions were not ones that we agree with, we can hold protests and demonstrations, we can lobby our MP, but we have no say on critical decision making in mid term of any elected government. That's why we elect governments" Exactly so it is relevant what the electorate think ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
