FabSwingers.com mobile

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 Politics

Syria: british special forces

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

There have been leaks from june this year that british special forces are in syria to help them to get training, supply weapons and fight against the islamic state, what do you think of it and should they have told us that they are there and not to keep it secret of their missions?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There have been leaks from june this year that british special forces are in syria to help them to get training, supply weapons and fight against the islamic state, what do you think of it and should they have told us that they are there and not to keep it secret of their missions? "
well it was mentioned that no parlimentry approval is needed.. Also, what if a russian warplane killed any of them? Getting complicated god could drag others into conflict and we have medled far too much in others affairs.. Syria will end up like iraq, afghanistan am libya

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Not to mention our double standards.. Like condeming assad yet deal and turn a blind eye to saudi arabia

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

We complain about russia getting involved yet do it ourselves

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rincessvenusCouple
over a year ago

Hull

you will besurprised wer our special forces are we still have sevral in n orhern ireland and iraq

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston


"There have been leaks from june this year that british special forces are in syria to help them to get training, supply weapons and fight against the islamic state, what do you think of it and should they have told us that they are there and not to keep it secret of their missions? "

Who says our SF are there to give training/help to anyone? Could it possibly be those who wish to have them removed?

Considering that IS is targeting the UK both to recruit fighters for their war in the middle east and to return to the UK training to build terror networks here is it not prudent to have our best trained combat intelligence troops on the ground to carry out interdiction operations? Or maybe those who think we should not have troops there would rather have armed police attempting to stop suicide bombers on UK streets, you know like the ones who killed Jean Charles De Menezes.

Or maybe you think that every time we send Special(secret)Forces to do a job the military should first give notice, maybe post a complete timetable and photos of the troops being deployed?

Sometimes I despair of the crass stupidity and lack of any forethought shown by so many of my countrymen and women. As for the photos published I think that the reporters and news media who published them should be charged with endangering our security!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge

Special Forces are in all kinds of places doing all kinds of things all of the time. It will not have come as a surprise to anyone who knows anything about SF that they are operating in Syria.

Although Parliament has not been informed, senior people on both sides of the house will have been informed.

No we shouldn't make it public when and where we are using SF.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

No we shouldn't make it public when and where we are using SF. "

Agreed, even that short report has provided a great deal of actionable combat intelligence to people who mean to destroy our way of life.

Q

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There have been leaks from june this year that british special forces are in syria to help them to get training, supply weapons and fight against the islamic state, what do you think of it and should they have told us that they are there and not to keep it secret of their missions? "

Because of that leak on TV last night, the UK may become an immediate target

this should not have been shown on tv last night.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There have been leaks from june this year that british special forces are in syria to help them to get training, supply weapons and fight against the islamic state, what do you think of it and should they have told us that they are there and not to keep it secret of their missions?

Because of that leak on TV last night, the UK may become an immediate target

this should not have been shown on tv last night."
well.. No i agree.. The media are so keen to report they don't take things like that into account

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There have been leaks from june this year that british special forces are in syria to help them to get training, supply weapons and fight against the islamic state, what do you think of it and should they have told us that they are there and not to keep it secret of their missions?

Because of that leak on TV last night, the UK may become an immediate target

this should not have been shown on tv last night."

For once I agree with you. Regardless of whether people think our special forces should be there or not, the last thing needed is to possibly alert hostile people in that area to their presence.

I'm not in 100% support of them being there, but it might be a necessary evil. Regardless, the last thing we need is to loose dedicated service men simply because the media is looking to generate something with as much interest as the Chilcot report.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Special forces are in some far.more surprising places than that.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iverpool LoverMan
over a year ago

liverpool

The british special forces should only be in Syria to train and arm syriams to fight isis if invited to do so by the syrian government.

we all know the west wants rid of assad so who's to say they aren't arming and training rebels to help cause more unrest over there.

just smells the same as Iraq, libya to me.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"The british special forces should only be in Syria to train and arm syriams to fight isis if invited to do so by the syrian government.

we all know the west wants rid of assad so who's to say they aren't arming and training rebels to help cause more unrest over there.

just smells the same as Iraq, libya to me.

"

I doubt that Assad is going to invite the SAS to come and kill him!

Countries have a responsibility to protect the citizens of other countries from attack from their own government, in international law this is called the Responsibility to Protect or R2P. Sovereignty no longer exclusively protects States from foreign interference; it is a charge of responsibility that holds States accountable for the welfare of their people.

There are 3 pillars of R2P:

1) The State carries the primary responsibility for protecting populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing, and their incitement;

2) The international community has a responsibility to encourage and assist States in fulfilling this responsibility;

3) The international community has a responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other means to protect populations from these crimes. If a State is manifestly failing to protect its populations, the international community must be prepared to take collective action to protect populations, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

I think that the international community (Britain included) is manifestly failing the people of Syria.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The british special forces should only be in Syria to train and arm syriams to fight isis if invited to do so by the syrian government.

we all know the west wants rid of assad so who's to say they aren't arming and training rebels to help cause more unrest over there.

just smells the same as Iraq, libya to me.

I doubt that Assad is going to invite the SAS to come and kill him!

Countries have a responsibility to protect the citizens of other countries from attack from their own government, in international law this is called the Responsibility to Protect or R2P. Sovereignty no longer exclusively protects States from foreign interference; it is a charge of responsibility that holds States accountable for the welfare of their people.

There are 3 pillars of R2P:

1) The State carries the primary responsibility for protecting populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing, and their incitement;

2) The international community has a responsibility to encourage and assist States in fulfilling this responsibility;

3) The international community has a responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other means to protect populations from these crimes. If a State is manifestly failing to protect its populations, the international community must be prepared to take collective action to protect populations, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

I think that the international community (Britain included) is manifestly failing the people of Syria."

The above being all well and good, I would counter that the only problem being the interpretation of those rules. I would argue that for many in the middle east the west only applies these where and when it suits them. And before anyone says anything I support our armed forces, I just think their trust should not be abused by ambivalent politicians.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"The british special forces should only be in Syria to train and arm syriams to fight isis if invited to do so by the syrian government.

we all know the west wants rid of assad so who's to say they aren't arming and training rebels to help cause more unrest over there.

just smells the same as Iraq, libya to me.

I doubt that Assad is going to invite the SAS to come and kill him!

Countries have a responsibility to protect the citizens of other countries from attack from their own government, in international law this is called the Responsibility to Protect or R2P. Sovereignty no longer exclusively protects States from foreign interference; it is a charge of responsibility that holds States accountable for the welfare of their people.

There are 3 pillars of R2P:

1) The State carries the primary responsibility for protecting populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing, and their incitement;

2) The international community has a responsibility to encourage and assist States in fulfilling this responsibility;

3) The international community has a responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other means to protect populations from these crimes. If a State is manifestly failing to protect its populations, the international community must be prepared to take collective action to protect populations, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

I think that the international community (Britain included) is manifestly failing the people of Syria.

The above being all well and good, I would counter that the only problem being the interpretation of those rules. I would argue that for many in the middle east the west only applies these where and when it suits them. And before anyone says anything I support our armed forces, I just think their trust should not be abused by ambivalent politicians."

R2P falls to every nation in the world, not just those in the West.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral


"There have been leaks from june this year that british special forces are in syria to help them to get training, supply weapons and fight against the islamic state, what do you think of it and should they have told us that they are there and not to keep it secret of their missions?

Because of that leak on TV last night, the UK may become an immediate target

this should not have been shown on tv last night."
Yes very true sometimes information should be controlled by the government.

Now you will all think I am wrong but practical is better than politically correct.

In this silly day and age we would probably condemn the government for the D day landings etc.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iverpool LoverMan
over a year ago

liverpool

https://youtu.be/k4H4j3iTBws

and this is why if I was a syrian or part of syrian goverment I would not want any "special forces" from any western country anywhere near the country.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"https://youtu.be/k4H4j3iTBws

and this is why if I was a syrian or part of syrian goverment I would not want any "special forces" from any western country anywhere near the country. "

I can understand why Assad and his supporters wouldn't want that, but why should the Syrians who are fighting AGAINST Assad not want his offices and presidential planes and helicopters destroyed?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"https://youtu.be/k4H4j3iTBws

and this is why if I was a syrian or part of syrian goverment I would not want any "special forces" from any western country anywhere near the country.

I can understand why Assad and his supporters wouldn't want that, but why should the Syrians who are fighting AGAINST Assad not want his offices and presidential planes and helicopters destroyed? "
.

The thing you don't know is what the "free Syrian army" will do to the other half of Syrians once they attain power?.... There'll just turn into Assad... Civil wars are the bloodiest and dirtiest in history and you can't solve them with killing Assad.

Perhaps the Russians understand that?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

We've all been indoctrinated through life to have the belief "one side goodies/one side baddies".

Unfortunately life really isn't like that, the free Syrian army or any other of the 6 or 7 rebel sides are not "goodies".

When the press use the word "rebel" it conjures up many things in the human mind, there very rarely the reality

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *LCCCouple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"https://youtu.be/k4H4j3iTBws

and this is why if I was a syrian or part of syrian goverment I would not want any "special forces" from any western country anywhere near the country.

I can understand why Assad and his supporters wouldn't want that, but why should the Syrians who are fighting AGAINST Assad not want his offices and presidential planes and helicopters destroyed? .

The thing you don't know is what the "free Syrian army" will do to the other half of Syrians once they attain power?.... There'll just turn into Assad... Civil wars are the bloodiest and dirtiest in history and you can't solve them with killing Assad.

Perhaps the Russians understand that?"

I agree, civil wars are terrible, and the longer it goes on, the worse it gets. Although I am extremely weary of increased British involvement in the country (we have made a mess in Iraq, Afghan and Libya), I can’t see the situation in Syria resolving itself without external influences.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"https://youtu.be/k4H4j3iTBws

and this is why if I was a syrian or part of syrian goverment I would not want any "special forces" from any western country anywhere near the country.

I can understand why Assad and his supporters wouldn't want that, but why should the Syrians who are fighting AGAINST Assad not want his offices and presidential planes and helicopters destroyed? .

The thing you don't know is what the "free Syrian army" will do to the other half of Syrians once they attain power?.... There'll just turn into Assad... Civil wars are the bloodiest and dirtiest in history and you can't solve them with killing Assad.

Perhaps the Russians understand that?

I agree, civil wars are terrible, and the longer it goes on, the worse it gets. Although I am extremely weary of increased British involvement in the country (we have made a mess in Iraq, Afghan and Libya), I can’t see the situation in Syria resolving itself without external influences."
.

History says it will end! They all end sooner or later when the people fighting it realise it's a pyrrhic victory for either side.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *thwalescplCouple
over a year ago

brecon

As head of state, Assad is guilty of war crimes, chemical weapons have been used several times by Syrian forces, there are two more incidents being investigated. He should be invited to answer directly for these incidents, and if he refuses the SAS should arrest him and take him to a neutral country to be tried.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *its_n_piecesCouple
over a year ago

i guess it hasn't occured to the knee-jerk reactionaries on this thread of the probability that the leak to the media is deliberate and designed to produce a certain outcome to further the goals of the uk intel services

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top