FabSwingers.com forum: Syria

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

Should we get involved or not ?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

be a bit difficult seeing the government has reduced the armed services to almost bugger all who they going to send

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ndykayMan
over a year ago

Falkirk

Politically yes - militarily no

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

Make love not war. That is all.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

Very true

We can't whats better a crazy dictator or crazy extremists if we go we will swing it in the terrorists favor. Think that's what the Yankees want so they can move on to Iran.

Its nuts why do we have to war one war after another it's all to suspect for me anyhoo.

Down with the government

Beleve in people namaste lol

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *UNKIEMan
over a year ago

south east

It would be wrong not to get involved which includes force....to do nothing or even just sanctions would tell all these countries aye go on do what you want.....before you know it it will be utter chaos....can you imagine if 1 of israels neighbours decides feck it lets hit them with 1 ....... israel Will hit back ....with nukes ....so yes we get involved BIG TIME

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *UNKIEMan
over a year ago

south east

Also another thing which people are missing ...this wasnt to be a foot on the ground force which was to be sent in ... what they wanted to do was hit the syrian military infrastructure and end their ability to carry out these attacks ...which would involve air and missile strikes NOT soldiers on the ground...which under international law would be perfectly legal for us to do ..now it has been confirmed chemical attacks DID take place

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ndykayMan
over a year ago

Falkirk

"Also another thing which people are missing ...this wasnt to be a foot on the ground force which was to be sent in ... what they wanted to do was hit the syrian military infrastructure and end their ability to carry out these attacks ...which would involve air and missile strikes NOT soldiers on the ground...which under international law would be perfectly legal for us to do ..now it has been confirmed chemical attacks DID take place

I know mate, but I'm still not convinced we should do it, we have enough problems with covering what we are doing now

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *UNKIEMan
over a year ago

south east

There is that andy but the consequences of doing nothing doesnt bare thinking about ...sanctions wont deter these acts ...and only penalise the syrian people

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

No shouldnt gey involved,there has been infighting in the middle east for hundreds of years,and lets face it the way our forces are being depleted by deaths in afghanistan and by our own government in this country,we might not be able to defend ourselves if someone decided to invade us

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

No.

I've said previously, no. I will not support the Rebels, and can only say to those that do, that you're ignorant. No, I'm no supporter of Assad but Assad in this case is fighting terrorism, not only in his own backyard but international terrorists too.

Those rebels are from Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Iraq, Sudan, Oman, UK, France, Spain and god knows where else.

And yes, I'm tired of one-sided arguments for the Rebels.

I'm glad that Britain has not got involved, and I can only hope our government get the message. As, it is not them that will suffer from the backlash of hate/anger from Syrians and Assad supporters but British civilians.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

Assad has sponsored terrorism for years.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *owboy BebopMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

Middle east is a nightmare situation. Found this readers letter to the Financial Times on MSN sums up the situation in 100 words !

'A short guide to the Middle East', the letter is from a Mr KN Al-Sabah. It reads in full:

"Sir, Iran is backing Assad. Gulf states are against Assad!

Assad is against Muslim Brotherhood. Muslim Brotherhood and Obama are against General Sisi [commander of the Egyptian armed forces].

But Gulf states are pro-Sisi! Which means they are against Muslim Brotherhood!

Iran is pro-Hamas, but Hamas is backing Muslim Brotherhood!

Obama is backing Muslim Brotherhood, yet Hamas is against the US!

Gulf states are pro-US. But Turkey is with Gulf state against Assad; yet Turkey is pro-Muslim Brotherhood against General Sisi. And General Sisi is being backed by the Gulf states!

Welcome to the Middle East and have a nice day."

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

"Assad has sponsored terrorism for years."

What government hasnt? It is clear that Assad is fighting the very people who have attacked us and killed our soldiers.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *UNKIEMan
over a year ago

south east

Ok so we'll just let assad use chemical weapons on anyone he doesnt like including the innocent (these weapons dont differentiate between rebels and innocent civilians)

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *aucy3Couple
over a year ago

glasgow

Damned if we do,

Damned if we don't.

There's no easy answers for Syria,only more questions.

Even with Assad gone,the differing factions within the rebels,will ensure decades of unrest,and civil war for Syria.

it's a can of worms that's already been opened,And no matter what anybody does,it's not being closed any time soon.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

"Ok so we'll just let assad use chemical weapons on anyone he doesnt like including the innocent (these weapons dont differentiate between rebels and innocent civilians)

Most US/ UK weapons can't tell the difference between good guys and bad guys either.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *UNKIEMan
over a year ago

south east

"Ok so we'll just let assad use chemical weapons on anyone he doesnt like including the innocent (these weapons dont differentiate between rebels and innocent civilians)

Most US/ UK weapons can't tell the difference between good guys and bad guys either."

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

Think we are quite right to totally suss it out first before doing anything.

Remember "weapons of mass destruction" ? And we found.......nowt !

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *UNKIEMan
over a year ago

south east

"Think we are quite right to totally suss it out first before doing anything.

Remember "weapons of mass destruction" ? And we found.......nowt !

Dont get me wrong i do get all the arguments against but there is a Slight difference this time .....these weapons have been used to devastating effect ....who will be next to use them if they believe they can get away with it

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *aucy3Couple
over a year ago

glasgow

"Think we are quite right to totally suss it out first before doing anything.

Remember "weapons of mass destruction" ? And we found.......nowt !

We were quite right to intervene in Iraq.

Those weapons of mass destruction could've had somebody's eye out.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ndykayMan
over a year ago

Falkirk

"Think we are quite right to totally suss it out first before doing anything.

Remember "weapons of mass destruction" ? And we found.......nowt !

But saddam used chemical weapons in Iraq against the Kurds. We didn't go in to stop him when he did, we went in as America wanted to protect the oil.

Im sorry, but I just don't think it's our place to police the world anymore - it's hard enough to protect our own citizens. Maybe in time we can get back I helping others but until then I think we should persuade others to step up and help. But then who do we help? And who do we leave?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *UNKIEMan
over a year ago

south east

I would much prefer to live in a world where if you use weapons of mass destruction you get punished hard instead of a world where we might be a bit miffed but its not our problem as it wasnt on our shores........YET!!!!!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

"I would much prefer to live in a world where if you use weapons of mass destruction you get punished hard instead of a world where we might be a bit miffed but its not our problem as it wasnt on our shores........YET!!!!!"

Agreed. So, with the rebels apparantly playing with chemical weapons on video. And, the British/American bussinessman selling Syria like shells from Libya to Syrian rebels should be investigated! Sources: leaked documents and footage, much footage freely posted by members of the rebel groups.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *eatherWoman
over a year ago

glasgow

a wee thought here in all this debateRemember when a wee man with a moustach from germany was massacaring a certain race no one beleived it was happening so nothing got done about it tillthey founf the camps and it sure wasnt a holliday one but maybe now we know what happening surely in the good lords name something can be done.And no i dont mean action thatleads to another bloody all out war

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

"a wee thought here in all this debateRemember when a wee man with a moustach from germany was massacaring a certain race no one beleived it was happening so nothing got done about it tillthey founf the camps and it sure wasnt a holliday one but maybe now we know what happening surely in the good lords name something can be done.And no i dont mean action thatleads to another bloody all out war

"
Yes, but the trouble is, it very will lead to an "all out war", sorry but short memories with some people, nae weapons of mass destruction, yet we start a war? Fine if we clinically win it, thats not happened though has it, friendly fire, needless deaths etc, that would happen again and it would just have a diffrent name on the news,"the latest from Syria" and we all sit watching the tele muttering, ohh thats terrible, people have had enough of us sorting out other countrys shit, its 2013, Syria had a civilised infra structure etc, let them get civilised themselves i say!!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

Lets face it, the uk is a member of the united nations, which is predominantly a peacekeeping/policeing force. Wmd's are illegal and have been used against civilians, INCLUDING CHILDREN,. If, it is found that Assad has used these weapons, then of course we should do something about it. And all this 'oh, our soldiers might get hurt if they go to war shit'! THATS WHAT THEY ARE PAID TO DO!

A little saying comes to mind, "Evil triumphs when good men do nothing". I wonder how many of the naysayers would be screaming for help from the un if this was happening on our soil?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *eatherWoman
over a year ago

glasgow

Or if there was vast reserves of oil we wanted to get our hands on.Naw am just being an old cynical women

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

"Lets face it, the uk is a member of the united nations, which is predominantly a peacekeeping/policeing force. Wmd's are illegal and have been used against civilians, INCLUDING CHILDREN,. If, it is found that Assad has used these weapons, then of course we should do something about it. And all this 'oh, our soldiers might get hurt if they go to war shit'! THATS WHAT THEY ARE PAID TO DO!

A little saying comes to mind, "Evil triumphs when good men do nothing". I wonder how many of the naysayers would be screaming for help from the un if this was happening on our soil?"
Recent history,,think Saddam wiped out a whole town with chemical weapons and we took, ohhh maybe 2 years to do anything? Thousands have died in this war, yet technically, how 50 people have died suddenly wakes us up to the fact?

Ever wonder what just may of been going on before internet and world wide up to the minute news updates?

I'm by no means saying ignore it, but i am saying we cant police every last wrong going on in the world.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *lba couple1Couple
over a year ago

glasgow

Poke your nose in to someone else's business and one day it will come back to haunt you.

If America go against Syria , Syria will then attach Israel, then we are all f---ed.

Just watched an American news clip showing the general that we want to arm killing a soldier cutting him open and eating his heart and liver, nice guy to choose to be mates with !!!!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ems4usMan
over a year ago

glasgow

kill them all.......... our queen would live much better and have a happier life with these parasites

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *damandeve4funCouple
over a year ago

Glasgow

"No.

Those rebels are from Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Iraq, Sudan, Oman, UK, France, Spain and god knows where else.

And yes, I'm tired of one-sided arguments for the Rebels.

Totally agree and the only evidence so far, admittedly sketchy, is that the chemical weapons were used by the rebels, not the government. As soon as they were used, the Syrian government invited the UN inspectors in and independent observers suggest that the population of the country supports its government and is against the rebels, who they view as an invading force. However, these facts and many more are not being reported in the western media, or at least are being buried.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *olly Gentle GiantMan
over a year ago

Glenrothes

My penarth worth.....if there is a humanitarian issue, how can the international community not act. But with chem weapons, who ordered it - State or Rebels? Unless and until independent an incontrovertible evidence as to culpability is available, no one has any right to intervene.

Middle East is a powder keg at best of times. Last thing it needs is Uncle Sam going in half cocked.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *eatherWoman
over a year ago

glasgow

going back to an earlier thread about saddam hussien i worked in a creche in a centre in the north of glasgow and we had refugees from his saditic regime.One of the mums told me all her relatives had been wiped out when he launched the chemical warfare on the village the same thing happened not one blind bit of notice was taken oh it was reported on the tv but nowt done

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

We should stay out of it,look at the way they want to treat each other,and they call themselves civilised nations?civilised nations while they may fight with one another dont go gassing innocent people

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *olly Gentle GiantMan
over a year ago

Glenrothes

Apparently some military head has had his emails hacked. Latest story doing the rounds is that Uncle Sam probably on a black ops basis did the dirty deed . White house is maintaining the "plausible denialability" stance.

We should leave well alone

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

There's always a problem identified, an emotive reaction no matter what the evidence and a solution proposed. At last, we have some thinking time and we dont have to send our boys to sort out someone else's mess...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

It's it any worse being hacked to death by a machete or dying by chemical warfare.

1400 died in a chemical attack in Syria.

5,000,000 were killed by machete and gun in Rwanda and the Congo between1998 and 2008 with no western intervention.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ola cubesMan
over a year ago

coatbridge

"It's it any worse being hacked to death by a machete or dying by chemical warfare.

1400 died in a chemical attack in Syria.

5,000,000 were killed by machete and gun in Rwanda and the Congo between1998 and 2008 with no western intervention."
if chemical agents get used for that period of time take yoir 5,000,000 and multiply by the same number chemical biological and neclear cannot be allowed at any costs ive seen first hand the devestation a nerve agent has and will always say stop at all costs

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

Keep our forces out for now but supply as much humanitarian aid as possible and pray that American don't intervene before the security council authorize it. Otherwise Syria will be the least of our problems

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

"Politically yes - militarily no

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

Good point given your experience.

Hotel Rwanda was the most harrowing film though....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

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

Me I think we should sort our own country out before getting involved in another

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *lassic1Man
over a year ago

bellshill

"be a bit difficult seeing the government has reduced the armed services to almost bugger all who they going to send

Conscription again

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread