Parliment Declines Syria Involement (1 Viewer)

[Steve R.]

Prime Minister David Cameron made a presentation before Parliament concerning whether the UK should get involved in Syria. Thankfully, Parliament voted against a Syrian action. Will Obama have the guts to go before the US Congress to seek an approval? I doubt it.

UK's Cameron loses parliamentary vote on Syria action

Cameron said afterwards he would not override the will of parliament and approve military action, saying it was clear that lawmakers did not want to see a military strike on the Syrian government to punish it for an illegal chemical weapons attack in the suburbs of Damascus last week.

Syrian Kurdish leader doubts Assad would be 'so stupid' as to carry out gas attack

Saleh Muslim, ... suggested last Wednesday's attack, which the opposition says was carried out by government forces and killed hundreds of people, was aimed at framing Assad and provoking an international reaction. Assad has denied his forces used chemical weapons.

So far it is is unproven who committed the chemical weapons attack. Yet, it appears that the US is foaming at the mouth for military action and has been using any thinly disguised excuse it can find to initiate such an attack.

Furthermore, this is a brutal civil war were both sides are doing the killing. It is quite disingenuous of the Obama administration to act as if Assad was the only villain. The Syrian rebels have also been committing atrocities. There are only "bad" guys here. So there is no justification to take military action against Syria.

 

[ColinEssex]

I'm impressed that an American is even aware that Syria exists let alone having a vague idea of what is going on there.

Col

 

[Steve R.]

The pundits here are just foaming a mouth for any miniscule excuse to execute a surgical strike. They claim that Obama's red-line must be upheld as a matter of honor. They seem to ignore that Russia and Iran have their own red-lines as a matter of honor. The US seems to believe that it can take unilteral action without any kick-back. But what if Russian and Iran do come to the aide of Syria? Escalation.

 

[ColinEssex]

Isn't life strange?

Ten years ago the USA started an illegal war based on the naughty goings on of al Qaeda.

Now the USA wants to bomb another country to assist the rebels oust the current incumbent in power. Al Qaeda are also assisting the rebels, so the USA will be on the same side as those they hated after the twin towers fell over.

Col

 

[Steve R.]

This just gets worse. There is NO discussion concerning who may have actually used chemical weapons. The endlessly repeated mantra by the Obama administration is that Assad is killing his own people. No mention is made of the rebels killing anyone. (I guess they are standing in front of Assad's troops with flowers.) This is a brutal civil war were both sides are doing the killing, but only Assad has been singled out for vilification.

The Washington Post Editorial Board had this unbelievably absurd statement.

The United States has a strong interest in Mr. Assad’s defeat and the victory of a coalition committed to democracy and pluralism, and there are steps short of committing troops that could make such an outcome more likely.

Should the rebels win, Christians and Alawites will become targets of genocide. Should the Islamists come-out on top there will be on democracy or pluralism.

Be thankful that Parliament made the rationale decision not to participate in the proposal to attack Syria.

Sarin gas used in Syria attack, Kerry says

Obama to take his Syrian case to Congress

 

[scott-atkinson]

We should leave Syria well alone, it's taken the Government of the UK two unauthorised conflicts into Iraq, remember the none existant WMD despite 'Proof' that they were there, and the war still ongoing in Afghanistan, to realise that we should keep our noses out and let them slug it out themselves.

If the yanks what to go Gung Ho into Syria, thats up to them, I expect to see another Twin Towers some time soon...

 

[nanscombe]

It still seems strange that the American people would be happy that their Government was siding with an organisation that killed "2,996 men women and children" on their own soil.

It would be like the British Government aiding the IRA.

 

[nanscombe]

I meant on 2,996 people killed on American soil rather than 2,996 Americans killed.

 

[Brianwarnock]

I meant on 2,996 people killed on American soil rather than 2,996 Americans killed.

And it's what you said, some people don't read what's written.

Brian

 

[nanscombe]

To be fair it could have been ambiguous.

 

[Steve R.]

U.N.'s Ban casts doubt on legality of U.S. plans to punish Syria. Reuters wrote:

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said on Tuesday that the use of force is only legal when it is in self-defense or with Security Council authorization, remarks that appear to question the legality of U.S. plans to strike Syria without U.N. backing.

So the US, it would appear, will go it alone.

Verify chemical weapons use before unleashing the dogs of war. To my knowledge there is NO smoking-gun that Assad used chemical weapons. Furthermore, there appears to be a lack of investigative reporting on who may have used chemical weapons. So the US, at this time, really has no target to punish yet.

The Religious Freedom Coalition wrote:

The Obama administration has selectively used intelligence to justify military strikes on Syria, former military officers with access to the original intelligence reports say, in a manner that goes far beyond what critics charged the Bush administration of doing in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq war. ... According to the doctored report, the chemical attack was carried out by the 155th Brigade of the 4th Armored Division of the Syrian Army, an elite unit commanded by Maher al-Assad, the president’s brother. ... However, the original communication intercepted by Unit 8200 between a major in command of the rocket troops assigned to the 155th Brigade of the 4th Armored Division, and the general staff, shows just the opposite. ... According to the transcript of the original Unit 8200 report, the major “hotly denied firing any of his missiles” and invited the general staff to come and verify that all his weapons were present.

I do not know how accurate/true the above report is.

 

[scott-atkinson]

Nobody is trivializing the deaths as a result of the 9/11, nor are we trivializing the deaths in the UK on the 7/7 London Bombings. Both are tragedies on a very large scale..

The results after though, especially 9/11 have resulted in 100 fold more deaths...

 

[nanscombe]

I've just been to a photographic at the National Maritime Museum (Greenwich, UK).

One of the photographs was of a transit of Venus. It was like comparing something the size of a beach ball (The Sun) with a pea (Venus, roughly the same size as The Earth).

I could have blotted out a planet the size of the Earth, together with its 6bn odd human inhabitants, with the tip of my little finger.

Now that is trivialising on a cosmic scale.

 

[nanscombe]

Nope. All my own work.

And you should have seen how insignificant our sun looks. A single speck of light at the end of one arm of an absolutely massive spiral galaxy.

Then you see a picture showing hundreds of galaxies.

1 person, or 6bn people are totally irrelevant on a cosmic scale.

 

[nanscombe]

Back on the microscopic level ...

We've seen what what can happen if you only do half a job (Iraq - Gulf war part I), you possibly have to go back and finish what you started later. Then there's the mopping up to do.

 

[ColinEssex]

2,996 men women and children died in 9/11 hardly "naughty goings on of al Qaeda".

I deleted the last part of your post as it is obscene and unnecessary.

However, remind me how many innocent children, mums and dads were killed with napalm and conventionally by the gun, by the USA in Vietnam, or illegally in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I think you will find 2000 odd pales into insignificance, yet the USA still thinks it has to poke its nose in everywhere.

American people really are brainwashed by its dictators.

Col

 

[kevlray]

I am not brainwashed by our leaders. They make me sad a lot when they think that dropping a few bombs on a foreign country will solve all the problems.

 

[ColinEssex]

What we did was unjustified and unnecessary. This current conflict is more of the same. I don't trivialize these deaths by saying "naughty goings on" or hooligans or roustabouts. If its wrong its wrong its not naughty, thats my beef.

I never mentioned hooligans or roustabouts, that's your descriptions not mine.

Why do you find it necessary to use such foul language to a fellow member just because you disagree with a comment?

Do you say those words to anyone who says something you think undermines the gravity of a situation?

I find it rather schoolboy childlike, but then again, you are American, so it's like a shoot first ask questions later phenomenon you all seem to adopt.

Col

 

[ColinEssex]

Back on the microscopic level ...

We've seen what what can happen if you only do half a job (Iraq - Gulf war part I), you possibly have to go back and finish what you started later. Then there's the mopping up to do.

Or more lucratively, the rebuilding, which obviously goes to American companies and massive backhanders to the president like bush did in his tenure.

Col

 

[ColinEssex]

You know the drill, if you have a complaint take it to a MOD or Jon

Already done that thanks.

Are you going to answer my questions?

Col