Response: spend millions of pounds bombing Syria. UK strongly suspects Russia of using chemicals to attack people in England Response: send a strongly worded email ******* hypocrites
Saudia Arabia us suspected of using phosphorus produced in US to bomb the Yemen Response UK and Us sell them weapons
The Government are damned if they do and damned if they don’t. What would you do in this particular situation?
I’m referring to this particular situation. Presumably given the response that you aren’t in favour of military “intervention”, if that’s the right word.
I would want prof before I started bombing anyone but when I had that proof I would act consistently whether it's a country we like to bully or one we are bullied by
So in this situation, ‘proof’ or otherwise, you’re against military intervention because it’s inconsistent with how you feel the Government has acted previously? NB - The Assad regime is a Kremlin backed regime.
I didn’t say or ask that. You said you’d require proof and then a consistent approach. I was asking if proof was ascertained would you effectively abstain from military intervention because it’s inconsistent with how you consider our Government have dealt with others in similar situations. This is your thread, you clearly have a strong opinion on it and I’m just asking what it is.
I don’t have a particular opinion on it, unfortunately. Obviously you’d expect conclusive evidence and parliamentary approval as a given but beyond that I appreciate that it isn’t black and white. I read the legal justifications put forward but again I think this is a grey area and one that’s way above my pay grade.
Britain US France (FUKUS) Have been involved in Syria since day 1. Them, Turks and Gulfies have kept the al Qaida rebel groups in Syria afloat for 8 yearz.. They'll probably set up another fake chemical attack or get the terrorists to set it up Again .. create more fake propaganda..then try cause WW3...
I’m not one for conspiracy theories but there could be some truth in what you say. We’re told Assad is bad but we’re only ever privy to one side of the argument. It’s virtually impossible to have an informed opinion on any of these complex international issues especially when the main players have vested interests.
I'm not into conspiracy theories at all. But the Syrian situation has been the most mis reported conflict ever . Like you say there are vested interests from multiple quarters .. the media has gone to levels on Syria far worse than owt b4. Even fisks latest report from east ghoutha in the independent said there was no proof of chemical weapons ... though the "Army of Islam" terrorist group who's footage was aired showing dead bodies in a room have admitted in the past to using chemicals in the war.. and we nearly went to war over them ..??
Worth a watch if you have time . An actual reporter who s been to Syria . Of course you ll not see her on main stream news as her narrative does not fit that of our governments .
Starting to look better for brexit and making sure the drawbridge is firmly closed with the sh*t storm all around the world. Should we just leave em to it and stop playing world police? It never seems to get us anywhere in the long term. They will eventually run out of people to kill and possibly evolve at the end of the process at which time they can re-join a civilised human race.
As Frankie Boyle said our government can’t stand by and watch the Syrian government bombing its people. Not without joining in.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/world/middleeast/cia-syria-rebel-arm-train-trump.html Only found this out yesterday , operation timber sycamore which in short was a CIA backed program to arm "rebels" in Syria . Looks like us Brits were involved too if you do a little digging . Anything for an arm's sale I guess ......
Robert Fisk, who is very definitely mainstream and very well respected, also has his doubts having visited the area allegedly gassed:- https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...uma-robert-fisk-ghouta-damascus-a8307726.html