SevenRivers Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 I had to laugh while watching Newsnight last night, some military expert said in the event of a strike, the US will fire off anything between 100-200 cruise missiles in the first salvo, and Team GB might fire off 4 or 5 before the sub has to come home. Rule Britannia! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 Get of that fence bf;);) I mentioned it on another thread, we've done little in quite a few other parts of the world (rwanda, sri lanka) Should chemical weapons (if that's actually true) be the line in the sand? Do the other hundred thousand dead not count? You're right it's a fence I'm uncomfortable sitting on. I guess it's down to being ambivalent about people I don't know, the magnitude of the problem and the consequences of interference. I'm sure anybody here witnessing a child being abused by an adult would dive in to help them, irrespective of the costs to ourselves, it's almost a default reaction for civilised human beings, yet thousands of kids in peril on the other side of the world don't create the same reaction. It's easier to rationalise things by looking at the downsides and that's probably where I am with it, so on balance I'd sit this one out probably until intervention had been ratified by the UN and more importantly the Russians & Chinese..see coward's way out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manlinose Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 Oil! The rest is made up. Syrian oil production, when it was at full capacity and allowed to sell it abroad, was less than 0.5% of the total oil output of the world's oil producers it never was a significant supplier and never will be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien52 Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 A few hundred cruise missiles get fired off.Some more people die. Best outcome=no change. Worst outcome=Assad gone Al-Qaeda run Syria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ousetunes Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 I don't know tfh. On the one hand it was heartbreaking to see images of dead children killed by nerve gas, on the other I understand the consequences of interfering from a British point of view. This is how I feel. On one hand we can't stand by and see children killed this way. On the other hand, it isn't this country's job to meddle with other country's affairs nor indeed police the world. I seriously do not know (and thus haven't voted). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manlinose Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 there will be no ratification of any military action by the UN security council - Russia will make sure of that i'm in favour of protecting the innocent victims whoever and wherever they are - i believe the UN inspectors should be given a few more days to ascertain if they can establish who was responsible and, if the Assad regime was responsible, we should take whatever action we can to ensure it isn't able to do it again to say we didn't intervene early enough on previous occasions is not the point - we could and we should have i am aware that any regime change would probably only replace one group of intolerant barbarians with another, and i am aware that any military action, whether it be bombs or ground troops, will create many more civilian casualties, but sometimes it is necessary for good people to do bad things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 Maybe the rebels should stop trying to overthrow the government and then peace would prevail whilst the desired government could be determined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 This is how I feel. On one hand we can't stand by and see children killed this way. On the other hand, it isn't this country's job to meddle with other country's affairs nor indeed police the world. I seriously do not know (and thus haven't voted). Fair comments. Mps won't have that luxury when it comes to a vote!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manlinose Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 Maybe the rebels should stop trying to overthrow the government and then peace would prevail whilst the desired government could be determined. desired and determined by whom? if by the "people", how would you impose democracy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 (edited) desired and determined by whom? if by the "people", how would you impose democracy? In the same way as would happen if there is military intervention. Does anyone know what percentage of the population support the Assad government ? Edited August 28, 2013 by harvey19 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now