tinfoilhat Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 It's rumbled on to its inevitable conclusion and now, allegedly, war crimes have took place. Boris Johnson has rollocked a couple of ambassadors but that really is the most we've done. It's not quite Sebrininca *2 but it could still go that way. Why has the west stayed quiet? Is it basically an admission we backed the wrong horse? We're sending troops to train another set of rebels who will, this week at least fight ISIS. Not the Kurds though - that's still forbidden. So, do we let the Russians and Iranians bulldoze their way through Syria and carp from the sidelines or properly wade in too? * I read today Russia vetoed the UN calling sebrininca genocide. What a bunch of arseholes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightrider Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 It's rumbled on to its inevitable conclusion and now, allegedly, war crimes have took place. Boris Johnson has rollocked a couple of ambassadors but that really is the most we've done. It's not quite Sebrininca *2 but it could still go that way. Why has the west stayed quiet? Is it basically an admission we backed the wrong horse? We're sending troops to train another set of rebels who will, this week at least fight ISIS. Not the Kurds though - that's still forbidden. So, do we let the Russians and Iranians bulldoze their way through Syria and carp from the sidelines or properly wade in too? * I read today Russia vetoed the UN calling sebrininca genocide. What a bunch of arseholes. Not that I'm defending Russia, but the rebels are just as nasty - e.g. executing civilians who try to leave areas they control because they don't want to be bombed by the Russians. http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/aleppo-falls-to-syrian-regime-bashar-al-assad-rebels-uk-government-more-than-one-story-robert-fisk-a7471576.html So its not just a question of condemning the Russians, both sides need to be condemned. If the Russians held off the news stories would be about the rebels committing atrocities on civilians. How on earth one could stop both sides I really don't know. I suppose if it was obvious, the rest of the world would have done it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chalga Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 Keep out of it,when the West have gone in to change regimes in the past,they got criticised,now the hand wringers are coming out to criticise for not helping to overthrow Assad.Him,Russia and Iran have the blood on their hands,let them criticise them..........but a lot will not say a dickey bird against Putin and co will they?............typical of the anti Americans that they talk about Obama being haunted by what happened,they are the ones who hold America responsible when they do something..........and when they don't do something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*_ash_* Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 This goes back to my EU decision. People say I voted for a lying bus. I say I voted against an EU that proved that it can't handle any kind of crisis, even when right on the doorstep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flanker7 Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 West West should have stuck to their guns, literally. But, where there is an overactive opposition (to almost anything) they crumble, despite it being the right thing to do. That's the problem with true democracies. The Russians and the Syrians don't have that problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestTinsley Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 The west have been involved from the beginning. The west have been arming, aiding directly and via their proxies such as the gcc and Turkey , the rebels (ie. Alqaida type groups and other moderate takfirist head chopper groups). The liberation of Aleppo is the biggest defeat alqaida isis and Co have so far witnessed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mafya Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 The Syrian uprising was instigated by the West, the so called rebels were backed and armed by the west, Russia stepped in to prevent Assad being killed and Syria turning into another Libya. Ceasefire in place so rebel fighters and civilians can be bused out to safety, you couldn't make this **** up. If Syria had fallen to the rebels then which country would have been next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayggb Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 Nothing .there really is too many different factions.iam not a fan of Russia but the western media condemn their bombing of civilians and yet surely that's what we did in the middle East .don't believe any media east or west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mafya Posted December 15, 2016 Share Posted December 15, 2016 The west have been involved from the beginning. The west have been arming, aiding directly and via their proxies such as the gcc and Turkey , the rebels (ie. Alqaida type groups and other moderate takfirist head chopper groups). The liberation of Aleppo is the biggest defeat alqaida isis and Co have so far witnessed. Spot on..... 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