Poll: Syrian Chemical Weapon Attack

Would you support a military strike on Syria without a UN Security Council resolution?


  • Total voters
    828
  • Poll closed .
Same old bunk I'm afraid. The UN did not accuse Syrian rebels of using Sarin gas, a UN employee did - the UN actually distanced itself from her comments pretty quickly. The UN employee has form for making accusations e.g. accusing NATO of war crimes in Kosovo (strange how she always makes these accusations in conflicts where Russia is playing an active role and always on the Russian side). It's like that UN employee who accuses Britain of crimes against humanity because of introducing the Bedroom Tax, complete bunkum.

The UN didn't distance itself from her comments, it just reiterated that the findings are still inconclusive, as opposed to claiming to be certain when the evidence isn't there to support that conclusion as the US has done. And as pointed out earlier in the thread, AFAIK she didn't accuse NATO of war crimes in Kosovo, she was asked whether she would be willing to prosecute NATO soldiers had they committed war crimes and she rightly said that she would be.

If you choose to trust a US politician over a UN investigator, that's up to you I suppose.
 
The UN didn't distance itself from her comments, it just reiterated that the findings are still inconclusive, as opposed to claiming to be certain when the evidence isn't there to support that conclusion as the US has done. And as pointed out earlier in the thread, AFAIK she didn't accuse NATO of war crimes in Kosovo, she was asked whether she would be willing to prosecute NATO soldiers had they committed war crimes and she rightly said that she would be.

If you choose to trust a US politician over a UN investigator, that's up to you I suppose.

Yes the UN did distance itself from her comments and quickly at that - she gave one impression, the UN gave a totally different one - that's how politics works at that level. The answer she gave about NATO was a pretty stupid answer to a trap question, one that anyone as senior as her should not have fallen into unless she wanted to reveal something about her ideology.

If you honestly believe that UN employees are free from bias then you're more naive than you appear.
 
When you say war crimes what do you actually mean...?

Nothing like Holland being held responsible for hundreds/ thousands of civilian deaths in Kosovo? See link in your quote (android is a pile of steaming **** and won't let me paste anywhere else...:rolleyes:)

As for lazders video about Georgia.... That doesn't look like they are trying to cover up anything... They cut to adverts and then come back to her and allow her to talk about it again... Looks more like they want her story heard but don't have time... Nothing to stop a good conspiracy though hey...;)

I think the definition of a war crime is fairly well understood if not always applied equally. I can't say exactly what I mean because as far as I know, there are no accusations of war crimes committed by NATO soldiers in Kosovo. Which is why her response to the question was extremely revealing.

The incident with the Dutch troops, I think you're talking about the Srebrenica massacre in Bosnia - I'm not sure you can say they were responsible for the deaths of the civilians but they were responsible for not doing anything to stop it and I think the Dutch government were found liable for something to do with that. The Dutch troops were operating under the banner of the UN at the time.
 
I wonder if everyones belief in the correctness of the UN will last past monday? Theres a report out today that suggests that the UN report points the finger at Assad. Whilst they arent apportioning blame, apparently it confirms it was Sarin, using SAA rockets and launched from behind government lines. Could be interesting to see how that affects the negotiations *if true*. I imagine Obama will press for an admission of guilt if he has any political will left to go down the military route.
 
Yes the UN did distance itself from her comments and quickly at that - she gave one impression, the UN gave a totally different one - that's how politics works at that level. The answer she gave about NATO was a pretty stupid answer to a trap question, one that anyone as senior as her should not have fallen into unless she wanted to reveal something about her ideology.

If you honestly believe that UN employees are free from bias then you're more naive than you appear.

No it wasn't, it was a perfectly legitimate answer to a legitimate question. The UN and the ICC (and subsiduries) are international bodies designed to regulate and uphold the law on all sides, whether it be dictators or NATO nations. If you really think that is the wrong answer I'd love to know what you thought she should say? No, NATO soldiers shouldn't come under the same laws as the soldiers they are fighting?

I think the definition of a war crime is fairly well understood if not always applied equally. I can't say exactly what I mean because as far as I know, there are no accusations of war crimes committed by NATO soldiers in Kosovo. Which is why her response to the question was extremely revealing.

The incident with the Dutch troops, I think you're talking about the Srebrenica massacre in Bosnia - I'm not sure you can say they were responsible for the deaths of the civilians but they were responsible for not doing anything to stop it and I think the Dutch government were found liable for something to do with that. The Dutch troops were operating under the banner of the UN at the time.

And so the suggestions throughout this thread suggesting she is anti NATO and wants to try NATO troops is incorrect then. Infact what appears to actually be the case is that she wants to be as unbias as possible in doing her job (which is commendable IMO).

Yes, that is the one - as per the article in the link http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/neth...-judgment-over-srebrenica-genocide-2013-09-06 (Now on a computer so can actually do things...)

A Dutch Supreme Court judgment finding the state liable for the deaths of three Muslim men amid the Srebrenica genocide marks a significant victory in the decades-long search for accountability, Amnesty International said today.


Responsible/liable?
 
Yes the UN did distance itself from her comments and quickly at that - she gave one impression, the UN gave a totally different one - that's how politics works at that level.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that then, it seems pretty clear to me that she pointed out the findings weren't yet conclusive and the UN confirmed that.

If you honestly believe that UN employees are free from bias then you're more naive than you appear.

I never said UN investigators are free from bias, but they're much less likely to have a vested interest compared to a politician.
 
I wonder if everyones belief in the correctness of the UN will last past monday? Theres a report out today that suggests that the UN report points the finger at Assad. Whilst they arent apportioning blame, apparently it confirms it was Sarin, using SAA rockets and launched from behind government lines. Could be interesting to see how that affects the negotiations *if true*. I imagine Obama will press for an admission of guilt if he has any political will left to go down the military route.

Interesting, be a lot of egg on the faces of some very obnoxious posters in this thread if it does turn out that way.

I think the Assad regime have all but admitted guilt, why else are they suddenly applying to join the UN chemical weapons convention?
 
We'll have to agree to disagree on that then, it seems pretty clear to me that she pointed out the findings weren't yet conclusive and the UN confirmed that.

Her answer suggests it was the rebels who launched a CW attack, the UN makes clear that there's no conclusive evidence of that. Which is it?

I never said UN investigators are free from bias, but they're much less likely to have a vested interest compared to a politician.

Really, did you not see the UN Rapporteur on the news ****ging of the bedroom tax?
 
Her answer suggests it was the rebels who launched a CW attack, the UN makes clear that there's no conclusive evidence of that. Which is it?

She said that initial findings suggested it was the rebels using chemical weapons, but she also made it very clear there's no conclusive evidence yet. The UN then reiterated that there isn't conclusive evidence yet, just as she had done.

Really, did you not see the UN Rapporteur on the news ****ging of the bedroom tax?

I didn't, but what does this UN Rapporteur stand to gain by lying? What does the UN investigator who made the comments about the Syrian rebels stand to gain by lying? It's pretty easy to see why western politicians would lie in comparison.
 
She said that initial findings suggested it was the rebels using chemical weapons, but she also made it very clear there's no conclusive evidence yet. The UN then reiterated that there isn't conclusive evidence yet, just as she had done.

So, two different answers with two different messages. Only one can be right - which one?

I didn't, but what does this UN Rapporteur stand to gain by lying? What does the UN investigator who made the comments about the Syrian rebels stand to gain by lying? It's pretty easy to see why western politicians would lie in comparison.

Why does anyone lie? To further their own agenda. Don't pretend that UN employees are somehow a different breed to western politicians or government officials - they're all cut from the same cloth.
 
I don't think the photos will really change anyones mind unfortunately.

Those who care for the civillians will want the west to stop funding the terrorists so the fighting stops and then there are those who want more mayhem regardless of the cost in human life.
 
https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/560553_568041036584698_1284609496_n.jpg

https://scontent-a-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/1044629_568019829920152_1999546587_n.jpg

Witness to a Syrian Execution by FSA: “I Saw a Scene of Utter Cruelty” TIME Magazine, September 12, 2013

Don't know how anyone can support the rebels, assad is lesser evil that's for sure.Army might kills civilians by accident but fsa go around mutilating and beheading non Muslims and enemies.Pure evil.

No doubt both sides have committed atrocities and I dont usually bother, but seriously ignorant one sided statements like this make my blood boil. Seriously, go read something. Start here if youre at all interested in facts.

During the Syrian civil war, the shabiha have been accused by Syrian locals and the foreign press of attacking and killing protesters. In March 2011, activists reported that Shabiha drove through Latakia firing at protesters in cars armed with machine guns, and then later of taking up sniper position on rooftops and killing up to 21 people. It was reported by local activists that on 18 and 19 April that the shabiha and security forces killed 21 protesters in Homs.

In May, Foreign Affairs reported that the shabiba joined the Fourth Division and attacked civilians in the cities of Banias, Jableh, and Latakia." A month later in June, witnesses and refugees from the northwestern region said that the shabiha have reemerged during the uprising and were being used by the Syrian government to carry out "a scorched earth campaign [...] burning crops, ransacking houses and shooting randomly." The Washington Post reported a case in which four sisters were raped by shabiha members.

In June 2012, shabiha members received up to $130 a day for cracking down on protesters. Many shabiha were described by locals as having shaved heads, thin beards and white trainers. It was also reported by Syrian locals that some elements in the Shabiha were contemplating plans to clear Sunni Muslim villages from the Alawi northwest in the hopes of creating an easily defendable rump state. One militiaman said he was ready to kill women and children to defend his friends, family and president: "Sunni women are giving birth to babies who will fight us in years to come, so we have the right to fight anyone who can hurt us in the future".
In July, a captured alleged shabibha member admitted looting and murder, stating that it was for "money and power".

Alleged role in Houla massacre

On May 25, 2012, 78 people, including 49 children, were killed in two opposition-controlled villages in the Houla Region of Syria, a cluster of villages north of Homs. While a small proportion of the deaths appeared to have resulted from artillery and tank rounds used against the villages, the foreign press later announced that most of the massacre's victims had been "summarily executed in two separate incidents", and that witnesses affirmed that the Shabiha were the most likely perpetrators. Townspeople described how Shabiha, from Shia/Alawite villages to the south and west of Houla (Kabu and Felleh were named repeatedly), entered the town after shelling of the ground for several hours. According to one eyewitness, the killers had written Shia slogans on their foreheads.The U.N. reported that "entire families were shot in their houses", and video emerged of children with their skulls split open. Others had been shot or knifed to death, some with their throats cut.

The fifteen nations of the U.N. Security Council unanimously condemned the massacre, with Russia and China agreeing to a resolution on the Syrian civil war for the first time. The U.S., U.K., and eleven other nations–the Netherlands, Australia, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Spain, Bulgaria, Canada and Turkey–jointly expelled Syrian ambassadors and diplomats.

Alleged role in Al-Qubair massacre

Another massacre was reported but not investigated by local villagers and activists to have taken place in the Syrian settlement of Al-Qubair on June 6, 2012, only two weeks after the killings at Houla. According to BBC News, Al-Qubair is a farming settlement inside the village of Maarzaf.

According to activists, 28 people were killed, many of them women and children. The day after the massacre, UNSMIS observers attempted to enter Al-Qubair to verify the reports, but were fired upon and forced to retreat by Sunni armed militia that have entered the city the day before. Victims were reportedly stabbed and shot by shabiha forces loyal to the government of Bashar al-Assad, according to the victim's families.

I don't think the photos will really change anyones mind unfortunately.

Those who care for the civillians will want the west to stop funding the terrorists so the fighting stops and then there are those who want more mayhem regardless of the cost in human life.

Those who care for civilians should be looking to shut down Assad and his people, rather than letting him butcher his way across Syria. At least he wont have WMDs now! We could go round in circles again on this no doubt.
 
Last edited:
Interesting, be a lot of egg on the faces of some very obnoxious posters in this thread if it does turn out that way.

I think the Assad regime have all but admitted guilt, why else are they suddenly applying to join the UN chemical weapons convention?

Exactly - with the UN making accusations against Assad of crimes against humanity (and that's not even related to the chemical weapons attacks!!) he is clearly on the run.
 
Exactly - with the UN making accusations against Assad of crimes against humanity (and that's not even related to the chemical weapons attacks!!) he is clearly on the run.

Which is great as that means he'll never stand down, unless he likes the idea of spending some special time with bubba...
 
I love how people ignore the fact that the Rebel ranks are full of foreign terrorists. How there are pictures of them beheading children and adults and executing civilians due to there religion.... and people STILL want to take down Assad.

In this current situation that will destroy Syria completely. The rebels are even WORSE then the government.
 
A few news outlets are reporting the Al-Qaeda backed rebels have called for an attack inside America.

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-09-13/head-syrian-rebels-calls-terrorist-attacks-america

What's the bet the mainstream news doesn't tell people about that. That doesn't fit into their story of how Assad is the bad guy. I know both the rebels and Assad are have committed atrocities. If you only follow mainstream news you would think Assad was the devil and the Al-Qaeda back rebels are Jesus.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom