Poll: Syrian Chemical Weapon Attack

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

  • Total voters
    828
  • Poll closed .
shadow_boxer said:
Scary sruff indeed but I do question what Assad would have to gain in the long term by using chemical weapons against the retreating rebels?
Click to expand...

The regime will fall that much is certain, it is merely a matter of time, could be years maybe even months but the regime will fall eventually. The rebels might be retreating on a local level but on a national scale it is beginning to appear that the balance is tipping in favour of the opposition.
 
Chives said:
The regime will fall that much is certain, it is merely a matter of time, could be years maybe even months but the regime will fall eventually. The rebels might be retreating on a local level but on a national scale it is beginning to appear that the balance is tipping in favour of the opposition.
Click to expand...

You seem to forget that most Syrians are in favor of Assad regime.

Even if Assad falls, the people of Syria will achieve nothing same as what Libya achieved, country got sent to stone-age and now theres war between streets.. Extremist are trying to get hold of power and normal civilians are now way worse off than under Gedaffi.

US are now concerned that if "rebels" win, it will become a terrorist state since 99% of the rebel army originate from various extremist factions including al-queeda... So we supply our enemies with weapons for free...

Chemical weapons? Yeah sounds real smart to use chemical weapons while you are winning so you can give excuse for NATO to come and bomb you, 100% legit. I bet the Syrian government will find a nuke and bomb some village or something with it... Maybe borrow "tsar bomba" from Russians?? Since it seems the only way out to get those 2-3 rebels out of compound...
 
Rhodri said:
Do you mean that the Russian supplied weapons are fictional or Tactical Nukes themselves?
Click to expand...

The former. Russia did not supply Syria with tactical nuclear weapons.

My father was chief petty officer aboard our nations ssbn's during the cold war. Needless to say, I learnt about thermonuclear warfare on my fathers knee aged five.
 
Last edited:
Thompson_NCL said:
The former. Russia did not supply Syria with tactical nuclear weapons.

My father was chief petty officer aboard our nations ssbn's during the cold war. Needless to say, I learnt about thermonuclear warfare on my fathers knee aged five.
Click to expand...

In that case I agree entirely, my mistake for thinking it was a call of duty reference :D
 
MrMoonX said:
Damn! This surely has to mean the UN and NATO put boots on the ground!
Click to expand...

That's not going to happen any time soon, well not whilst we're funding two of the world's biggest opposing terrorist organisations to kick the living snot out of each other it isn't. On one side we have the 'rebels' who're supported by al-Qaeda and partly supplied by certain Western States, and on the other you have Assad's military which is supported by Hezbollah and supplied/funded by Russia.
 
Craig1981 said:
How can the other nations of the world just stand back and let this kinda thing go on? No government has the right to massacre its own people.
Click to expand...

I thought exactly the same when I was a teenager in 1988 when Iraq gassed the Kurds in Halabja, nobody did or said anything :mad:
I stuck the picture of a dead Kurdish baby on my wall to remind me of what governments are really like.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom