Poll: Syrian Chemical Weapon Attack

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


  • Total voters
    828
  • Poll closed .
Considering BAE probably sold them the weapons they are using on their own population. I imagine the government want to hush this up, just like the US sold Israel the means to shoot Palestinian kids
 
Considering BAE probably sold them the weapons they are using on their own population. I imagine the government want to hush this up, just like the US sold Israel the means to shoot Palestinian kids

Fairly sure the majority of Syrian arms are sourced from Russia/ex USSR. Apart from that stockpile of German STG44's that were found by the rebels of course.
 
Considering BAE probably sold them the weapons they are using on their own population. I imagine the government want to hush this up, just like the US sold Israel the means to shoot Palestinian kids

If the government doesnt do anything:

OMG CONSPIRACY!!! OMG!!! THEY ARE HUSHING IT UP!!!

If the government does something:

OMG!!! CONSPIRACY!! THEY ARE GETTING INVOLVED!

Is there anything that isn't a conspiracy these days?
 
[TW]Fox;24807504 said:
If the government doesnt do anything:

OMG CONSPIRACY!!! OMG!!! THEY ARE HUSHING IT UP!!!

If the government does something:

OMG!!! CONSPIRACY!! THEY ARE GETTING INVOLVED!

Is there anything that isn't a conspiracy these days?

You talk abotu conspiricies an aweful lot. I think you have some secret agenda here... :D
 
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...

I wouldn't agree that the vast majority of Syrians are in favour of the regime, vast majority of Alawites perhaps.

Well yes the second the first bullets of the civil war were fired, it was clear that turmoil would continue for years to come.

99% of the rebel army are extremists? sounds like a vast exaggeration to me.

Well Assad knows that the West will not intervene as it would require 50,000+ boots on the ground to be successful, there just isn't the political will for it along with the fact that Russia wouldn't allow it.
 
Why would Assad do this when he has the upper hand against Al Nusra and the FSA?

Also a UN team arrived a few days ago to look into the alleged chemical attack a few months ago,no mention of the recent find of Sarin in Turkey in the hands of Al Nusra.
 
According to a CIA report Assad would get 75% of the vote in the 2014 elections,no many British politicians would ever get that.

Not many politicians in any country with a number of established political parties would ever get that, not sure what your point is?
 

I can't say I'd give much weight to the first link at all really..

As for the second article, I'm not really sure how you can carry out what is effectively opinion polling accurately in the middle of a civil war. Also telling how none of the "activists and independent organizations" are named in the article.

The third link is over two months old, a lot can change in two months.
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23777201

Pretty shocking stuff on the news right now. Apparantly Syria has used chemical weapons to attack Damascus. Reports are that over 650 people have been killed.

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.

They are in a middle of a civil war. What rights do we have to get stick our noses in?

Let me ask you something. If for example the same thing happened in the UK where a large section of the country rebels, should we let it happen or should the Army put the rebellion down?
 
I can't say I'd give much weight to the first link at all really..

As for the second article, I'm not really sure how you can carry out what is effectively opinion polling accurately in the middle of a civil war. Also telling how none of the "activists and independent organizations" are named in the article.

The third link is over two months old, a lot can change in two months.

As i have said Google is your friend,to be honest i don't have the time to hunt out the info i have previously read.

Needless to say their is a lot of misinformation out there,but i don't believe this is a civil war when most of Assad's troops are Sunni and not Alawites.If it was a true civil war then the FSA would not need so much support from Al Qaeda/Al Nusra as they are known in that area.
 
Back
Top Bottom