Poll: Syrian Chemical Weapon Attack

[Devlish]

I wouldn't mind seeing how many lives the UK's gun supply effort has scalped.

we havent supplied guns.

How about we push for a negotiated truce rather than answer everything with bombs. Why have you constantly been beating the drums of war? Do you like making things worse and increasing the suffering of Syrians?

Its called reality, the Syrian Government does not want peace. It wants 100% control like the old days and its backed by Russia so thats the end of that.

Why do you always lament the suffering of the innocents and then in the same breath argue the case for letting that suffering continue? Any action now to deplete the Syrian Army brings the end of that suffering one step closer. How come it does not register with you that weapons of mass destruction have been used and that, if allowed to continue, will mean death on a whole different terrifying scale? Why do you want to sit on your hands whilst that happens???

 

[Strife212]

All the people in here saying you can't rely on youtube vids

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23879744

This morning the government will publish a document (after Iraq, no-one will call it a dossier) written by the Joint Intelligence Committee.

It has already been seen by senior government ministers and the Labour leader and shadow foreign secretary. It is largely an analysis of so-called "open source material", ie YouTube videos of the chemical weapons attack last week.

 

[arknor]

Chemical/Nuclear/Biological weapons sit on a tier above all others.

Getting shot or blown up is terrible. Suffocating as your lungs fill with blood and it actually being a sweet release from the pain of your eyes burning is simply worse.

how do you feel about western governments cutting of supply lines so the people with have no food and water , shops will be empty , petrol station queues will be tens of miles long etc?

it should be a warcrime to make the innocent population suffer
like we did to libya so the people would turn on gaddafi.


why don't we spend those hundreds of millions on food , water and tents and near the border of turkey or somewhere establish a safe zone for citizens who want to avoid the fighting but have nowhere to go if we genuinely want to help them

 

[Danthus]

David Cameron just cited Facebook, Twitter and Youtube as evidence of Assads guilt.

 

[wildman]

David Cameron just cited Facebook, Twitter and Youtube as evidence of Assads guilt.

David Cameron is an idiot, and grasping at straws to get his election wining war campaign underway in time for 2015 elections........

 

[matt_fsr]

David Cameron just cited Facebook, Twitter and Youtube as evidence of Assads guilt.

There's probably more credibility in FB, Twitter and Youtube than in a government document.

No surprises in the way this poll is looking, yet I could safely bet £100 we'll be chucking cruise missiles in Syria's direction within a few weeks.

 

[Devlish]

David Cameron is an idiot, and grasping at straws to get his election wining war campaign underway in time for 2015 elections........

Yeah because this is clearly the popular course of action. Youre talking about bought by the unions Milliband there, whose doing the populist thing.

 

[areksnumbr1sxylady]

Lol, okay ill try and sum up what I meant clearer

We shouldn't become actively involved in another countries civil war, however if one side begins using horrific weapons banned throughout the world then that side should be punished very hard to ensure the next person who thinks about it thinks twice.

Standing by while atrocities occur because it doesn't effect us isn't always a good thing, the intro to WW2 and Yugoslavia taught us this.

-----



Chemical/Nuclear/Biological weapons sit on a tier above all others.

Getting shot or blown up is terrible. Suffocating as your lungs fill with blood and it actually being a sweet release from the pain of your eyes burning is simply worse.

Its funny that those rules are inforced by USA the world police... Who was the first and only user of Nuclear weapons dropped on a civilian population.... They still use/used nuclear depleted ammunition in iraq/afghanistan/Yugoslavia ... And then there is also claims of use of "mild" chemical weapons e.g the phosphorus well it doesnt fill your lungs with blood but if its gets on any part of your body it will burn through the bone unless you get a knife and carve it out and a gas mask wont save you from it.

 

[Devlish]

Its funny that those rules are inforced by USA the world police... Who was the first and only user of Nuclear weapons dropped on a civilian population.... They still use/used nuclear depleted ammunition in iraq/afghanistan/Yugoslavia ... And then there is also claims of use of "mild" chemical weapons e.g the phosphorus well it doesnt fill your lungs with blood but if its gets on any part of your body it will burn through the bone unless you get a knife and carve it out and a gas mask wont save you from it.

Oh god here we go, hiroshima and nagasaki were bad, the billions of death to WP and depleted uranium compared to this use of WMDs. Its time to leave the stupid to the stupids. Byeeeee.

 

[[TW]Fox]

David Cameron is an idiot, and grasping at straws to get his election wining war campaign underway in time for 2015 elections........

Election winning!? He will know very well it's anything but election winning.

 

[areksnumbr1sxylady]

Oh god here we go, hiroshima and nagasaki were bad, the billions of death to WP and depleted uranium compared to this use of WMDs. Its time to leave the stupid to the stupids. Byeeeee.

byee enjoy your kindergarten.

 

[Craterloads]

we havent supplied guns.



Its called reality, the Syrian Government does not want peace. It wants 100% control like the old days and its backed by Russia so thats the end of that.

Why do you always lament the suffering of the innocents and then in the same breath argue the case for letting that suffering continue? Any action now to deplete the Syrian Army brings the end of that suffering one step closer. How come it does not register with you that weapons of mass destruction have been used and that, if allowed to continue, will mean death on a whole different terrifying scale? Why do you want to sit on your hands whilst that happens???

Do the rebels want peace or do they also want 100% control? Is it not also true the UK and US also want control just like Russia? difference being we have gone to numerous wars in the last 10 years to implement this control.

And what do you seriously think will happen once the "Syrian army has been depleted"? Let me tell you first step is the extermination of minority sects including the alawhites, Christians, Druze, Shias.

Massive internal infighting between the rebels, a grab for power so to speak between many different groups. The complete fall of law and any structure within their society. We were responsible for killing just as many, if not many more, on what planet do you think we deserve any say in the matter? Especially

Why do you put greater emphasis on the fact, lower end estimate, 350 people were killed by chemical weapons? Than to say 1000s of people being executed in cold blood by both sides?

 

[Amnesia]

All the people in here saying you can't rely on youtube vids

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23879744

I rather suspect that as Foreign Secretary of a major country Hague has a little more information to his hands than we do, even if we do have the all knowing foreign policy and intelligence expert arknor in our midst. That said from an uneducated position I find Hagues rhetoric concerning.

Oh WOW so all this intelligence and evidence people have been banging on about is YOUTUBE!!!!!

Good job we can trust YouTube videos to bring us the real story

 

[wildman]

Election winning!? He will know very well it's anything but election winning.

Depends on if its a quick win and he can be seen to have saved women and children while managing to bring the cost of unleaded down............

likely not going to happen, but he is still and idiot for wanting to expend military resource on something that force simply won't resolve unless they are fully comitted to a complete take over of the country.

 

[ubersonic]

Its funny that those rules are inforced by USA the world police... Who was the first and only user of Nuclear weapons dropped on a civilian population.

Dude.... seriously?

They asked Japan to surrender, Japan said no they would fight to the last man.
They dropped a nuke and again asked Japan to surrender, Japan said no they would fight to the last man.
They dropped another nuke and again asked Japan to surrender, then the USSR finally declared war on Japan, finally at the request of the emperor and by a split decision the Japanese government voted to surrender.

Do you really think that invading Japan would have been a better idea? (To help you with that the predicted death toll was 1.7–4 million Americans + 5-10 million Japanese).

likely not going to happen, but he is still and idiot for wanting to expend military resource on something that force simply won't resolve unless they are fully comitted to a complete take over of the country.

He is also an idiot for campaigning to keep Scotland in the UK when it hates his party and it leaving the UK would all but hand him the 2015 election, but despite what the media say about him he isn't as self serving as some people make out. I really believe if he thought our intervention in Syria would save thousands lives he would be in favour of it despite the political suicide involved.

 

[Amnesia]

Dude.... seriously?

They asked Japan to surrender, Japan said no they would fight to the last man.
They dropped a nuke and again asked Japan to surrender, Japan said no they would fight to the last man.
They dropped another nuke and again asked Japan to surrender, finally at the request of the emperor and by a split decision the Japanese government voted to surrender.

Do you really think that invading Japan would have been a better idea? (To help you with that the predicted death toll was 1.7–4 million Americans + 5-10 million Japanese).

So nukes are good then ?

or is it nukes are only good when the good guys drop them

 

[FoxEye]

There's probably more credibility in FB, Twitter and Youtube than in a government document.

No surprises in the way this poll is looking, yet I could safely bet £100 we'll be chucking cruise missiles in Syria's direction within a few weeks.

It'll end up like Libya, any Syrian military installation will end up fair game, until the rebels/Islamist radicals are able to overthrow the govt.

They want justification to get the ball rolling, but anyone who thinks we're just going to attack a few select targets is living in la-la land.

 

[Craterloads]

Dude.... seriously?

They asked Japan to surrender, Japan said no they would fight to the last man.
They dropped a nuke and again asked Japan to surrender, Japan said no they would fight to the last man.
They dropped another nuke and again asked Japan to surrender, finally at the request of the emperor and by a split decision the Japanese government voted to surrender.

Do you really think that invading Japan would have been a better idea? (To help you with that the predicted death toll was 1.7–4 million Americans + 5-10 million Japanese).

So is only America allowed to end a war quickly? Is that logic not applicable to other nations?

 

[do_ron_ron]

Having looked at this situation as it developed and the haste to which the West wants to start bombing. In the early stages the rebels where getting the upperhand and there were regular defections from the Syrian military. The West was pleased as it seemed to support their geo-political aims. Enter help for the Govt. side by other groups and we start to see the rebels getting beat and pushed out of their gains. We start to see stories of atrocities on UK television allegedly perpetrated by the Govt side. Apart from one or two incidents by the rebels you here nothing against them. The BBC seems to be keen to push forward 'incidents'. Streams of 'incidents' which they preface with 'this footage cannot be independently verified'. Thank goodness for satellite television. Despite their President being gung-ho for intervention and maintaining the West's line French television shows atrocities from both sides. Now that the rebels are getting beaten Cameron and Co want to bomb Syrian Govt infrastructure. This happened in Libya. The Govt had the upperhand until the West's intervention. Cameron's 'mission creep' went far beyond anything he was supposed to do and it turned the conflict around. What's the betting there will be initial goals and surprise, surprise the West's intervention becomes the rebel's salvation. No doubt there is a cruise missile that has been targeted to kill Assad just like their was one to kill Gaddafi. With news of typhoons being sent to Cyprus I wonder if we will see the RAF fly again, that is the Rebel Air Force?

 

[arknor]

have they said it's not about regime change yet?