Poll: Syrian Chemical Weapon Attack
- Thread starter Craig1981
- Start date
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2012
- Posts
- 53
I think this is a difficult situation for the government, no matter what course of action the UK / UN take, it will be considered wrong.
After-all it easy to criticize when you don't have to make the choice.
Personally I feel some kind of action has to happen otherwise it is like letting people get away with mass murder. Although I believe the action taken should be considered very carefully.
Personally I think the UK government is also jumping the gun a little bit, they should wait for the UN to complete their investigation. It up the UN to act not just one nation!
After-all it easy to criticize when you don't have to make the choice.
Personally I feel some kind of action has to happen otherwise it is like letting people get away with mass murder. Although I believe the action taken should be considered very carefully.
Personally I think the UK government is also jumping the gun a little bit, they should wait for the UN to complete their investigation. It up the UN to act not just one nation!
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 2,005
- Location
- Warwickshire
Well done to all the MP's who voted against.
yeah, let the murder continue. Good job.
Youre right, we can add Damascus to the roll call now, and i'm sure Aleppo soon. I cant watch the images on TV anymore knowing my country has failed so miserably to do anything about them. The victims of the SAA will turn even more to the extremists now, and we will reap what we so miserably have sown.
Last edited:
removing assad wouldn't stop anything...
the rebels would just end up fighting the terrorists even more than they are now and any non muslims would be no longer welcome
turkey are already helping the rebels with weapons and training anyway and saudi seem to be helping the terrorists as usual
first targets drawn up were likely anywhere he could be staying and you know it, same **** happened in libya when it wasn't about regime change
I'm tired of arguing with you, its pointless now anyway. Weve shown our true colours and you'd better pray to God that the FSA (or rather the SLF now that the SC has lost all credibility) lose because Al Nusra is going to be running the show now and they'll have access to chemical weapon stockpiles. Coming to a city near you soon.
Don't be daft. If Assad starts actually using chemical weapons in a verifiable way, then Cameron and Obama will get their way.
The motion was defeated because it would be wrong to march in to a sovereign country on shaky grounds, like we did in Iraq. We might actually be learning from our past mistakes. Maybe.
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2012
- Posts
- 53
No I think that statement is incorrect, it would have been about striking military targets that could be used to deliver chemical weapons.
They have made it clear that they do not want to "help" a side in the civil war, just prevent the use of these weapons.
I think after the UN report things may change.
erm FSA and al nusra are the rebels... even if we helped the rebels win it wouldn't be the FSA in charge as they have shown by letting al nusra take away the oil fields , gas fields , bakeries and flour mills the FSA had captured and looting like animals
the sooner the FSA realise the west won't win a war for them the quicker they will stop fighting and the quicker al nusra can be defeated allowing people back to their homes
more lives will be saved from not prolonging a war and letting it burn out
Yeah right, the first 11 times werent enough. What are we learning then? that when chemical weapons were thought to exist that was justifiable, when theyve been used thats not? Good lesson for every tinpot dictator out there.
Arknor, ffs do some goddamn reading. Learn the difference between the FSA and Al Nusra. how can you even comment when you dont know the basics. Oh wait its good enough for the rest of the UK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Syrian_Army
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Nusra_Front
Good, military intervention is completely unjustified as far as i'm concerned at this stage of proceedings and would serve only to do more damage than it prevents judging by our previous experiences and ability to dish out a fair bit of collateral damage
Hopefully no military action won't directly mean 'no kind of action at all' though, should we eventually get some concrete evidence one way or the other.