Poll: Syrian Chemical Weapon Attack

[GAC]

and it starts. labour mp's crowing about common sense.

so i take it we will be not backing the geneva convention in regards to chemical weapons use then. i just hope the people slapping each other on the back remember this vote if terrorists get their hands on chemical weapons from syria if al nusra get any control of them.

so whats the next step. another 100k, 200k or a million dead ?

if we are supposed to be a civilised country at what point do we say enough is enough with the numbers killed, or are we only civilised from a distance and when it comes to actually doing something (even though thats not what was being voted on last night) we just stand around in committee just like the un.

as for the un its a farce, russia has been vetoing anything to do with syria for 2 years now and nothings liable to change as putin see's it as a internal conflict and syria should be allowed to do as it pleases including killing its own people. just look at what he did in georgia when his tanks rolled in and the un did nothing.

and just for good measure the bbc is reporting a playground in alepo has been hit with a napalm like substance.

 

[Ripjaw]

Not our problem, the uk sticks its greedy little nose into everyones bussiness and runs behind the usa at every opoutunity its sickening. Its actually the reason i left th army. should have seen my COs' face when i told him my reason for leaving lol

 

[RDM]

It was the right decision by parliament. With no coherent goal, no specific military aims and no real strategy there is little point in attacking Syria.

In the broader picture the UN has, once again, shown how useless it is. Many more will die and the UN will do nothing about it.

 

[Raumarik]

GAC - You're making the assumption that military action would actually be successful in preventing chemical weapons leaking from the Syrian government compounds, in what way does bombing infrastructure enhance security? What happens if we hit a chemical weapons dump and it's not all incinerated? What evidence is there that the Syrian government actually did it? Currently it's all hearsay, essentially "we don't know, but they're more likely to have done it". That wouldn't be considered evidence in a UK court.

Lastly if we did manage regime change, which isn't a stated outcome we'd want, but blatantly is what we'd be nudging towards - what guarantee do you have that the rebels won't sell off or gift chemical weapons to terrorists?

 

[Johnnytoxic]

and just for good measure the bbc is reporting a playground in alepo has been hit with a napalm like substance.

There is plenty more that can be done diplomatically.

Sending a few cruise missiles will not achieve anything and will further destabilize the wider region. The middle east already hates us for poking our nose into wars that are not ours.

I'm sure another bombing of the middle east would certainly give rise to more extremists, possibility on our soil too.

The point is that there was no end goal and no aim to the military action. It was just to serve a slap on the wrists. Anyway I still don't believe enough evidence is there to say it was the Assad regime. Yesterday the government were citing social media in stacking up the evidence. You cannot order military strikes on probabilities and assumptions.

 

[GAC]

GAC - You're making the assumption that military action would actually be successful in preventing chemical weapons leaking from the Syrian government compounds, in what way does bombing infrastructure enhance security? What happens if we hit a chemical weapons dump and it's not all incinerated? What evidence is there that the Syrian government actually did it? Currently it's all hearsay, essentially "we don't know, but they're more likely to have done it". That wouldn't be considered evidence in a UK court.

well il say it AGAIN last nights vote wasn't for military action though, that would be the NEXT VOTE.

as for what military action could achieve i dont know as i haven't seen any of the plans drawn up, have you ?

at least they could level a couple of military runways to stop them bombing the hell out of schools like the bbc has been showing, unless you feel kids being bombed from the air is all find and dandy and we should allow it to continue because we dont want to get our hands dirty.

as i said above if people enjoy talking about how civilized we are what does it make us when we wont act in the face of overwhelming deaths and actions ?

 

[platypus]

Can we remove the politics from this please. There is a time and place for party bashing, and this isn't one of them. Party politics should not come in to a vote of such importance, and those that think it does are just silly. See the bigger picture please.

You want to remove the politics from a thread that is discussing the Parliament vote on whether to take military action in Syria or not? Okey doke.

[aside]I was merely asking his opinion on something that cropped up in the course of the thread, ease up.

 

[GAC]

There is plenty more that can be done diplomatically.

2 years of diplomacy and 100k deaths. so at what point do we say enough's enough ?

 

[arknor]

i just hope the people slapping each other on the back remember this vote if terrorists get their hands on chemical weapons from syria if al nusra get any control of them. .

erm al nusra have more chance of getting syrian chemical weapons and control of the country with us bombing assad for them...

us doing nothing lets assad carry on winning against them....

as for what military action could achieve i dont know as i haven't seen any of the plans drawn up, have you ?

You know what it achieves it weakens the assad regime and allows the al nusra terrorists to gain more ground than they already have.

you keep banging on about us doing nothing lets al nusra gets chemical weapons but don't seem to understand the rebels best fighting force is al nusra......

you appear to be under some delusion that al nusra are sided with the government and by allowing the government to keep control it's going to give al nusra chemical weapons that belong to syria.

if you want to stop al nusra getting syrian chemical weapons then we should be taking military action against al nusra and not helping them by winning a war they are fighting

 

[Johnnytoxic]

If you watched, the reason they lost the vote for military action was because Nick Clegg would not deny the vote be used to allow indirect action with UK bases.

He got roasted for this and tried to squirm out of it. Indirect as in the U.S using UK bases for military action. This was the tipping point.

 

[Schlong&Stable]

I'd be glad is cameron stepped down he was never voted in anyway.

Why do you keep saying this? Your ignorance of our Parliamentary system would not be so alarming if you were not so outspoken. But as it happens you are, I am very alarmed by your ignorance.

 

[arknor]

Why do you keep saying this? Your ignorance of our Parliamentary system would not be so alarming if you were not so outspoken. But as it happens you are, I am very alarmed by your ignorance.

cameron got voted in by a majority ? if nick clegg didn't bend over for him there would have been another election vote...

 

[scorza]

don't be daft, it was pure politics from the start. Miliband engineered the defeat for party political reasons. So very clever.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/d...out-the-syria-vote-miliband-changed-his-mind/

I think Ed comes out of this quite well, he's certainly broke some unwritten rule of parliament which will have consequences for him whether he becomes PM or not. However in a post-Iraq world, parliament having more say prior to the use of force is never a bad thing. As for the flip-flopping, I tend to think this was a decision of conscience rather than playing party politics.

I really hope Cameron et al decide to go after Blair in an attempt to "punish" the Labour party now for this.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Russia too must be made to pay for its unconditional support of a regime committing the most awful war crimes.

Why only Russia?? Pot calling kettle black?? What about the US,many Western European countries,China,etc??

How many dodgy regimes have we supported like Pinochet who kill thousands of their own people?? How many times have we cause civil wars to last decades,when the US supplied weapons like stingers to UNITA during the Angolan civil war which killed 500000 people?? It was when UNITA was defeated that the war ended after decades.

The US is responsible for the toppling of the moderate government decades ago in Iran,put the Shah in power who killed thousands of his own people and directly lead to the current lot who did crap things too.

We have no moral high ground at all in this regard. We have been involved in helping out many horrible people,so if Russia is guilty of war crimes so are we.

With the rise of the information age we cannot hide the sins of our countries any more.

 

[Devlish]

if cameron does the opposite of what the public want then he is no better than any middle east dictator?

Dont be ridiculous, you might as well hand over the premiership to the editor of the Daily Fail and other redtops, which is where the majority of people in this country get their information. The reason we have politicians is that theyre meant to make reasoned choices, not play party politics with peoples lives.

Why only Russia?? Pot calling kettle black?? What about the US,many Western European countries,China,etc??

How many dodgy regimes have we supported like Pinochet who kill thousands of their own people??

How many have used chemical weapons on their populace? Lets be honest, we wouldnt even be discussing this if that hadnt happened, and Assad would be still in the stalemate he's in now and 100,000 dead. Only now, hes been given a greenlight on how to break that stalemate.

 

[arknor]

Dont be ridiculous, you might as well hand over the premiership to the editor of the Daily Fail and other redtops, which is where the majority of people in this country get their information. The reason we have politicians is that theyre meant to make reasoned choices, not play party politics with peoples lives..

and there I was thinking they were supposed to be representatives of the people who elected them.

I'm sure 100% of dictators think they are doing what's best for the people even if it's not what the people want too.

Maybe if we weren't getting shafted on taxes , vat , councils face huge funding cuts and constantly being told we can't afford bla bla bla then people might think we could afford to throw 1.5million $ humanitarian missiles at another country so terrorists can take control and make an Islamic state

 

[doofer]

UK Public opinion actually sways Parliament shocker!

Who else is waiting for the Mainstream Media Propaganda machine to now step in to overdrive mode in order to 'sway' the British public back into thinking the way the Govt. wants?

How long before the British Brainwashing Corporation start broadcasting more and more graphic coverage of alleged 'atrocities', with the word 'Humanitarianism' increasingly thrown in wherever possible?

 

[ubersonic]

I think Ed comes out of this quite well, he's certainly broke some unwritten rule of parliament which will have consequences for him whether he becomes PM or not. However in a post-Iraq world, parliament having more say prior to the use of force is never a bad thing. As for the flip-flopping, I tend to think this was a decision of conscience rather than playing party politics.

He told the government he and his party were in favour of action then when the time came to vote double crossed them, he hasn't just broken an unwritten rule he has made our country look stupid on an international stage and all to further his own career.

How long before the British Brainwashing Corporation start broadcasting more and more graphic coverage of alleged 'atrocities', with the word 'Humanitarianism' increasingly thrown in wherever possible?

There's an article up now about an incendiary bomb dropped on a primary school ^^

and there I was thinking they were supposed to be representatives of the people who elected them.

This seems to be a very common misconception on the internet, they are there to do what is best for the people/country, not what the people want (which would usually be bad for the people/country).

 

[arknor]

UK Public opinion actually sways Parliament shocker!

Who else is waiting for the Mainstream Media Propaganda machine to now step in to overdrive mode in order to 'sway' the British public back into thinking the way the Govt. wants?

How long before the British Brainwashing Corporation start broadcasting more and more graphic coverage of alleged 'atrocities', with the word 'Humanitarianism' increasingly thrown in wherever possible?

they already are the bbc is full of gas masks , dead bodies and burnt children.

seems like a great bit coincidence some school apparently gets a bomb dropped on it just when our parliament were debating taking action.

everyone claims they saw a plane yet there aren't any videos of it flying over multiple times looking for a target like the witness claimed?

yet you can go on youtube/******** and find videos of almost every fight that ever happened in syria so far, if a plane were flying overhead so much I'm pretty convinced it would have been filmed

He told the government he and his party were in favour of action then when the time came to vote double crossed them, he hasn't just broken an unwritten rule he has made our country look stupid on an international stage and all to further his own career.

I thought he said he wanted to wait for a UN report before taking or planning any action

 

[Devlish]

and there I was thinking they were supposed to be representatives of the people who elected them.

I'm sure 100% of dictators think they are doing what's best for the people even if it's not what the people want too.

Maybe if we weren't getting shafted on taxes , vat , councils face huge funding cuts and constantly being told we can't afford bla bla bla then people might think we could afford to throw 1.5million $ humanitarian missiles at another country so terrorists can take control and make an Islamic state

God, I despair, this isnt about whether your unemployment benefit goes down 2p, its about punishing the use of WMDs. Your islamic caliphate scaremongering smacks of excuses, fear and ignorance. But dont worry, theres a lot of you about so you;ll never be short of company.

Im not convinced youre not a troll as you keep on beating the same drum and refusing to accept information to the contrary of your daft statements, so I'll be ignoring most of your posts from now on.