Poll: Syrian Chemical Weapon Attack

[bitslice]

Sorry for butting in on your Scottish independence thread, but isn't the idea of a US missile strike just a token gesture? In that we don't want future governments pulling this chemical stunt on our troops, so we lob a few missiles at them and look stern.
I gather this strategy is no more important than that and does not imply any further involvement.

 

[Amp34]

Yup, just like in Afghanistan where the Taliban would hide in a house and push the kids outside to stop UK apaches opening up on them. No doubt Syrian forces have already moved military targets outside schools and mosques so they can cry "waaaah war crriminals" when they get blown up.

I doubt the rebels are much better in Syria, hiding amongst civilian populations is a standard tactic for rebels, especially those fighting in irregular units, without full uniforms like they are. The problem is it leaves a lot more damage to civilian populations as houses get bombed and civilians killed as a byproduct. For example I doubt Assad is intentionally attacking civilians*, however if rebels are integrated into towns then accidents happen, much like accidents caused in Afghanistan and Iraq by western forces, especially if you have less precision guided weapons.

*there is no evidence of genocide yet and it would be stupid to target your own civilians except for that as you end up with more rebels... It also means as the rebels are fighting regular units there will be less civilian casualties caused by the rebels.

 

[scorza]

Sorry for butting in on your Scottish independence thread, but isn't the idea of a US missile strike just a token gesture? In that we don't want future governments pulling this chemical stunt on our troops, so we lob a few missiles at them and look stern.
I gather this strategy is no more important than that and does not imply any further involvement.

That's pretty much my take, a US missile strike won't do anything to help the rebels and I'm pretty sure the US administration don't want it to, it's about Obama saving face. Hopefully the Syrians won't be daft enough to use CW after they've had their spanking, it'll be interesting to see what happens if they do and not in a good way.

 

[Amp34]

LoL, because an article by a media person is prove.


Such a good source, who has access to all information.

And how do you go from


To pictures of multiple shells, and delivered within a short time period over a largish area. Seeing as some of these are saying it was accidental mishandling. Mishandling doesn't leave shells lodged in the ground over a large area in a short time frame.

That doesn't mean that The US is correct. But your facts, is not facts at all. Do you always believe such a short article with no sources or evidence at all. Not even from anyone who would be privy to all the facts and intelligence.

While the shells do see like damming evidence apparently those shells are actually home made (by Syria) and designed to be used for conventional and unconventional warheads. Considering we (the public) have only seen a few photos of a few shells embedded into the ground (and the photos I've seen of the weapons inspectors only show them looking at those embedded as well), it could just be that some conventional warheads didn't go off, not particularly uncommon in an intense bombardment.

I'm sure that has been looked into and there are hundreds of shells embedded in the ground for a chemical weapons attack but we (or at least I), haven't seen images showing that yet.

 

[bitslice]

For example I doubt Assad is intentionally attacking civilians*


*there is no evidence of genocide yet and it would be stupid to target your own civilians except for that as you end up with more rebels... It also means as the rebels are fighting regular units there will be less civilian casualties caused by the rebels.

Well he has already?
His dad levelled a town when the Muslim brotherhood kicked off years ago, so when the Arab spring kicked off, he went full retard on a bunch of civilians hoping to quell the riot in the same fashion but it didn't work. Which is apparently how this whole civil war started.

Remember Assad is Alawite, the Syrian population are Sunni, everyone hates everyone.

 

[Castiel]

Yet we still sold them chemical during a civil war which was later banned by another establishment?

Such a resoundingly good get out clause.

What other Establishment?...it might have escaped your notice, but we are part of the EU establishment and were instrumental in the very embargo that halted such exports...and not only from Britain, but the other EU countries who also issue export liecences for Precursor Chemicals to Syria.

Besides nothing I have said is a "get out cause", only illustrating that you were wrong in your assumptions.

The fact is, unless the UK issued licences which broke international law or contravened the recent embargo then they have done nothing wrong and their is no evidence that has happened, in fact according to reports the licences issued stated the two chemicals exported were for very specific and civil industrial use and the licences were only issued for that purpose, not arms manufacture and were revoked when it was deemed there was a risk of them being used otherwise.

In fact the latest news states that the DBIS has said that the Sodium and Potassium Fluoride that the licences granted were never actually exported to Syria.

Tim Reid ‏@TimReidBBC

Department for Business says export licenses granted for potassium fluoride and sodium fluoride were never actually exported to #Syria

...............

Tim Reid ‏@TimReidBBC

UK govt denies claims chemicals exported after uprising in #Syria began could have been used in the production of agents such as sarin gas

 

[holymonk]

For gods sakes this thread is bad enough without all your scottish independance ****

Indeed, I say give Scotland their independence, they will never be able to afford it, will be a Greece within 3 years.

Stupid logchuckers.

 

[Amp34]

Well he has already?
His dad levelled a town when the Muslim brotherhood kicked off years ago, so when the Arab spring kicked off, he went full retard on a bunch of civilians hoping to quell the riot in the same fashion but it didn't work. Which is apparently how this whole civil war started.

Remember Assad is Alawite, the Syrian population are Sunni, everyone hates everyone.

Or to use the facts a different way. His dad did something decades ago, which is now being pinned on Assad (like father, like son) and he was heavy handed on a the protests, which is actually what happened. Being heavy handed against protesters is not the same as intentionally targetting civillians in a civil war.

If he's really into genocide he's a bit inept, especially considering the jihadists, with less resources have done better jobs against alawite villages... Then there's the point that it's not truly alawite vs Sunni, with reports suggesting the majority of Syrians supporting Assad over the rebels and jihadists, which is one of the reasons it's been going on like it has.

 

[do_ron_ron]

Or he's pointing out that the US are hypocrite and basically break the UN convention themselves anyway....

As much as we like to think we're the good guys we still do some nasty **** as well. I bet those several hundred people still in Guantanamo, who havent been in front of a judge, allowed to speak to lawyers or possibly even in a warzone when they were picked up (illegal rendition anyone...) wouldn't say we were the good guys. Or the innocent civilians caught in the crossfire of illegal drone attacks against people the US judge as unsavoury characters. (Of course they aren't allowed a trial, or even to explain their side of the argument....).

Did you forget the American chemical warfare in SE Asia. Agent Orange causing cancers and still causing birth defects.

 

[bitslice]

Being heavy handed against protesters is not the same as intentionally targeting civilians in a civil war.

At the start of this he made a big deal about he wasn't going to kill Syrians and that all the people fighting were external jihadists. This didn't appear to filter down into the army who went around killing everyone.

Then there's the point that it's not truly alawite vs Sunni, with reports suggesting the majority of Syrians supporting Assad over the rebels and jihadists, which is one of the reasons it's been going on like it has.

I'd agree with this as the people do seem stuck in the middle, notably the jihadists are after an Islamic state which I can't imagine any Syrian previously living in a secular state would be in favour of (pointless Islamic Sky Pixie differences aside).

This really doesn't look like a civil war to me, it looks more like **** stirring from interested parties using Syria as a stage, I really don't know why we are not assisting Assad against them (we support most dictators after all).

After all we sent help to the Libyan rebels, and the next day they trashed one of our war cemeteries
You can't trust muslims, they are entirely self interested small world peasants and will stab you in the back if it suits them.

 

[Troezar]

What this all boils down to is hypocrisy. We all know any actions will be for purely selfish national interests. Power comes from the money and the biggest guns. It's a function of who we allow to lead us and every dominant power has done similarly, for now it is the US. They are just better at spin than most

 

[Biohazard]

What other Establishment?...it might have escaped your notice, but we are part of the EU establishment and were instrumental in the very embargo that halted such exports...and not only from Britain, but the other EU countries who also issue export liecences for Precursor Chemicals to Syria.

The EU that the Tories want to leave while ripping up the Human Rights Act.

Yes.

Besides nothing I have said is a "get out cause", only illustrating that you were wrong in your assumptions.

What was wrong in there, sorry?

The fact is, unless the UK issued licences which broke international law or contravened the recent embargo then they have done nothing wrong and their is no evidence that has happened, in fact according to reports the licences issued stated the two chemicals exported were for very specific and civil industrial use and the licences were only issued for that purpose, not arms manufacture and were revoked when it was deemed there was a risk of them being used otherwise.

Done nothing wrong, you really believe that?

The specific use was to make window frames apparently. What was sent over was potent powdered versions of the chemicals.

I'd have just sent them the window frames instead.

In fact the latest news states that the DBIS has said that the Sodium and Potassium Fluoride that the licences granted were never actually exported to Syria.

That was confirmed months ago, it was the dates that were in doubt.

 

[Castiel]

The EU that the Tories want to leave while ripping up the Human Rights Act.

Yes.

The Tories do not want to leave the EU, they want to repatriate certain powers...in any case that makes no difference to the fact that the decision to have the embargo was made in agreement with the UK.

What was wrong in there, sorry?

Pretty much the entire argument you fabricated on the basis that the Precursor Chemicals required Military Licences.

Done nothing wrong, you really believe that?

Legally yes I do...There is no evidence to show otherwise.

The specific use was to make window frames apparently. What was sent over was potent powdered versions of the chemicals.

I'd have just sent them the window frames instead.

It would appear that nothing was actually sent at all....and if a Syrian company needs a chemical to produce their product why would they import the product?

What you personally would do is immaterial.

That was confirmed months ago, it was the dates that were in doubt.

So it was confirmed months ago that the Chemicals were never shipped in the first place and yet the SNP are accusing the Govt of doing so?....smart people in the SNP!!!

 

[Biohazard]

The Tories do not want to leave the EU, they want to repatriate certain powers...in any case that makes no difference to the fact that the decision to have the embargo was made in agreement with the UK.

Do you know what an 'in/out' referendum is?

Pretty much the entire argument you fabricated on the basis that the Precursor Chemicals required Military Licences.

Well if it wasn't, oh well. Chemical licenses then. Six and half a dozen, it's not the bit of paper I'm concerned with but the potential implications from the sale itself.

Legally yes I do...There is no evidence to show otherwise.

Legally done nothing wrong, what about ethically?

It would appear that nothing was actually sent at all....and if a Syrian company needs a chemical to produce their product why would they import the product?

What you personally would do is immaterial.

Have you got a link?

So it was confirmed months ago that the Chemicals were never shipped in the first place and yet the SNP are accusing the Govt of doing so?....smart people in the SNP!!!

No, apparently Westminster spokespeople acknowledged approving the export for sale. They just didn't want to tell anyone when it had happened.

I've not seen anything to suggest either way if the sale definitely took place or not because crucial details are being withheld apparently.

People do seem to think it's taken place, and even if it hasn't this is a bit of a blunder to put it lightly.

 

[StriderX]

The Circle Jerk has begun, hide yo' kids yo.

 

[V F]

Rap hands and nappy pants included?

 

[magick]

 

[gettothechopper]

lolzzzz

Infowars?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Hilarious

 

[Jono8]

Go here:

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/08/31/321425/us-revealed-as-enemy-of-world/

Many laughs to be had, especially the comments.

 

[Castiel]

Do you know what an 'in/out' referendum is?

Yes and are you aware that no such referendum has taken place? or that the Government do not actually support leaving the EU?

Well if it wasn't, oh well. Chemical licenses then. Six and half a dozen, it's not the bit of paper I'm concerned with but the potential implications from the sale itself.

Well being as the sale seems not to have actually happened, you have nothing to be concerned about.

Legally done nothing wrong, what about ethically?

I see no ethical argument to be had for issuing a licence under one situation and then revoking it when the situation changed.

Have you got a link?

The link is in the post..it came direct from the twitter feed of the BBC Correspondent quoted.

No, apparently Westminster spokespeople acknowledged approving the export for sale. They just didn't want to tell anyone when it had happened.

Hearsay at best and approving the export licence was not illegal or given the situation at the time particularly risky...again they were revoked only 6 months later when the embargo, which Britain voted for because the situation had changed was put into place.

I've not seen anything to suggest either way if the sale definitely took place or not because crucial details are being withheld apparently.

People do seem to think it's taken place, and even if it hasn't this is a bit of a blunder to put it lightly.

People with a political axe to grind..which is hardly the most objective of positions to agree with.

Personally this appears to be more about political infighting than the actual alleged sale, which if the sources quoted by the BBC are correct never even happened.