Poll: Syrian Chemical Weapon Attack

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

  • Total voters
    828
  • Poll closed .
The boy has cried wolf, one too many times. America needs to do something to regain trust after all these false premises it's relied on to start war. And it needs to be action that doesn't involve agression. Violence begets more violence.
 
tdream said:
The boy has cried wolf, one too many times. America needs to do something to regain trust after all these false premises it's relied on to start war. And it needs to be action that doesn't involve agression. Violence begets more violence.
Click to expand...

How many times has the US used false premises to start a war?
 
RDM said:
How many times has the US used false premises to start a war?
Click to expand...

Libya (were only going to enforce a no fly zone to stop bombers killing civilians).
Iraq (They have WMD's and we have to stop them).
Afghanistan (Their running loads of Al-Qaeda training camps).

Only three off the top of my head, but as they are the last three wars the US was in you can understand why people are skeptical.
 
At the end of the day, if the objective is to save as many lives as possible then the money would be better spent on food/healthcare & infrastructure projects both domestically & internationally.

War has a poor lives saved per dollar value & call my cynical, but I don't believe for a second the USA is concerned with human rights abuses (when it's the very entity which engages in it when it suits it's agenda).

The UK & USA lack any international integrity & we need to stay out of global conflicts for the foreseeable future (with both of our historic of overthrowing democratically elected leaders/supplying terrorists & aiding the suppression of the local populations via arms sales).

If we want to really change the cultures of the world then how about we lead by example, become a beacon a genuine beacon of freedom & liberty - with low crime rates, low political corruption, good public health & a fulfilled happy population.
 
ubersonic said:
Libya (were only going to enforce a no fly zone to stop bombers killing civilians).
Iraq (They have WMD's and we have to stop them).
Afghanistan (Their running loads of Al-Qaeda training camps).

Only three off the top of my head, but as they are the last three wars the US was in you can understand why people are skeptical.
Click to expand...

There were loads of Al-Queda training camps in Afghanistan :confused:
 
scorza said:
There were loads of Al-Queda training camps in Afghanistan :confused:
Click to expand...

This belief is due to the USA muddying the waters between the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, and bundling every single insurgent into the same bag. Before the US invaded Afghanistan the were no Al-Qaeda training camps or the like, what the was were Taliban (the rulers of Afghanistan) training camps designed to build an Afghan army, and rebel (insurgent) camps.

Some members of Al-Qaeda may have been trained at Taliban/rebel camps however that is just the same as some mercenary's having been trained at TA or USMC camps.
 
ubersonic said:
This belief is due to the USA muddying the waters between the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, and bundling every single insurgent into the same bag. Before the US invaded Afghanistan the were no Al-Qaeda training camps or the like, what the was were Taliban (the rulers of Afghanistan) training camps designed to build an Afghan army, and rebel (insurgent) camps.

Some members of Al-Qaeda may have been trained at Taliban/rebel camps however that is just the same as some mercenary's having been trained at TA or USMC camps.
Click to expand...

Erm no, they were Al-Queda training camps although it's true that the Taliban and Al-Queda were closely integrated - AQ even let the Taliban use their own suicide bombers. What do you think OBL was doing there? Skiing holiday?
 
scorza said:
Russians spouting more nonsense I'd say. Let me guess, there's a video on ******** explaining how the US is delivering chemical weapons to Al-Queda in Syria via sub-launched ballistic missiles.
Click to expand...


Well the UK have 100% exported chemicals that can make weapons to Syria and this is how the US know that chemical weapons are there ;)
 
There's no explosion/impact because the sub missiles broke up in mid air to reveal James Bond on a rocket pack :D


deuse said:
Well the UK have 100% exported chemicals that can make weapons to Syria and this is how the US know that chemical weapons are there ;)
Click to expand...

I could call up Tesco/Iceland right now and have them export chemicals to my house that could be used to easily make chemical weapons, that's how absurd the news story on the UK-Syria sales is :P
 
ennogs said:
From steve55 on another thread

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kz-s2AAh06I

France's Former Foreign Minister: UK Government Prepared War in Syria Two Years Before 2011 Protests

France's Former Foreign Minister, Roland Dumas, has stated in a televised program on LCP that UK government officials had told him about preparations for war in Syria two years prior to the start of the 2011 protests and conflict. The reason given for this war is the Syrian government's anti-Israel stance that made Syria a target for Western-backed regime change.
Click to expand...

Thanks hadn't seen that, no surprise at all though our ***** love the er great game.
 
ennogs said:
How do we know he used them?

America lied to get the gulf war started. This lie was repeated to the to the American congress, the United Nations and repeated by many news outlets around the world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmfVs3WaE9Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b56UVnc_M7o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKIjk-RJWuw

So if they lied about Iraqi soldiers taking babies out of incubators and leaving them to die whose to say they did not lie at that time about Saddam using chemical weapons.
Click to expand...

It is well documented..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_poison_gas_attack
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom