Syrian forces shell a third city.

Danthus

Danthus

Danthus

Permabanned
Joined
5 Jun 2010
Posts
15,459
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13358201

Syrian security forces are continuing their crackdown on anti-government protests across the country, with army tanks shelling the third city of Homs.

Several reports say the residential district of Bab Amro came under attack in the early hours of the morning.

Towns around Deraa in the south have been raided and a western suburb of the capital Damascus has been cut off.

Thousands have reportedly been arrested and hundreds killed in the crackdown.

The Syrian government insists it is pursuing "armed terrorist gangs".
Click to expand...

Why is the West allowing this to continue?
 
We always seem to suffer in the long term by helping others in the short.

We pick up the bill, we get the terrorist attacks, we get the responsability of care to asylum seekers.

It cant go on forever
 
well we can just sit back hassle gaddafi and let syria carry on with the killings... they now claim LOL

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13358201
Syrian security forces are continuing their crackdown on anti-government protests across the country, with army tanks shelling the third city of Homs.
Click to expand...

but they arent protestors they are
The Syrian government insists it is pursuing "armed terrorist gangs".

It says it has seized arms and ammunition as well as 150 motorbikes it says the "terrorists" were using to launch attacks.
Click to expand...

UN shows it cares
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called on Syria to take a softer line.

"I urge again President [Bashar al-]Assad to heed calls for reform and freedom and to desist from excessive force and mass arrest of peaceful demonstrators," he told journalists.

He said he was disappointed that Syria had not yet allowed an international aid assessment team access to Deraa, where the unrest began in March, despite assurances from Mr Assad.
Click to expand...

keep protecting those civilians..
 
It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation, what a lot of these countries are experiencing is pretty much a civil war, if we go in to these countries, sure we may stop the attacks and set up a new government, but we will have to be there forever as these things won't just go away as so many people naively believe. We can ask for these actions to stop, but we are doing so through the lens of our own country, we don't have the same motivations to begin an armed uprising in the west and unfortunately its one of the few ways of making change happen in these countries.
 
OldCoals said:
Why is the West allowing this to continue?
Click to expand...

Two reasons I would guess.

The first is because there is not local support to move against Syria, i.e. They haven't upset the Arab League enough to allow western intervention.

The second is because there is no strategic reason to intervene.

I seem to recall you being against the intervention in Libya, why are you for intervention in Syria?
 
OldCoals said:
Sanctions only impact upon the regular people, they have little effect on those in power.
Click to expand...

That depends on what sanctions you take and they are the only form of action available without going in and meddling with a country’s internal affairs. Would you rather there are no sanctions? I wonder what you would advocate in their place.
 
ubersonic said:
Nothing we can do, Syria isn't the run down joint Libya is, not counting nuclear capability the Syrian armed forces are a match for the UK's on paper, plus they have a lot of allies unlike Muammar nomates.
Click to expand...

They are not a match for the UK's military at all :/ Sure they have a lot of men but There Airforce and Navy are no match for ours.
 
Last edited:
RDM said:
Two reasons I would guess.

The first is because there is not local support to move against Syria, i.e. They haven't upset the Arab League enough to allow western intervention.

The second is because there is no strategic reason to intervene.

I seem to recall you being against the intervention in Libya, why are you for intervention in Syria?
Click to expand...

I was against the intervention in Libya, not because it was wrong full stop but because I thought, and events have somewhat backed me up, that it was not a humanitarian mission.

Now tanks shelling cities where there are civilians surely is a humanitarian issue, yes?
 
If we did interfere - enforcing a no-fly zone would be tricky. Don't Syria have one of the best air defence systems in the Arab League*?

*Not good enough to stop Israel bombing some key facilities but a lot better than Libya's
 
simulatorman said:
That depends on what sanctions you take and they are the only form of action available without going in and meddling with a country’s internal affairs. Would you rather there are no sanctions? I wonder what you would advocate in their place.
Click to expand...

An arms embargo, to late, they are using arms. Some bank accounts have been blocked, great, I am sure there are lots of others that haven't been. Certain named members of the Syrian leadership can not enter the EU either.

None of the above saves lives on the ground.
 
OldCoals said:
I was against the intervention in Libya, not because it was wrong full stop but because I thought, and events have somewhat backed me up, that it was not a humanitarian mission.

Now tanks shelling cities where there are civilians surely is a humanitarian issue, yes?
Click to expand...

wtf? is gaddafi not shelling his own people too?
 
OldCoals said:
I was against the intervention in Libya, not because it was wrong full stop but because I thought, and events have somewhat backed me up, that it was not a humanitarian mission.

Now tanks shelling cities where there are civilians surely is a humanitarian issue, yes?
Click to expand...

So what would you like to see us do? How do you think we should go about doing it without Arab League support? Do you feel that the intervention in Syria would turn out any better than the intervention in Libya?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom