Chesterfield Online Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Fly on August 24, 2013, 08:27:03 PM
-
Yes I can think of a few people I'd like to nuke. Joke, perhaps just a few people I don't have the time of day for.
But chemical bombings, just how deluded are some of the people running countries that could do that.
The country will always deny it and say its a splinter group.
Who's funding the splinter group ??
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/24/syrian-chemical-weapons-rebel (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/24/syrian-chemical-weapons-rebel)
-
I've been following this Fly. What kind of humans would do this. Did anyone else watch ITV news at 6pm yesterday? One of the shots was a woman and young child with heads covered. Twice during this shot I am sure I saw the child slightly move it's arm? It bothered me so much I watched news at 10pm but they didn't show the clip again. America seems to be dragging it's heels on this one
-
Did USA care about child victims when they nuked Japan in WW2? Did the allies care about child victims when Iraq was bombed?
-
Did USA care about child victims when they nuked Japan in WW2
Same 'care' Japan had when they bombed Pearl Harbour. Not saying retaliation on that scale is right.
I'm just hoping no one fires on Syria. Don't think it's our business to jump in.
IMHO
-
Looking as if they are weighing up the options of the best way to have a pop at them.
It's not helped that the UN team have been shot at en route to where the C/W landed - if that's what they were.
Russia's growling at us to back off.
-
I think it's a question of degree. Apparently we can live with tens of thousands of innocent men, women and kids being slaughtered, but are we OK with hundreds of thousands?
-
Who's biggest, who's hardest.
Japan bomb Pearl Harbour, USA say right batsards, learn a lesson, job done.
Syrian Government throw chemical weapons against Syrian rebels, and kill innocent Syrians.
So who are the USA and UK going to fire against, the Syrian government and more innocent Syrians.
Therefore doing what the Syrian rebels want to do, over throw the government.
Quick, someone put me right, are the rebels right and the government so corrupt ?
-
I think that question is for the experts. I was just pointing out that there comes a point when we cannot stand on the sidelines and watch genocide take place.
I would have hoped that some bright person would have hatched a plan to have Assad popped off. I'll reserve judgement on who was sniping at the UN inspectors. Again, it's most likely the be Assad's lot - but the opposition could have engineered the situation.
As to your last point, I am not sure about both sides, but there will come a time when, if the International community does not do something, it will be millions dying.
-
My post wasn't aimed at your last post Pete, just the thread in general ;)
You make some good points in your reply.
If the International community does not do something, it will be millions dying
Then let the UN decide that. Not the USA or UK.
-
I have heard on the news that the rebels also have some chemical weapons, which is the governments argument in Syria, it has been suggested that the rebels have turned on their own thus making others think it must be the government.
The last news update I heard on this was it was 'a possibility that direct strikes at the government may take place to wipe it out.
I think the USA were to issue a statement around 7pm our time but I haven't watched the news since 6pm
-
Its delicate this one, but surely something needs to be done. The entire UN need to be together on this including Russia & China. Humanitarian aid more than anything to stop civilian killing.
The entire world needs to sort this out, not just UK & USA, who have failed in every conflict they have been involved in. It needs a worldwide involvement to make Syria safe. We can't just start bombing them indiscriminatly not knowing who we are killing, and then start talking afterwards.
We need a unilateral (global) agreement for armies & humanitarian help to go there.
How many times have we seen other countries help us though when we believe we are "doing the right thing" Ultimately we have come out of these conflicts with no actual progress.
It's time we sat back a bit to see what the rest of the world thinks before we wade in with our "diminishing" & overworked armed forces. UK is not the World Police :(
-
Check this out.
Busted! U.S. Backs False Flag Chemical Attack in Syria! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xrxl8nA9Arg#)
-
Anything is possible so I wouldn't discount it Pete, haven't had chance to get up to date with the situation today
-
>> haven't had chance to get up to date with the situation today
I think we're going to war again. I think Obama is scheduled to make his intentions known this week - and Cameron is bringing all MPs back to Parliament on Thursday to debate the situation.
My opinion? I think America will go in - and we will follow them, again...
-
One of these days we are going to get on big back lash from a country business! our government have stuck their beaks in!
-
So wrong to go wading in. Sources can't even decide who sent the chemical weapons.
Latest I saw is US gave the rebels weapons, so they, the US, can blame the Syrian Gov.
-
The reason I posted about seeing the child move an arm was because I wasn't sure if some of the filming was rigged, although some parts I have to admit were obviously not
-
Isn't war peculiar? If we go into this against Assad, we'll be on the same side as Al Qa'ida.
-
My opinion? I think America will go in - and we will follow them, again...
I've got an idea, so people know where they are when they enter the UK, why don't we have signs at all ports/airports etc that state:
"Welcome to the UK, a wholly owned subsidiary of the United States of America (Have a nice day)"?
-
Looks like labour may stand against the government in this.
I think what they are saying makes sense, which is wait until all findings from UN are in before they vote
Whats the rush?
-
I say back off. What's the reason to plough in ? what aren't they telling us.
You can't just bomb a country when you don't know what side to bomb !!!!!!!!!!!!
-
If they took out Assad there is no one to take control - be worse than ever then.
America seems to be in the same rush.
-
I'm afraid the Americans like wars in other countries - it makes the few at the top very, very rich men.
-
Saw this online this morning:
"I am totally opposed to intervening in Syria, it would lead to a Middle East war. Chemicals are just another weapon that kill people. Don't bombs kill people? Don't 'Cruise Missiles' kill people? If America and Britain defy the UN then it will lead to a greater conflict." Tony Benn
Also, someone commenting on Cameron's idea that they will only bomb factories, laboratories and stockpiles, etc doesn't take into account what happens when you blow up a few tons of lethal chemicals...
Just a thought.
-
The more I read about this, the worse I feel. I fear any military intervention by the West will ultimately upset delicate Middle East tensions,as well as Russia now sending in the big guns as well.
I know we all like to be humanitarian, and abhor suffering of any sort, but I can't see any proposed military intervention by UK/USA/Turkey/France etc doing anything on a "humanitarian" level. We would just attack them and kill even more people FFS! This would give other Middle eastern countries the chance to "engage" with each other,worsening what is already a catastrophic situation.http://www.timesofisrael.com/russia-sends-at-least-12-warships-to-syria/ (http://www.timesofisrael.com/russia-sends-at-least-12-warships-to-syria/)
Maybe the "sabre rattling" of Cameron/Obama should have been enough. Not a chance in hell.
If Russia has sent so many warships to the region, who do you think they will point their missiles at?
It won't be Syria, but it might just be our sevicemen, pilots & navy - they warned us off but we don't seem to be able to hear. I, for one do not like the way this could go :(
-
Just for the record, I'm totally 100% against any military action towards Syria.
-
Here's another bloody silly thought, how many top tories have shares in oil companies ?
Apparently the price is soaring as the threat of military action looms.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/10270895/Oil-shares-rise-and-airlines-stocks-fall-on-Syria-tensions.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/10270895/Oil-shares-rise-and-airlines-stocks-fall-on-Syria-tensions.html)
-
I certainly don't agree with it even though they are telling us that it will be a one off strike - I doubt it.
What then will it bring from Russia who are gathering some ships to 'protect their interests' this is seen as threatening by the US.
Whilst the UK is gathering it's forces in Cyprus - to 'protect our interests'
So then what is US proposal of a one off strike if not threatening
There wil be more than the Syrian civilians needing gas masks if someone doesn't get to grips with this..
-
Here's a good read. It also explains why Russia are sitting back.
Billions of pounds of weapons that they sell Syria's Assad regime.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/61461/syria-facts-the-complete-guide-to-all-the-global-players-involved-in-the-syrian-conflict (http://www.policymic.com/articles/61461/syria-facts-the-complete-guide-to-all-the-global-players-involved-in-the-syrian-conflict)
-
kin stupid. !
-
Good !
-
It's time Parliament found a voice.
Well done to Milliband for speaking common sense.
-
We are in UN, NATO and EU so why is it us alone that gets dragged into conflicts with USA. Horrible though it is in Syria it's a civil war so it's not our place to take sides. In some ways the rebels are the same groups that we've fought against in other parts of the Middle East.
-
My last couple of posts were after hearing the votes in parliament last night. ;D
I'm not smiling now I've just read this.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/30/white-house-syria-intelligence-air-strikes (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/30/white-house-syria-intelligence-air-strikes)
Does Obama think he's got to make himself look as big as Bush by firing a few weapons ??
-
Just had a quick read from Fly's link - and this paragraph stood out:
"The British vote, which came despite a strong plea from prime minister David Cameron to back any US military action, emboldened congressional critics of the administration, who are now calling for a similar vote before force is authorised. According to an NBC poll, almost 80% of Americans believe Obama should get congressional authorisation before using force in Syria, while 50% were completely opposed to a military strike."
So the average American is not 100% behind their President...
Who knows, having shown that the Labour Party and the average Brit are not behind Cameron - we might show that we have the guts to stand up to the American elite (who will make money out of a war) and give folks in other countries the support and encouragment to stand up for common sense.
This is good. We should be looking at humanitarian aid for the wounded and dispossessed Syrian people not looking to start another war.
Right. Now lets look at this so-called Special Relationship b*ll*cks. What exactly do we get from it? Do our arms producers get preference? Does our prime minister get anything back?
I don't know.
Anybody?
-
Poached this from Wikipedia
The two nations are bound together by shared history, an overlap in religion and a common language and legal system, and kinship ties that reach back hundreds of years, including kindred, ancestral lines among English Americans, Scottish Americans, Welsh Americans, and Scotch-Irish Americans.
Through times of war and rebellion, peace and estrangement, as well as becoming friends and allies, the UK and the USA cemented these deeply rooted links during World War II into what is known as the "Special Relationship", described in 2009 by British political commentator Christiane Amanpour as "the key trans-Atlantic alliance",[1] which the U.S. Senate Chair on European Affairs acknowledged in 2010 as "one of the cornerstones of stability around the world."[2]
Today, the relationship with the United States represents the "most important bilateral partnership" in current British foreign policy,[3] and the American foreign policy affirms its relationship with the United Kingdom as its most important bilateral relationship,[4][5] as evidenced in aligned political affairs, mutual cooperation in the areas of trade, commerce, finance, technology, academics, as well as the arts and sciences; the sharing of government and military intelligence, and joint combat operations and peacekeeping missions carried out between the United States Armed Forces and the British Armed Forces. The UK has always been the biggest foreign investor in the USA and vice versa.
The two countries combined make up a huge percentage of world trade, a significant impact of the cultures of many other countries and territories, and are the largest economies and the most populous nodes of the Anglosphere, with a combined population of over 370 million as of 2010. Together, they have given the English language a dominant role in many sectors of the modern world.
There is a maritime boundary between the British dependent territories of the British Virgin Islands and Anguilla, and the United States' dependent territories of the US Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico.[6][7]
According to a 2013 BBC World Service Poll, 74% of Americans view the United Kingdom positively, with only 14% expressing a negative view. However, British views of the U.S. are much more sharply divided, with 46% viewing the U.S. positively and 46% viewing the U.S. negatively.[8]
-
Just a thought - from someone who knows...
(http://www.ichesterfield.co.uk/images/war.jpg)
-
God bless America and all who fail in her.
http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-obama-speaks-on-syria-in-rose-garden-20130831,0,6962620.story (http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-obama-speaks-on-syria-in-rose-garden-20130831,0,6962620.story)
I also think 'The Sun' should hang it's head in shame for today's headline.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/5107363/France-takes-Britains-place-as-Americas-closest-ally.html (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/5107363/France-takes-Britains-place-as-Americas-closest-ally.html)
-
Take no notice Fly, it's just Rupert Murdoch throwing his doll out of the pram - he's still hurting from us kicking his fat Australian ass. :)
There is an easy way to stop stuff like that winding you up - don't read the Sun or visit it's website - bag a shite anyway, will probably close down when Page 3 drops its tits... :))
-
don't read the Sun or visit it's website - bag a shite anyway
Got to buy it on a Saturday ;)
Our_Lass likes the telly mag ;D Not disrespecting Our_lass :-*
Other than that, I don't buy any newspapers. Apart from the DT to see whose passed away locally.
My posts on here have always been my 'my' own. If I don't like, or do like, I post. Regardless of where from.
Just hope I don't switch the lappy on in the morning and find the US has 'hit' Syria :(
-
I watched Obama live on tv this afternoon and he said he was going to put it to Congress before he starts on Syria - a few days away.
-
http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-obama-speaks-on-syria-in-rose-garden-20130831,0,6962620.story (http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-obama-speaks-on-syria-in-rose-garden-20130831,0,6962620.story)
The link was in one of my recent previous posts.
-
You should have made it clear in your post what it was about.
-
Two questions have been ringing in my head today as I read various articles about Syria:
1. Why would Syria’s Assad invite United Nations chemical weapons inspectors to Syria, then launch a chemical weapons attack against women and children on the very day they arrive, just miles from where they are staying?
2. If Assad were going to use chemical weapons, wouldn’t he use them against the hired mercenary army trying to oust him? What does he gain attacking women and children? Nothing! The gain is all on the side of the US Government desperate to get the war agenda going again.
http://chesterfieldonline.org/index.php/topic,3649.msg24278.html#msg24278 (http://chesterfieldonline.org/index.php/topic,3649.msg24278.html#msg24278)
Did anyone watch this?
-
Nothing woud surprise me Pete.
There is so much behind the scenes which we don't know about and never will.
When are congress due to get together, not really heard much of the news today apart from France saying they can't do it alone.
I believe it's been said that even if the evidence is stacked up against Assad our Parliament won't be asked to vote again - anyone else heard this.
A bit off topic but OH read out a news report from his phone about a cargo ship being fired at from Egypt whilst going through the Suez Canal -?
-
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say, in my humble opinion, it is Israel and the US that are behind this propaganda that we in the West are swallowing hook line and sinker.
I've spent the last few days reading about the background to this situation and it can be traced back to an agenda laid out by Israel and mimicked by the US industrial/Military Complex many years ago. The destabilisation of Syria is high on that agenda. The US component of this plan is evidenced/typified by the Daily Mail clip I posted earlier on in this thread.
The US have planned every detail and brought most of the plan to fruition. And I think Obama is aware of this, but it is too big even for the President of the USA to do anything except to go along with it.
IMHO of course.
-
it is Israel and the US that are behind this
I didn't think the USA and Israel were the bestist of friends.
Guess this story proved me wrong. >>Israel has carried out a joint missile test with the US in the Mediterranean<<
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23947354 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23947354)
It's obviously Syria the USA have problems with. Congress haven't met and voted yet,
but some top >>US Lawmakers Voice Support for Syria Strike<<
http://www.voanews.com/content/top-us-lawmakers-voice-support-for-syria-strike/1742507.html (http://www.voanews.com/content/top-us-lawmakers-voice-support-for-syria-strike/1742507.html)
-
Beat me to it there Fly - maybe Russia knows something we don't :? ;)
-
Russia's selling billions of pounds worth of weapons to the Syrian Gov OC.
That's why they don't want the US to start.
I posted a link in an earlier post about who's up to what ;)
-
This video is by Wesley Clark, retired American four-star general and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander. He talks about the plan I mentioned above.
Wes Clark - America's Foreign Policy "Coup" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TY2DKzastu8#)
-
Just what I was getting at in that clip Pete - there is 'something' we do not know -
I've had an email from an ex servive man today - saying exactly the same thing.
Is it because he doesn't want to have egg on his face again
Or was the vote really to his liking underneath his warrior face?
Russia - well they are now saying they will join in any action with the UN's approval once proof is there that assad did this - only he knows that proof will not be there as the UN inspectors did not go into Syria to gain it.
Crafty eh
-
There is so much none of us will ever know OC - but it won't stop me ranting about it...
-
Interesting link from Twitter today about America's use of chemical weapons in various wars and against its own people. Put this in your pipe and smoke it, Obama.
http://bit.ly/18y8wbQ (http://bit.ly/18y8wbQ)
-
I notice the last was in 2009 so not that long ago.
I Really don't know where this will end.
-
>> I Really don't know where this will end.
If Obama and Cameron have their way? World War 3.
-
Quote of the week from Obama:
"Delivering chemical weapons against children is not something we do. It's prohibited in active wars between countries. We certainly don't do it against kids."
http://bit.ly/18y8wbQ (http://bit.ly/18y8wbQ)
-
I read an interesting article last week where it was claimed that Milliband was following the 'Blair Doctrine' when it came to making decisions like these.
The 'Blair Doctrine' being to think 'what would Tony have done' and then to do the total opposite!!!
-
Russia asks Assad to give up chemical weapons arsenal to save western intervention.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/syria-russia-urges-ally-give-2262715 (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/syria-russia-urges-ally-give-2262715)
Is this the same Russia that is/was selling Syria missiles ??
-
Here's one for ya - we sold the chemicals to Assad to make chemical weapons after the conflict had begun.
Vince Cable has been caught bang to rights on this - expect more over the next few days...
What with Cameron wanting to attack asap and the news that we supplied the chemicals to make the chemical weapons - aren't we a caring sharing nation? Nearly as bad as the Yanks.
-
If that's right, it's sick !!
-
Things are moving swiftly at the moment with Syria agreeing to letting the UN take control of their C/W?
We will see
-
They are starting to destroy and dismantle the chemical's - lets hope in the time it's taken they have not stashed some elsewhere
-
Yeah, me too OC. But it is nice to see that we and the US didn't have to start throwing bombs and missiles about.
Not that I trust anybody on any side... :(