August 28, 201312 yr Communists all of you! Can anyone explain to me what the events in Syria has to do with UK. Why is it that UK had to propose the UN resolution, and not Turkey, Iceland, New Zealand or Zanzibar? Why does UK have to take military action but not the Russians, Pakistan or Libya? I don't get it. What am I missing?
August 28, 201312 yr Communists all of you! Can anyone explain to me what the events in Syria has to do with UK. Why is it that UK had to propose the UN resolution, and not Turkey, Iceland, New Zealand or Zanzibar? Why does UK have to take military action but not the Russians, Pakistan or Libya? I don't get it. What am I missing? Its all starting to sound a bit familiar, much like the lead up to the Iraq war when the UN inspectors were inspecting possible WMD sites. We and the Yanks were second guessing the results while preparing for action, whilst lying to Parliament and the British public.
August 28, 201312 yr Author Can anyone explain to me what the events in Syria has to do with UK It's quite simply the UK's continuing delusions of grandeur, an inheritance from our days of empire. Too many cannot accept that we are now only just about a first world nation and a minor one at that. As such we should behave no differently than the likes of Italy, Denmark, Sweden etc. France still suffers a little of the same, not as bad as us, but still enough to be currently engaged in military action in Mali and making pronouncements about Syria. It's those same delusions of grandeur that make our politicians want Trident missile submarines and two aircraft carriers when other countries our size and larger have no such desires. . Edited August 28, 201312 yr by flecc
August 28, 201312 yr Communists all of you! Can anyone explain to me what the events in Syria has to do with UK. Why is it that UK had to propose the UN resolution, and not Turkey, Iceland, New Zealand or Zanzibar? Why does UK have to take military action but not the Russians, Pakistan or Libya? I don't get it. What am I missing? Maybe, thankfully, we Brits just have a stronger sense of what is wrong and what is right and are not afraid to 'stand up and be counted' when the situation dictates......and using chemical weapons on innocent people including children is patently not right......and your own people at that..... A difficult situation....but.... What else would a civilised country be expected to do .......just stand by and watch even more women and children being massacred in such a cold blooded horrendous way ? Lynda
August 28, 201312 yr Communists all of you! Can anyone explain to me what the events in Syria has to do with UK. Why is it that UK had to propose the UN resolution, and not Turkey, Iceland, New Zealand or Zanzibar? Why does UK have to take military action but not the Russians, Pakistan or Libya? I don't get it. What am I missing? No other country is thick enough to let in just about every asylum seeker going so the MPs looking at who is living in the area they look after are seeing protests and marches and junk to do with stuff not even in this country. Living in london it is hard to find a day you can't go to parliment square and the surrounding roads to find a few hundered people waving banners about russia/syria/iran/iraq/turkey/africa/ect and that the uk should step in to help somehow. The point that people waving banners about 0 hours contracts or another issue we have in the uk near a middle east goverment building might get them shot at is kinda missed by many.
August 28, 201312 yr Author What else would a civilised country be expected to do ....... Lynda Just do what we are entitled to do, run our own country. What happens internationally is the business of international organisations like the UN and UNESCO, and the expression of our conscience should take the form of strengthening those, helping them to work better.
August 29, 201312 yr One of the largest sectors of manufacturing ( and exporting) in the UK is "defence", possibly second only to the financial sector. The parliamentarians who hold shares in, and hold board positions on the likes of BAE Systems will pave the way to UK involvement, sooner or later, directly or indirectly. The Arab Gulf States are ruled variously by Shia or Sunni Muslims. Both of whom consider each other to be apostates and blasphemers...the penalty for both "crimes" being death. Even as we discuss the developing situation, envoys from oil-rich Saudi Arabia (Sunni Muslims) will be busy issuing veiled threats of reducing oil production if the West does not do their dirty work for them....annihilating the Shia Muslims, of which, President Assad of Syria is a prominent member. Whenever we hear calls from Middle East states for "democracy", what we are really witnessing is a call for Western support in ensuring one particular tribe gets the upper hand....look what is happening in Egypt. Ordinary folks such as ourselves, will say "stay out of it, let them fight it out among themselves". Unfortunately, we live in a world ruled by oil, money and utterly corrupt and morally bankrupt politicians, fairness for all of humanity is not part of their remit.
August 29, 201312 yr I think we are all missing the point. We're British, demmit. We have an innate understanding of what's best for everybody, and the proper way to do things. Now, recently, times have been a little hard, and we have had to loosen our grip on world affairs somewhat, but rest assured we do know what's best, and we will continue to point out to every Johnny Foreigner that they need to do things our way or not at all. Dem good job we're still on the Security Council - wouldn't be there without those half a dozen nukes and aircraft carriers, even without flying machines! Now please stand for the National Anthem... Sent from my LT26i using Tapatalk 4
August 29, 201312 yr Just do what we are entitled to do, run our own country. What happens internationally is the business of international organisations like the UN and UNESCO, and the expression of our conscience should take the form of strengthening those, helping them to work better. Well, exactly. Look at how well it turned out in Rwanda, for example. Just let them get on with it, I say.
August 29, 201312 yr I think we are all missing the point. We're British, demmit. We have an innate understanding of what's best for everybody, and the proper way to do things. Now, recently, times have been a little hard, and we have had to loosen our grip on world affairs somewhat, but rest assured we do know what's best, and we will continue to point out to every Johnny Foreigner that they need to do things our way or not at all. Dem good job we're still on the Security Council - wouldn't be there without those half a dozen nukes and aircraft carriers, even without flying machines! Now please stand for the National Anthem... Sent from my LT26i using Tapatalk 4 Of coarse you are right, but now days we wait until our President, who ever he maybe, makes his mind up and then we loyally agree, even if we don't and then go forth into the darkness to complete one's mission for Queen, Country, and the special relationship., Edited August 29, 201312 yr by jazper53
August 29, 201312 yr Unfortunately, we live in a world ruled by oil, money and utterly corrupt and morally bankrupt politicians, fairness for all of humanity is not part of their remit. Having watched Zeitgeist a few times, nothing surprises me. Anyone who has seen it may probably be thinking what I'm thinking. (shakes head) Surely not?
August 29, 201312 yr Surprise, surprise! A certain aircraft built by Lockheed, equipped with drop-tanks, has just flown quietly over my house. No mistaking that enormous wingspan.
August 29, 201312 yr Can't wait to see Dave leading all the Tory War-mongers into battle on his bike, not daring to look back in case nobody is following ...
August 30, 201312 yr An outbreak of common sense? Incredibly, the governments amended motion was defeated:eek: I would like to think that we (and politicians?) have learnt the lessons from the sexed up propaganda of the Iraq farrago.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23892783 And that doesn't mean I don't care that people are being gassed by their own - it just means that I would like to know for sure who did what to whom before joining the rush to bang heads. The cynic in me can't help thinking that such noble sentiments didn't play that much of a part in the decision by some MPs to vote against the motion:( Edited August 30, 201312 yr by peerjay56
August 30, 201312 yr The darkest places in Hell are reserved for those who remain neutral in times of crisis.
August 30, 201312 yr Incredibly, the governments amended motion was defeated:eek: I would like to think that we (and politicians?) have learnt the lessons from the sexed up propaganda of the Iraq farrago.BBC News - Syria crisis: Cameron loses Commons vote on Syria action And that doesn't mean I don't care that people are being gassed by their own - it just means that I would like to know for sure who did what to whom before joining the rush to bang heads. The cynic in me can't help thinking that such noble sentiments didn't play that much of a part in the decision by some MPs to vote against the motion:( is a death by gas any more cruel than death by other weapons? People who make moral judgement should also experience reality of war. There are no winners, only losers in the battlefield. Conflicts are usually about land and natural resources and the winners are big businesses. Syria's dividing line between the two warring factions is religious. Take religion out of politics or convert to science (as religion) and we will all live a more peaceful life.
August 30, 201312 yr Author Syria's dividing line between the two warring factions is religious. Exactly, all of the Arab Middle East's current disturbances are Sunni versus Shia conflicts. The daily bombs killing hundreds every month in Iraq are just that, and all because we got rid of the one strong man preventing it, Saddam Hussein. And our solution to Syria? Get rid of their strong man, Bashar al-Assad. How clever, if we succeed Syria will be the next place suffering permanent conflict, Iraq style.
August 30, 201312 yr Even the weather forecast said it would be Sunni this morning but turning Shi'ite in the afternoon. Conflict everywhere.
August 30, 201312 yr and all because we got rid of the one strong man preventing it, Saddam Hussein. . You are bloody joking flecc arent you...... do you mean the same 'strong' man who was gassing his own people in the north of the country ??? Not that Ive really got the time to enter into a long drawn out discussion on it but the way that man treat his own people just makes my blood boil especially when you are referring to him as a strong man as if that was to be somehow applauded when we all know what sort of a despot he was.. Sorry....gotta go.....cheese scones in oven and nearly ready....back later lol Lynda
August 30, 201312 yr I don't think that flecc wants to keep SH. Often our politicians only look at the 'national interests', in other words, short term moves, no exit strategy. Hence the cure is worse than the disease. Conflicts are necessary, borders need redrawing now and then but one thing remains constant: big business wins everytime and I am fed up with it. It may take another generation or two before the remaining two thirds of the world are lifted from starvation and ignorance, the two things that fuel conflicts.
August 30, 201312 yr Author You are bloody joking flecc arent you...... do you mean the same 'strong' man who was gassing his own people in the north of the country ??? Lynda I'm not joking Lynda. Many nations are unsuited to democracy, and that is especially true of Islamic nations since Islam and democracy are not easily reconciled. In countries with serious potential internal problems like a mixed Sunni/Shia population, only a strong leader can prevent trouble. Saddam Hussein for the whole of his rule prevented any conflict between these two factions and also wouldn't allow Al Qaeda or any other terrorist faction to get a foothold. The cost of a strong leader is harsh policy enforcement, but this is very short term so has one-time limited consequences. The cost of no strong leader in such countries is ongoing conflict and deaths that will total far more over time as Iraq has shown ever since the West's bungled interference and attempt to enforce democracy. As for the wider issue of the gassing of the Kurds, Saddam as an Army officer learnt his military craft from Britain and no doubt was well aware of British history in his area. He knew that when we set the borders of the area in 1922 and the Kurds demonstrated against that, we ordered in the RAF to bomb them with mustard gas to stop their rebellion, their first bombing action post WW1. So when Saddam had the same trouble with the Kurds, he knew exactly what to do, he bombed them with mustard gas. Note, when he bombed the Kurds, our prior bombing was in living memory. Our dishonest politicians either do not know that or attempt to hide it from us, but a few like me do know our history of British international criminality. We are not in a position to lecture on this subject. . Edited August 30, 201312 yr by flecc
August 30, 201312 yr Many nations are unsuited to democracy, and that is especially true of Islamic nations since Islam and democracy are not easily reconciled. Malaysia, the Maldives, Turkey are examples of Islamic democracies.
August 30, 201312 yr Malaysia, the Maldives, Turkey are examples of Islamic democracies. True...... but all with pretty horrific human rights records
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.