So, this Syria thing...

[Mrk]

It was about military action - it was in the actual wording of the motion.

I could have worded that better - it wouldn't result in military action, as a second vote would have been held.

 

[Bigloco]

The yanks and israelis are behind it imo.

I find it amazing that, after obama has been stating the chemical weapons would be "crossing the red line" that assad would then casually use them on a civilian area.

The yanks are desperate to get in there and this just happens to be how they will do it.

Well done wimpy miliband for making sure we are not part of it. I still think that cameron will get us in there somehow though.

There is no consensus in the US for military action. Obama is the most left leaning president we've had in a long time. CNN article showing the voice of reason to be the right: Obama, don't rush!


From everything I've read, Israel would much rather have Assad in power than Islamists.

 

[Bigloco]

I'd just like to add...that if the US couldn't (or wouldn't) manufacture some WMD's to spread around in Iraq thereby justifying our use of force (and under Bush/Cheney of all people) we sure as snot aren't going to be launching chemical weapons into Syria.

That makes no sense and its definitely tin foil hat territory.

 

[Ratkiller]

There is no consensus in the US for military action. Obama is the most left leaning president we've had in a long time. CNN article showing the voice of reason to be the right: Obama, don't rush!


From everything I've read, Israel would much rather have Assad in power than Islamists.

If I remember correctly Obama killed more people in drone and missile strikes in his first 8 months than Bush did in his whole reign.

Left leaning president.

 

[edge]

couple of things about all this just dont add up, why were we going to take action before we had any concrete proof ?.................why would assat set off chemical weapons, when his side is finally winning the war,and pick the very moment the weapons inspectors were there to do it, knowing full well that it would bring action agaist him, he has nothing to gain lots to lose?....................................Who was sniping at the inspectors to keep them out of the areas they wanted to inspect?To many grey areas we did the right thing not getting into this mess.

 

[Allezfan]

There is no consensus in the US for military action. Obama is the most left leaning president we've had in a long time. CNN article showing the voice of reason to be the right: Obama, don't rush!


From everything I've read, Israel would much rather have Assad in power than Islamists.

Obama's about as left leaning as Mussolini.

 

[Bigloco]

Obama's about as left leaning as Mussolini.

Or Stalin?

edit: I'm not really comparing him to Stalin...I should have said, "most political pundits say Obama is the most left leaning president since Carter" or something to that extent. I really hate "right" and "left" labels as I don't really think there's much difference between them.

 

[Allezfan]

I just despise obama, if I'm honest.

But this isn't the forum for that.

 

[Mrk]

Or Stalin?

edit: I'm not really comparing him to Stalin...I should have said, "most political pundits say Obama is the most left leaning president since Carter" or something to that extent. I really hate "right" and "left" labels as I don't really think there's much difference between them.

In the US, he's left-leaning, in the UK on most issues he'd still be considered to the right of our conservatives.

 

[evilwebby]

Obama has brought right into the Krugman philosophy that war is good for the economy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/28/paul-krugman-spending_n_984921.html

Scary that this is how policy-makers think.

 

[davek]

John Kerry speaking now about the evidence - talks a good talk, zero concrete facts.

The new Colin Powell.

 

[Tubey]

Listening to John Kerry now on Sky News.

On the surface, I agree 100% with what he's saying and I'm pretty ashamed with how we've responded as a country to this. Chemical weapons should not be tolerated by our parliament, basically "see no evil, hear no evil". Short term cowardice from single-minded politicians, scared of Iraq 2.

Problem is, the cynic in me wonders if I'm hearing the real reasons for the US urgency for military action.

John Kerry speaking now about the evidence - talks a good talk, zero concrete facts.

The new Colin Powell.

Sort of... But he's right too. We're endorsing chemical weapons via silence, there's no denying that.

 

[davek]

Listening to John Kerry now on Sky News.

On the surface, I agree 100% with what he's saying and I'm pretty ashamed with how we've responded as a country to this. Chemical weapons should not be tolerated by our parliament, basically "see no evil, hear no evil". Short term cowardice from single-minded politicians, scared of Iraq 2.

Problem is, the cynic in me wonders if I'm hearing the real reasons for the US urgency for military action.



Sort of... But he's right too. We're endorsing chemical weapons via silence, there's no denying that.

Untrue, we're endorsing the need to be rigorous because those politicians lied through their blood stained teeth over dodgy dossiers and WMD.

 

[pfim]

If there was US urgency for action, there would have been bombing two years ago. I don't see any urgency here.

 

[davek]

Ha Ha Ha...Kerry; "our oldest allies, the French" are with us.

Slap across the chops there.