So, this Syria thing...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not slighting the USA in any way, a lot of European countries (like the UK, France etc) who bandy together in these coalitions are probably breaking UN laws if they invade, yet for some reason it's ok. These things just never end well.
YOO HAYT DUR YOO ESS AYE LAD !!!
 
What disgusts me most is the stance of 'kill as many of your own citizens as you want mate, just don't use that chemical stuff we've all got. That's naughty'


what difference does it make how they've died. Should have sorted it months ago, but the world stood by and watched.
 
Yep, and I have a weird feeling about the US stance on this, kind of reminds me of Suez.

ding ding ding ding ding

I believe you are getting this sorted. This is a president that caves to his enemies and throws his allies under the bus. Keep watching. He'll do something cosmetic to the Syrian leadership (drones will probably be involved, it's his style), have a big press celebration (no MISSION ACCOMPLISHED sign, but...) and then go back to the golf course and the fund raisers, because he has to keep the Senate in 2014. Syria will then slip off the US news as there is another Miley Cyrus sighting or something important.

Did I mention that the President has to hold the Senate in 2014? Keep your eyes on the prize. Debt ceiling food fight scheduled for October. May have to have a war going to motivate raising that debt ceiling again.

Get your popcorn, and for God's sake keep your people home. This crew has no intent of actually winning anything or making this stop.
 
Radical solution - US should deport all jews to Israel. Israel then has enough manpower to look after itself, and the US is rid of the huge Jewish vote which forces their hand in the middle East.

Sorted.
 
Yep, we certainly helped create the problems we see today. Wouldn't go as far to say we are entirely responsible. What do you think I am, a self hating liberal? Mwhahaha x

I think **** is gonna go down though. Can't let them get away with using chemical weapons against their own peeps.

I wonder who they bought the chemical weapons off?

Probably the same people that are now saying they shouldn't use them, just like in Iraq and Iran.
 
The West has always got Middle Eastern policy wrong, so what is different now?

Nothing..........

So we are going to attack a sovereign nation (regardless of how abhorrent the leaders of that nation have behaved) without the approval of the UN?

Groundhog day!

Quite. We should stay out of things that are none of our business.
 
Hitler used to gas his own people. Should we have let him get on with it too because it was "none of our business" then?

Obviously, old Adolf was a warmongering [Poor language removed] at the same time but if countries like America and Britain don't intervene when atrocities like this occur, more and more leaders/dictators will see it as an acceptable method of dealing with their own people who don't fit their profile as an ideal citizen.

A full scale ground invasion like Iraq and Afghanistan would probably be a huge overreaction but a tactical bombing campaign that leads to the elimination of that evil [Poor language removed] Assad? I'm all for that.
 
Hitler used to gas his own people. Should we have let him get on with it too because it was "none of our business" then?

Obviously, old Adolf was a warmongering [Poor language removed] at the same time but if countries like America and Britain don't intervene when atrocities like this occur, more and more leaders/dictators will see it as an acceptable method of dealing with their own people who don't fit their profile as an ideal citizen.

A full scale ground invasion like Iraq and Afghanistan would probably be a huge overreaction but a tactical bombing campaign that leads to the elimination of that evil [Poor language removed] Assad? I'm all for that.
Problem with that though is what happens to the gas when Assad is gone? Without boots on the ground it'll be taken by the opposition, possibly falling into the hands of the Al-Qaeda groups fighting with the rebels. It's a horrible decision to try and make.
 
Hitler used to gas his own people. Should we have let him get on with it too because it was "none of our business" then?

Obviously, old Adolf was a warmongering [Poor language removed] at the same time but if countries like America and Britain don't intervene when atrocities like this occur, more and more leaders/dictators will see it as an acceptable method of dealing with their own people who don't fit their profile as an ideal citizen.

A full scale ground invasion like Iraq and Afghanistan would probably be a huge overreaction but a tactical bombing campaign that leads to the elimination of that evil [Poor language removed] Assad? I'm all for that.

And Britain/France gave him Czechoslovakia before we entered the war, before giving up most of Europe to the Russians after the war.

Likewise, our intervention in that period caused massive unrest in the middle east, India/Pakistan. Heck, Syria itself was only formed after the English and French divied up the Ottoman empire after WW1.

Do we think less of Germany and Japan because they've had pacifist constitutions for the last 70 years? Has it harmed their development as nations?

If you go back a few years, most in the west thought the Arab Spring was a great thing, yet we've seen it unravel spectacularly in Egypt, and it result in a civil war in Syria.

Not sure it's wise to think our intervention in global conflicts have been unreservedly positive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top