Syria

[oldbluefox]

As Frank says, we cannot police the world. This is a humanitarian crisis and other countries need to play their part in resolving it. It should not always be Britain and US who lead the way (and suffer the consequences). Personally I feel it is an Arab issue and would best be resolved by Arab states, especially since they always seem to resent any involvement by the West in their affairs. Our involvement should be restricted to humanitarian aid, Since Russia and China are vetoing UN action maybe they should be playing a more active role on the issue of chemical warfare. Of course it is not absolutely clear who the perpetrators were. Was it the Assad regime or was it the rebels trying to discredit him?

[towny44]

If the tyrant state using chemical weapons on its own people were Russia or China, would David Cameron still advocate that we bombed their military sites?

[Boris+]

Hi John,

Let's get this straight - I don't like what is going on, but I can't do anything about it. Meanwhile, whilst you may not like what I have posted - all I am trying to say is that if this situation deepens then there could be a whole load of knock-on effects, some of which might affect shipping (for example).

So, just how can people disagree with the fact that I have identified some areas of these anticipated potential knock-on effects; and furthermore, just how can people disagree with me caring enough to be willing to try and help someone in any small way I can?

It is certainly starting to feel like 'Em Bashing' from where I am sitting. I draw my own conclusions; privately.

Em

[Meg 50]

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. –Sir Edmund Burke

though it's easy for us to say. Not sure what the answer is however.

[Not so ancient mariner]

An evil dictator he most certainly is, but I remain to be convinced that Syria will actually be a better place for its citizens if he is overthrown, than it was before the uprising got underway. The experience of watching events in Iraq, Libya & Egypt hardly provides me with confidence in a stable post-Assad Syria.

[emjay45]

I am another who thinks we should stay out of Syria. I only hope David Cameron has the courage not to go along with Obama.

[The Monocled Mutineer]

AOTH:

Notwithstanding my earlier comments in this thread, was Syria a better place over 1 year ago when the Ba'athist regime of Bashar-al-Assad used hardware of war to quell civil protest and now (qed) the illegal 'hardware' of war (ie chemical weapons). From March 2011 to date about 100,000 Syrians have died.

Was Syria a better place when, in 1982, Hafez-al-Assad (father of the current dictator) approved the massacre of 40,000 of their citizens (Hama Massacre)?

The only regime in absolute number terms that can top Syria as a comparable "smaller" nation for the state sanctioned abuse of human rights including genocide to their own people is North Korea.

[Not so ancient mariner]

With any revolution, the overthrow of the existing regime is actually the easy bit. Finding a consensus among disparate opposition groups in order to put something better in place afterwards, is almost always the stumbling block.

[Admiral of the Humber]

AOTH:

Notwithstanding my earlier comments in this thread, was Syria a better place over 1 year ago when the Ba'athist regime of Bashar-al-Assad used hardware of war to quell civil protest and now (qed) the illegal 'hardware' of war (ie chemical weapons). From March 2011 to date about 100,000 Syrians have died.

Was Syria a better place when, in 1982, Hafez-al-Assad (father of the current dictator) approved the massacre of 40,000 of their citizens (Hama Massacre)?

The only regime in absolute number terms that can top Syria as a comparable "smaller" nation for the state sanctioned abuse of human rights including genocide to their own people is North Korea.

Dear Derek,

Any particular reason why you have directed this response at me? I do not believe I have contributed to this thread until now.

Regards
Rob aka AOTH

[The Monocled Mutineer]

AOTH:

My apologies: I got mixed up between you and NSAM as regards who I was answering - probably a Freudian slip due to you having 'Admiral' and him having 'Mariner' in your forum names.

~~~

NSAM:

Notwithstanding my earlier comments in this thread, was Syria a better place over 1 year ago when the Ba'athist regime of Bashar-al-Assad used hardware of war to quell civil protest and now (qed) the illegal 'hardware' of war (ie chemical weapons). From March 2011 to date about 100,000 Syrians have died.

Was Syria a better place when, in 1982, Hafez-al-Assad (father of the current dictator) approved the massacre of 40,000 of their citizens (Hama Massacre)?

The only regime in absolute number terms that can top Syria as a comparable "smaller" nation for the state sanctioned abuse of human rights including genocide to their own people is North Korea.

[Kendhni]

The only concern I have is that the US/UK have a record of killing thousands of civilians when they enter countries to protect them. However what are the alternatives ... sit back and do nothing (the old "so what it doesn't affect us" attitude ..... yet !!!!)? I am also concerned at some of the groups that have been receiving military assistance since they are definitely not friendly to the west.

I agree with NSAM that we could end up with yet another power vacuum that can be created (as seen in Afghanistan, Iraq and even Egypt and other countries).

[gfwgfw]

Hey Ho

My thread has got a tad personal due to "The Usual Suspects"

Hence my sincere concern that one member has been overly and unnecessarily criticized

He/She gave his/her own opinion and IMO has been taken a tad out of context

Perhaps the appropriate person/s can close my well intention thread, and I do thank the majority of posters for their thought provoking input

Kindest regards to all


Graham

[gfwgfw]

. . . . by the way I am sadly still sitting bleedy uncomfortably on the fence, still haunted by the very distressing pictures/videos be bandied around the "net"

Luboo all

Graham x

[The Monocled Mutineer]

Afgahnistan, Iraq, as well as Libya, and the fomer states of Yugoslavia have to a lesser or greater degree governments that are trying to govern for the people, following liberal democracies' military intervention. They are thwarted to a lesser or greater degree by the radicilsed Islamists who are anti-liberal in every sense of the word and hate pluralism and freedom for women, etc, etc.

The only people killing people in these countries today are the radicalised insurgents

Egypt has not had outside liberal democracy intervention. The vacumn has been created by having a non-secular 'poilitical' party in power. Only misery comes from government by religious diktat (Iran is a splendid example of abuse of human rights through state sanctioned religious theocracy)

Only secular parties imbued with liberal democratic values govern for all their people. Islamist parties do not. Neither do military coups. However, it is to be hoped that the military allow for free elections and ensure that only secular parties stand. Ataturk (for all his many faults) was so right as regards keeping the medievalists out of government. Islamists are of the same order of scum as the anti-human rights 'criminal conspiracy posing as a political party', the BNP, in our country and should never be allowed to control as much as a village allotment, let alone a nation.

[Silver_Shiney]

To call it a 'Syrian theatre' is disgusting, it is not theatre

"Theatre" is a recognised term in the military for areas of conflict.

It may be but that certainly wasnt the way that it was meant here.

John

In the context of this thread, it is the only way it could have been taken. Kindly stop turning this thread into an Em-bashing contest.



Anyway, to get back on-topic, there is little doubt that chemical weapons have been used. Both sides blame the other. Who is telling the truth? I certainly do not know.

Then we have word that UN inspectors have come under fire. Would that not be classed as an act of war in itself? But, again, who fired the shots? Unless there is clear intelligence to confirm this is the work of Assad, it would be very unwise for the West to take military action. The League of Arab Nations are condemning the use of chemical weapons, so let them deal with it.

[gfwgfw]

Mr Kane

How far would you go to protect your beautiful "ranch" in Watercress Land against infiltrators - both political and religions maniacs, and even the "Irish so called Travelers"

NQ brother fully paid up - Darzart branch

The Happy Giant of Cerne Abbas

[The Monocled Mutineer]

gfwgfw

We have the rule of law, with "the guardians" subject to accountability by an elected legislature at local and national levels. Other than the law of self defence as regards if you or a family member is attacked and passive precautions it is for officials, police, intelligence services and (in extremis) the military to protect us all, not private citizens (as regards taking vigilante and other illegal actions).

[Not so ancient mariner]

The Monocled Mutineer Wrote:

Notwithstanding my earlier comments in this thread, was Syria a better place over 1 year ago when the Ba'athist regime of Bashar-al-Assad used hardware of war to quell civil protest and now (qed) the illegal 'hardware' of war (ie chemical weapons). From March 2011 to date about 100,000 Syrians have died.

Was Syria a better place when, in 1982, Hafez-al-Assad (father of the current dictator) approved the massacre of 40,000 of their citizens (Hama Massacre)?

The only regime in absolute number terms that can top Syria as a comparable "smaller" nation for the state sanctioned abuse of human rights including genocide to their own people is North Korea.

My point was not that Syria was a better place at any particular point in the past, but whether it will necessarily be a better place if/when Bashar-al-Assad is overthrown. Given the examples of what has happened elsewhere in the Arab world (another 60 people killed in Iraq today I hear) I do not believe the probability - at least in the short term - to be particularly high.

[oldbluefox]

Past experiences in Libya, Iraq and now Egypt where warring tribes and religious groups are vying for power, do not fill me with confidence. What is the Arab League and the peace envoy for the Middle East doing about this awful situation?

[Not so ancient mariner]

Unfortunately life is cheap in that part of the world.

[Frank Manning]

Good point OBF. Interference from 'The West' will do no good, if the past is any guide. Since the Russians are reported to be backing Assad, I cant see anything getting past the Security Council. Putin is a gangster anyway and no better than Assad, best to keep our powder dry, and look to our own defences than meddle in the affairs of others.

[Silver_Shiney]

Good point OBF. Interference from 'The West' will do no good, if the past is any guide. Since the Russians are reported to be backing Assad, I cant see anything getting past the Security Council. Putin is a gangster anyway and no better than Assad, best to keep our powder dry, and look to our own defences than meddle in the affairs of others.

[Boris+]

I refer to the post made by Silver Shiney - he is perfectly correct regarding my use of the term 'theatre' or phrase 'Syrian theatre' - it is indeed a term used to describe areas of conflict.

CJ - I regret to inform you that you are most certainly incorrect (in the nicest possible way), and that the way in which I meant 'theatre' or 'Syrian theatre' was precisely in line with a description of a geographical area of conflict. You may construe as you wish to construe, however - only I can say how I meant it to be construed, and that is as set out by Alan (aka SS) - it is a geographical area of conflict.

That phrase does not condemn or criticise anyone, it merely identifies that something is going on, and the country in which it is happening - simples.

Em

[Quizzical Bob]

Quite correct. Normally used as 'theatre of operation' and certainly does not mean 'theatre of entertainment'.

[ChesterfieldJohn]

I refer to the post made by Silver Shiney - he is perfectly correct regarding my use of the term 'theatre' or phrase 'Syrian theatre' - it is indeed a term used to describe areas of conflict.

CJ - I regret to inform you that you are most certainly incorrect (in the nicest possible way), and that the way in which I meant 'theatre' or 'Syrian theatre' was precisely in line with a description of a geographical area of conflict. You may construe as you wish to construe, however - only I can say how I meant it to be construed, and that is as set out by Alan (aka SS) - it is a geographical area of conflict.

That phrase does not condemn or criticise anyone, it merely identifies that something is going on, and the country in which it is happening - simples.

Em

Then I apologise for critiscising your use of the term 'theatre'

John