EPTIraq & Syrian Civil Wars - Page 88
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Please guys, stay on topic. This thread is about the situation in Iraq and Syria. | ||
|
Kurumi
Poland6130 Posts
| ||
|
Scareb
Germany173 Posts
On August 30 2013 02:03 Derez wrote: I think Assad should have been bombed a long time ago on humanitarian grounds. Over 100k killed by a dictator that won't give up on ruling a country where half the population doesn't accept it. Whatever the alternative is, it has to be better than this for the long term development of Syria. Bomb him, force peace talks and enforce a peaceful settlement, either heavy federalization or split it up entirely. Yeah bomb him! And please only him and his closes allies! Otherwise only innocent people die! There is no different by whom you are getting killed! The only way you can really hurt him is by getting his money! Freeze his bank accounts all around the globe! | ||
|
Catch]22
Sweden2683 Posts
Meeting 20:30 CET. | ||
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
 At the moment the only plus sign is that stupid North Korea aren't involved nor are China. | ||
|
AA.spoon
Belgium331 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
On August 30 2013 02:20 Pandemona wrote: See, pissing off Russia is bad. If they choose to "defend" the "innocent" Syrian leader we have a mini world war on our hands with SO MANY CASUALTIES, rather than just waiting. If you just wait a little longer and pressurise the silly UN to actually make a descion then we will get this sorted out as peacfully as possible. At this rate we are going to see a REALLY bad war break out At the moment the only plus sign is that stupid North Korea aren't involved nor are China. Wow, that's the worst piece of "analysis" of the situation I've read. Russia has shown no inclination to put their own neck on the line. They have said that they will veto any action, but they also condemned the use of CW. China is equally committed as Russia, as they have also promised to veto any UNSC action. Because of this, there is no point in waiting for the UN. They will merely stall and eventually veto, as they promised to do. Furthermore, the UN team in Syria has no ability to determine culpability, so all they can verify is that CW were used. Which they did. No further input will occur. Also North Korea is involved, a ship with weapons headed to assist Assad was seized only a few days ago. While it's possible to have the US be pulled into the Syrian conflict, where they will fight regional troops such as Hizbollah (and only if the situation escalates like Iraq did), there is not a single informed individual warning against a world war. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On August 30 2013 02:42 Ghanburighan wrote: Wow, that's the worst piece of "analysis" of the situation I've read. Russia has shown no inclination to put their own neck on the line. They have said that they will veto any action, but they also condemned the use of CW. China is equally committed as Russia, as they have also promised to veto any UNSC action. Because of this, there is no point in waiting for the UN. They will merely stall and eventually veto, as they promised to do. Furthermore, the UN team in Syria has no ability to determine culpability, so all they can verify is that CW were used. Which they did. No further input will occur. Also North Korea is involved, a ship with weapons headed to assist Assad was seized only a few days ago. While it's possible to have the US be pulled into the Syrian conflict, where they will fight regional troops such as Hizbollah (and only if the situation escalates like Iraq did), there is not a single informed individual warning against a world war. There is no point for the US to be involved directly and it will only cause further problems the US in the area. But I guess we feel that some sort of action is necessary, though I doubt ground troops will be involved. There is no winning in this situation and it will only make the opposition strong if the US gets deeply involved. I have seen all of this before and I don't really see anything that benefits the US. Mostly I expect to getting yelled at by every other country that is unwilling to get involved, but totally willing to provide criticism of those that do. | ||
|
revel8
United Kingdom3022 Posts
Interesting that the UK Parliament is having a debate and vote on this issue. Of course the outcome of the vote is only about gauging the appetite for intervention amongst the MPs, but as the Whip will be used, it won't even do that. This means that the MPs will vote on Party lines, rather than as individuals. Not that the vote matters in any practical sense anyway, the British Prime Minister still retains the Royal Prerogative. Cameron has the legal power to take the UK to war without requiring Parliamentary assent. | ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10131 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On August 30 2013 03:33 Godwrath wrote: Stop talking bullshit pls, if the UN confirms it was Assad who used chemical weapons, there is nothing China or Russia can do. They will just call for further investigation and hold off a full vote. They have the ability to do so and have not shown any reason to back off their support of the regime. I expect nothing but stalling from both China and Russia. | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
On August 30 2013 03:17 revel8 wrote: Waiting for the UN to intervene is pointless. It is not going to happen unless Russia and China remove their support of Assad. They will just veto any attempt to pass a UN Resolution. Assad would have to use CW on the Kremlin to cause such a reversal. Interesting that the UK Parliament is having a debate and vote on this issue. Of course the outcome of the vote is only about gauging the appetite for intervention amongst the MPs, but as the Whip will be used, it won't even do that. This means that the MPs will vote on Party lines, rather than as individuals. Not that the vote matters in any practical sense anyway, the British Prime Minister still retains the Royal Prerogative. Cameron has the legal power to take the UK to war without requiring Parliamentary assent. To ignore the commons decision on this issue would be political suicide. I like to think MPs have the self respect to not simply vote on party lines on issues this important. | ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10131 Posts
On August 30 2013 03:35 Plansix wrote: They will just call for further investigation and hold off a full vote. They have the ability to do so and have not shown any reason to back off their support of the regime. I expect nothing but stalling from both China and Russia. The use of chemical weapons legitimize any action against Assad. No matter what China and Russia vote. And stalling at this point, is what we need before rushing into conclussions of evidence which has yet to be presented. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On August 30 2013 03:37 Godwrath wrote: The use of chemical weapons legitimize any action against Assad. No matter what China and Russia vote. And stalling at this point, is what we need before rushing into conclussions of evidence which has yet to be presented. The rules of the UN allow them to stall out a vote on the security counsel for whatever reason they want. That means even if supporting evidence is found that shows 100% that Assad is responsible, they can still prevent a vote from ever taking place. That is why people keep saying the UN is useless on this issue, because China and Russia can just delay any vote by the security counsel endlessly. I will be very surprised if they let it come to a vote, ever. | ||
|
revel8
United Kingdom3022 Posts
On August 30 2013 03:37 Godwrath wrote: The use of chemical weapons legitimize any action against Assad. No matter what China and Russia vote. And stalling at this point, is what we need before rushing into conclussions of evidence which has yet to be presented. Actually you are wrong. China and Russia have the right to veto any UN Resolution. You may argue they do not or should not but they actually do. | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
On August 30 2013 03:33 Godwrath wrote: Stop talking bullshit pls, if the UN confirms it was Assad who used chemical weapons, there is nothing China or Russia can do. Right back at you, UNSC permanent members have a veto. And intervention must be authorized by the UNSC. Checkmate Obama. | ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10131 Posts
On August 30 2013 03:40 Plansix wrote: The rules of the UN allow them to stall out a vote on the security counsel for whatever reason they want. That means even if supporting evidence is found that shows 100% that Assad is responsible, they can still prevent a vote from ever taking place. That is why people keep saying the UN is useless on this issue, because China and Russia can just delay any vote by the security counsel endlessly. I will be very surprised if they let it come to a vote, ever. I do know that, but at this point is about PR. US is willing to bypass the UN already and we do know that, so there is nothing Russia or China can do by voting no anyways if the UN finds evidence, which is my point. I am aware of the veto, who isn't ?  | ||
|
hzflank
United Kingdom2991 Posts
On August 30 2013 03:35 bardtown wrote: To ignore the commons decision on this issue would be political suicide. I like to think MPs have the self respect to not simply vote on party lines on issues this important. Having a vote today would of been political suicide for Cameron, which is why it was postponed. I have been following the commons debate and opinion is overwhelmingly against military action in Syria and many conservative MPs say that they will vote against it. If we bomb Syria then expect Cameron to be ousted and a general election to occur soon. As for public opinion, a times poll cited in the commons debate found that only 11% of the British people support any military action in Syria. | ||
|
dsousa
United States1363 Posts
That bomb was put there by the FSA, which is supported by the USA. US Taxpayers almost killed Stephano! We shouldn't be supporting the FSA! http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2012/al-monitor/us-authorizes-financial-support.html | ||
|
hzflank
United Kingdom2991 Posts
On August 30 2013 03:33 Godwrath wrote: Stop talking bullshit pls, if the UN confirms it was Assad who used chemical weapons, there is nothing China or Russia can do. How is the UN going to do that? They will be able to confirm what chemicals were used, but it is highly unlikely that the Un can confirm who used them. The people who are claiming to know that it was Assad are intelligence agencies, notably Israeli intelligence. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21851 Posts
On August 30 2013 03:48 Godwrath wrote: I do know that, but at this point is about PR. US is willing to bypass the UN already and we do know that, so there is nothing Russia or China can do by voting no anyways if the UN finds evidence, which is my point. Can they stop the US/UK from attacking, no they cannot. But by denying the UN resolution they can make it politically worse for there "enemy's" and I expect them to keep that up for as long as they are able. There already is a strong sentiment that the US is meddling in to many nations and without a resolution this will be another case of that | ||
| ||
