The only question I ask is why should the UK (taxpayer) get involved (again) while others do nothing? Whatever the US & France want to do is up to them, we should decline to assist them. Meanwhile countries like Germany, Japan, Canada and Australia say nothing and get on with making money by making stuff. While the PIGS get on with pleading for more bailout money. Maybe we should say, okay, Portugal, Ireland (yeah, I know they're are neutral unless it comes to a pub brawl), Greece and Spain, you guys will get the next tranche of dosh but only when you get stuck in on some "peacekeeping" activities.
Let the other European "nations" steam in if they want to.
watch the oil price go into orbit------inflation shoot up------the micro recovery that this country had stop dead-----------and thenwhen its over all the other countries that sat on their hands go in and rebuild the country with UN handouts .
We learn nothing from every war we enter---------nothing.
Is it in the Job Discription of the UK MP "must have at least one war during the life of the job" ?
Billions in aid to countries that dont need it----------billions in wars that we shouldnt be involved in. maybe ifthat had been invested at home we wouldnt be in this shit.
We have a social responsibility to protect those innocent people that need protecting, to attempt to facilitate peace during factions, and to punish those who break international agreed standards by either sanctions or direct involvement.
However, that should be down through the United Nations, (and in this instant) in association with the Arab Council.
Our financial and workforce commitment to the UN should be enough.
I can’t help thinking that all this was started by George W Bush when he invaded Iraq, I say that without evidence or much semblance of logic. The old order seems to have been removed, the old powers once strong are weak and the status quo is gone. The US has seen limits to its power, I note the planning issues in Iraq but, how much better has it done in Afghanistan where there was proper planning? It now tries to negotiate with its adversaries to extradite itself. As this happens the old enemy, Russia grows stronger, wealth from oil and gas are changing the dynamics everywhere.
The financial situation in the US and Europe have not gone unnoticed in the Middle East, throughout the region groups are seeing unprecedented levels of support from Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia, at the same time as our influence declines. It is well known now that the US and Europe cannot affect the region as we once could. Emboldened, the power brokers within the region try to break away from outside dominance (and who can blame them) and without a brake attempt to gain strategic advantage.
Ambitions of a united Islamic Uma, a return to a Caliphate state play a large part in the chaos that currently exists, each regional power plays its hand to achieve this as an ultimate goal except maybe Turkey who remain very quiet on these issues and strategically aliened to the West. The Uma would include; Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Iran, Azerbaijan, Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordon, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Yemen, Egypt, Somalia, Eritrea, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Western Sahara, Mauritania, Mali, Indonesia and to some extent Niger (plus northern Nigeria) Chad and Sudan (I bet I missed some). I would guess at 80% of the worlds oil supplies are in those countries.
Before George W Bush, Iraq acted as a buffer to Iran’s growing power, now that has been removed Iraq is being slowly infiltrated and brought under Iranian control. Lebanon is now controlled by Hezbollah an Iran backed religious group. Hezbollah now pushes into Syria (supposedly Iran’s allies), where they fight both Assad forces and Sunni forces arriving from training camps in Sudan and Somalia backed by the Saudi’s. Both of these export a very militant fundemental brand of Islam.
So as above (operationpig), the stupidity of Obama drawing red lines in the sand is obvious to all. Anyone that wishes to draw the US into the conflict now has an easy route, one that may have already been used. I doubt that Assad would have used them after all why would he in a winning situation where his own troops are deployed in the field. I suggest that the truth will never be known. NB Iran has used chemical weapons in the Iran-Iraq war during the eighties, although hotly disputed by Iran who blame the Iraqis for this.
So with regard to what to do in this situation; I personally believe any military intervention will risk doing more harm than good, especially as, yet again we seem to be backing the wrong horse. It could escalate very quickly and play into the hands of our enemies. I would like us to make contact with the Assad regime and help them to restore order and evict the foreign fighters on their soil. Assad is not a democratic liberal but, rather him than the alternative, this is the best way to protect innocent lives.
That would require a political U turn, after so long supporting the revolutions in Libya and Egypt, cries of hypocrisy will ring out, but if “The West” does not make this change I can only see bad things coming. Take the political hit and describe it as a humanitarian decision, make a new ally in the process, build much needed bridges in the Middle East. I can't see us doing it but, that is what I'm hoping for.
If you think the first movie one was futile, horrific and still causing civilians to die years later, just wait for the sequel.
Hollwood's Washington's best yet (and that is saying something).
To be fair looking at the latest developments it looks like Britains co-producing this sequel again.
With David Cameron starring as Washington's pet poodle Tony Blair.
(Directors Note: The sequel will not feature the 1 million protesters marching in the opening scenes of the first movie as the actors concerned have given up participating in the democratic process.)
If anyone thinks that there is any possibility of a United Arab Uma or even a simpler agreement between the Islamic States as mentioned in Loco's very interesting post above then the no fly zone is needed right now to stop those flying pigs.
You police a no fly zone using anti-aircraft guns from ships or based in neighbouring allies e.g. Turkey or Isreal.
That's a good idea. Lets get Israel involved.
Nobody has actually put that forward as an idea, it's just an option. It's more than likely the anti-aircraft guns will be based on American ships. The Isreali's are however already involved having sent 3 strikes on targets in Syria in the last year.
You police a no fly zone using anti-aircraft guns from ships or based in neighbouring allies e.g. Turkey or Isreal.
That's a good idea. Lets get Israel involved.
Nobody has actually put that forward as an idea, it's just an option. It's more than likely the anti-aircraft guns will be based on American ships. The Isreali's are however already involved having sent 3 strikes on targets in Syria in the last year.
Planes are needed to enforce a no fly zone, which is definitely an option if a load of cruise missiles take out the Syrian air defences - there is no threat to allied planes from the Syrian airforce.
highly doubt any land or ship based air defences have the range to cover an entire country...
Read something a while back that went along the lines of the west wanting a 'draw' from this conflict, significantly weakening Assad, but him having smashed a load of AQ backed Jihadis first. Seems like the gambit backfired.
I can’t help thinking that all this was started by George W Bush when he invaded Iraq,..
I think the unprovoked attack on the free secular world that resulted in the deaths of 3,000 innocent civilians by muslim fundamentalists started it. Without 9/11 there would have been no war in either Iraq or Afghanistan.
This is an interesting article describing how the highly organised foreign muslim jihardists are effectively already providing the government for large parts of Syria.
Comments
Check out this article, some very interesting points.
Meanwhile countries like Germany, Japan, Canada and Australia say nothing and get on with making money by making stuff. While the PIGS get on with pleading for more bailout money. Maybe we should say, okay, Portugal, Ireland (yeah, I know they're are neutral unless it comes to a pub brawl), Greece and Spain, you guys will get the next tranche of dosh but only when you get stuck in on some "peacekeeping" activities.
watch the oil price go into orbit------inflation shoot up------the micro recovery that this country had stop dead-----------and thenwhen its over all the other countries that sat on their hands go in and rebuild the country with UN handouts .
We learn nothing from every war we enter---------nothing.
Is it in the Job Discription of the UK MP "must have at least one war during the life of the job" ?
Billions in aid to countries that dont need it----------billions in wars that we shouldnt be involved in. maybe ifthat had been invested at home we wouldnt be in this shit.
http://survivalist.com
However, that should be down through the United Nations, (and in this instant) in association with the Arab Council.
Our financial and workforce commitment to the UN should be enough.
The financial situation in the US and Europe have not gone unnoticed in the Middle East, throughout the region groups are seeing unprecedented levels of support from Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia, at the same time as our influence declines. It is well known now that the US and Europe cannot affect the region as we once could. Emboldened, the power brokers within the region try to break away from outside dominance (and who can blame them) and without a brake attempt to gain strategic advantage.
Ambitions of a united Islamic Uma, a return to a Caliphate state play a large part in the chaos that currently exists, each regional power plays its hand to achieve this as an ultimate goal except maybe Turkey who remain very quiet on these issues and strategically aliened to the West. The Uma would include; Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Iran, Azerbaijan, Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordon, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Yemen, Egypt, Somalia, Eritrea, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Western Sahara, Mauritania, Mali, Indonesia and to some extent Niger (plus northern Nigeria) Chad and Sudan (I bet I missed some). I would guess at 80% of the worlds oil supplies are in those countries.
Before George W Bush, Iraq acted as a buffer to Iran’s growing power, now that has been removed Iraq is being slowly infiltrated and brought under Iranian control. Lebanon is now controlled by Hezbollah an Iran backed religious group. Hezbollah now pushes into Syria (supposedly Iran’s allies), where they fight both Assad forces and Sunni forces arriving from training camps in Sudan and Somalia backed by the Saudi’s. Both of these export a very militant fundemental brand of Islam.
So as above (operationpig), the stupidity of Obama drawing red lines in the sand is obvious to all. Anyone that wishes to draw the US into the conflict now has an easy route, one that may have already been used. I doubt that Assad would have used them after all why would he in a winning situation where his own troops are deployed in the field. I suggest that the truth will never be known. NB Iran has used chemical weapons in the Iran-Iraq war during the eighties, although hotly disputed by Iran who blame the Iraqis for this.
So with regard to what to do in this situation; I personally believe any military intervention will risk doing more harm than good, especially as, yet again we seem to be backing the wrong horse. It could escalate very quickly and play into the hands of our enemies. I would like us to make contact with the Assad regime and help them to restore order and evict the foreign fighters on their soil. Assad is not a democratic liberal but, rather him than the alternative, this is the best way to protect innocent lives.
That would require a political U turn, after so long supporting the revolutions in Libya and Egypt, cries of hypocrisy will ring out, but if “The West” does not make this change I can only see bad things coming. Take the political hit and describe it as a humanitarian decision, make a new ally in the process, build much needed bridges in the Middle East. I can't see us doing it but, that is what I'm hoping for.
Shock and Awe 2--- the sequel
Comung to a screen near you this week-end.
If you think the first movie one was futile, horrific and still causing civilians to die years later, just wait for the sequel.
Hollwood'sWashington's best yet (and that is saying something).(Directors Note: The sequel will not feature the 1 million protesters marching in the opening scenes of the first movie as the actors concerned have given up participating in the democratic process.)
Sanctions against a country such as a no-fly zone =/= all out war.
highly doubt any land or ship based air defences have the range to cover an entire country...
Read something a while back that went along the lines of the west wanting a 'draw' from this conflict, significantly weakening Assad, but him having smashed a load of AQ backed Jihadis first. Seems like the gambit backfired.
thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/28/how-u-s-strikes-on-syria-help-al-qaeda.html