Syria vote Labour demands evidence

[clapham_gull]

I've been reading a couple of books about North Korea. The second a bit long winded but goes through all the possibilities of what to do about. I've formed the opinion of do nothing as the best all round and I've of the same opinion here at the moment. The Hitler comment above always raises a chuckle, didn't take long for someone to go all Dads Army. When Syria are mobilising across the channel...

 

[daveinprague]

Blair this, former labour govt that...its feck all to do with party politics...theres no evidence, other than an American say so, who committed this atrocity, so I believe Parliament got it right..
if even by default.

Edit...how many tories voted against, is it known...save me looking

 

[Chicken Run]

The defeat of the government in last night's vote is without doubt the best piece of news I've heard for a very long time and gives me some hope for the future of our system of parliamentary democracy.

Why is this a loss for Cameron? He had the balls to ask parliament to vote on whether we should / or not commit UK funds and troops (read soldiers lives) in Syria. They responded. He respected their decision. How can such a rare display of true democracy in action be viewed as a loss?

 

[martyn20]

Blair this, former labour govt that...its feck all to do with party politics...theres no evidence, other than an American say so, who committed this atrocity, so I believe Parliament got it right..
if even by default.

Edit...how many tories voted against, is it known...save me looking

You clearly did not see Miliband's interviews after the vote last night, he put his whole strategy down to mistakes made over Iraq. He could have framed his support and threatened lack of support in a different way that did not rule us out of action totally as he has done now. There could be a youtube clip of Assad pressing a red button to release the gas and we would still not help out stopping it happening again.

 

[somerset]

Yes - as someone who has been following this uprising & civil war from the start, from independent & international news sources and including bulks of raw footage - I am absolutely positive Assad did not use chemical weapons against his own people - at a point in time where the SAA is in its strongest position since it all began and ahead of a UN inspection, it is just not the logical conclusion.

.

It must be good,... you need to pass this evidence onto the CIA, I am surprised they missed it , but thank goodness you have swept up after them, heaven knows what might happen if you don't forward it on.

 

[martyn20]

Why is this a loss for Cameron? He had the balls to ask parliament to vote on whether we should / or not commit UK funds and troops (read soldiers lives) in Syria. They responded. He respected their decision. How can such a rare display of true democracy in action be viewed as a loss?

Not even Labour expected to win the second vote last night, the fact he was defeated by his own side means he does not have control of his own party, he did not think it would ever happen so did not effectively use the whip. Basic case of a leader not knowing the intentions of his own party, this could finish him.

 

[martyn20]

From January

http://rt.com/news/syria-fsa-chemical-weapons-229/

And the actual evidence, plenty of news agencies have said the same of Assad but you do not believe them

 

[martyn20]

From May (take in mind it's the Telegraph and UN)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...es-Syrian-rebels-of-chemical-weapons-use.html

And you think that is enough evidence to be beyond any doubt?

 

[martyn20]

No - I'm just saying that it should be obvious to anyone who has bothered to follow the uprising comprehensively from the beginning that it is the Islamist terrorists who committed this illegal chemical attack. Especially over the past year, where it seems to have been building up to this.

So there is no actual evidence one way or the other but we should all accept it was Islamist terrorists who carried out this illegal chemical attack, that a bloody big jump mate.
Have you actually read the JIC report released yesterday.

 

[daveinprague]

Theres no evidence whatsover, yet people here are prepared to bomb one of the sides over it....the side fighting OUR enemy....

Is the JIC report the report that concludes 'its highly likely that the Assad regime is responsible'? If they dont know, they dont fecking know.

Highly likely isnt good enough for im afraid.

 

[martyn20]

Theres no evidence whatsover, yet people here are prepared to bomb one of the sides over it....the side fighting OUR enemy....

Is the JIC report the report that concludes 'its highly likely that the Assad regime is responsible'? If they dont know, they dont fecking know.

Highly likely isnt good enough for im afraid.

And you don't think that goes someway to prove the West's motive is stop chemical attacks on civilians not regime change just because we don't like Assad. The way he aided the rebels in Egypt even though Mubarrak was our friend?

 

[daveinprague]

When we are allied to one of the sides....supplying them with arms, and munitions, to tell me its 'highly likely' the other side did it, is not a reason for our country to go and bomb the feck out of another country. Im not concerned with regime change etc...I dont think we should be involved at all, civilian deaths (a common side effect of civil wars, like it or not) are tragic, but thats what war is about... If China did the same thing, would the UK and USA be rushing to bomb them?

 

[martyn20]

When we are allied to one of the sides....supplying them with arms, and munitions, to tell me its 'highly likely' the other side did it, is not a reason for our country to go and bomb the feck out of another country. Im not concerned with regime change etc...I dont think we should be involved at all, civilian deaths (a common side effect of civil wars, like it or not) are tragic, but thats what war is about... If China did the same thing, would the UK and USA be rushing to bomb them?

And if the US or the UN come up with strong evidence would you then support a limited missile attack on Assad?

 

[daveinprague]

US, no... UN, yes, under limited conditions. I dont think we should be swaying this in any direction with our actions...Ive been saying civil war, but its not even a civil war in reality...theres sunni jihadists from all over the arab world, the caucacus, Britain, Canada, USA, on one side, and Syrians, with Hezbolloh in the north on the other side...
Why people want the jihadist lunatics of Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, and the Islamic State of Iraq insurgents to win
this war is totally beyond me.
If the 'rebels' win, and establish a hardline fundamentalist state, we will end up bombing them as well in the future, with more chance troops on the ground in a future war.

 

[Hotchilidog]

And if the US or the UN come up with strong evidence would you then support a limited missile attack on Assad?

To what end? Can you guarantee that any attack would have the desired effect? Do you not think that the current civil war in Syria is completely unrelated to the unintended consequences of the last two decades of western intervention in the middle east. Honestly you would have thought the warmongers would have learnt their lesson by now. The minute we get Bush and Blair in a courtroom I'll take the admonishment of other leaders seriously.

There are still however civilians caught in the middle who need help and I think our efforts would be best directed at helping the refugees and wounded in this conflict.

No-one seems too bothered about the 1000 Egyptians murdered by the government last week, or the Iraqi civilians blown to crap this week either. Just let me know on which basis you pick and choose who we save and who we ignore. The truth there is no easy solution to what is going on in Syria, and sadly it is not simply a matter of good guys vs bad guys as much as we'd like to believe. In all likelihood an ill considered western response will make things worse for those people you want to help.

Our job is to come with good well thought out solutions that can help people on the ground not just fire a few missiles and feel satisfied that "we have done something".

Assad may be a murderous scumbag, but amongst the people he is fighting are an equally murderous bunch scumbags too. Sadly the civilian population are caught in the middle (plenty of whom actually support the current govt). It is not our place to decide the fate of countries such as Syria. If we can do some good, we should, but we should not act to appease our consciences or prejudices at the expense of others.

 

[drew]

Yes - as someone who has been following this uprising & civil war from the start, from independent & international news sources and including bulks of raw footage - I am absolutely positive Assad did not use chemical weapons against his own people - at a point in time where the SAA is in its strongest position since it all began and ahead of a UN inspection, it is just not the logical conclusion.

We know that the rebels possess chemical weapons, and we also know that they have been massacring innocent people from the beginning. There is absolutely no evidence of an aerial dispersement of sarin gas - So why don't the governments face the facts and deal with the Islamist terrorists that are responsible instead?

The simple reason is that it would be too difficult to do so - Western governments want to be seen doing something against a breach of international law, but military actions against the rebels just isn't an option for them. They may as well assist a toppling of yet another Middle Eastern dictator, or at the very least add more fuel to the fire.

From May (take in mind it's the Telegraph and UN)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...es-Syrian-rebels-of-chemical-weapons-use.html

If that is what you base your conclusion on then it is pathetic. Syrians have chemical weapons (and have allegedly used them on 14 occasions) so the rebels claim they can match them. They might have the know how but the report says they have the components, not the finished product ready for deployment! Someone threatens you with a very big stick so you claim you have a very big stick as well!! Wow.

Your comment about being absolutely positive it wasn't Assad is childish. You might form a judgement but you have no way of knowing for certain one way or another.

 

[daveinprague]

Didnt Mustafa post a video of the 'rebels' firing an artillery piece the other day, the like of which, ive never seen before, and can only assume its for chemical weapons...
Im pretty sure Al Qaeda has the 'know how', and since the rebels have overrun military establishments during this disaster, and in the words of the FIC report, 'its highly likely' they have the components to go with the know how...
Ive seen the 'rebels' beheading people, shooting lines of up to 10 people in the back of the head...executing a 15 year old boy, eating the heart of a Syrian soldier...beheading catholic priests..encouraging children to behead victims....im embarrassed enough that we are supplying these feckers with weapons, never mind bombing the other side for them as well.
The war is feck all to do with us....keep out of it.

 

[martyn20]

Didnt Mustafa post a video of the 'rebels' firing an artillery piece the other day, the like of which, ive never seen before, and can only assume its for chemical weapons...
Im pretty sure Al Qaeda has the 'know how', and since the rebels have overrun military establishments during this disaster, and in the words of the FIC report, 'its highly likely' they have the components to go with the know how...
The war is feck all to do with us....keep out of it.

'And can only assume it's for chemical weapons' wow what a comment, nothing to back it up at all, it's like one you have never seen so it must be chemical weapons! Blair would be so very proud of you, maybe the rebels can fire them within 45 minutes.

 

[daveinprague]

You want to bomb people without any evidence... wow...Carry on supporting jihadists mate..jihadists beheading catholic priests, wiping out entire villages, executing children etc....having served on an aircraft carrier, and moving troops around, ive got a pretty good idea what standard artillery pieces look like...

 

[martyn20]

You want to bomb people without any evidence... wow...Carry on supporting jihadists mate...having served on an aircraft carrier, and moving troops around, ive got a pretty good idea what standard artillery pieces look like.

Where have I said I want to bomb people without evidence? My anger right now is Labour have limited our options to zero, even if conclusive evidence is discovered by the UN we cannot help stop these attacks.
Please explain to me what makes an artillery piece 'look like' it is designed to fire chemical weapons, from your vast experience. And if an American General came out and said we are going to bomb because I have seen a video of a gun that looks like it fires chemical weapons and that's good enough for me, would you accept it?