Syrian Gas Attack. Should the West intervene?

  • we need no-fly zones to be implemented.

    How? This is not our country, it is a Russian assisted state. If we put our own planes in without their permission they'll be shot down. If we try to shoot down their planes expect swift and brutal retalliation irrespective of borders.


    Both ways we're the losers.

    History is much like an Endless Waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.

    4312-gwban-gif

    If my post is in red it is moderation. Take note.

  • The Syrian planes get taken out with attacks on their bases and if the Russian planes enter the no-fly zones, they get shot down. Even Turkey shot some Russian planes down without starting WW3, so anything is possible if there's a will to do it.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • How? This is not our country, it is a Russian assisted state. If we put our own planes in without their permission they'll be shot down. If we try to shoot down their planes expect swift and brutal retalliation irrespective of borders.


    Both ways we're the losers.

    Given that Syria is Russia's puppet state and could therefore enact an air cease fire and demand Syria follows suit - in the air and on the ground - but chooses not to do so, what would happen if the UN terminated Russia's membership and invoked trade sanctions, on the grounds that it has become a rogue state threatening world peace? How would Russia respond? By siding with North Korea or China? Unlikely I think.


    Maybe Russia would respond by telling UN members that it would enact a total cease fire for a short specified period on condition that the UN concentrated solely on an evacuation corridor for Syrian civilians rather than persisting in bringing in food, water and medical supplies, which is a road leading nowhere.


    Of course, if Syrian civilians still insist on staying - even with a permitted UN peacekeeping force to protect civilians from hostile fire during evacuation - then those civilians are sealing their own fate and their children's.


    Admittedly Syrian civilians are between a rock (aka bombs & rubble) and a hard place (UN safe haven - less comfortable than Hilton). But at least the haven offers survival and the possibility of a better life further down the line.


    Surely this is exercising realistic humanitarianism rather than interventionism.

  • When I talk about being a interventionist, I don't mean going round the world changing regimes, but only intervening for humanitarian grounds or self defence or deterrence factors.


    But without a no-fly zone, what happens if after agreed ceasefire, the Russians and/or Syrians attacked the evacuation corridor?


    Rob Alka , I'm going to create a thread about the UN later and I'll copy your comments from the first part of the your post into that. There are some other posts from last year which mentioned the UN too, so if I can find them, I'll copy those those too.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • At least 70 people have died in a suspected chemical attack in Douma, the last rebel-held town in Syria's Eastern Ghouta, rescuers and medics say.

    Volunteer rescue force the White Helmets tweeted graphic images showing several bodies in basements. It said the deaths were likely to rise.

    There has been no independent verification of the reports.

    Syria has called the allegations of a chemical attack a "fabrication" - as has its main ally, Russia.

    The US state department said Russia - with its "unwavering support" for Syria's government - "ultimately bears responsibility" for the alleged attacks.

    When the last major chemical attack happened, Trump launched a missile attack at the military airport from where the attack came from. Lets see if he does anything this time.


    This has all the hallmarks of Putin over this and he seems to be testing the west's resolve over the attack in Salisbury.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Looks like someone is getting involved, probably Israel, but Trump threatened Assad yesterday on Twitter calling him Animal Assad and saying he and Russia and Iran will pay.

    At least 14 people have died or were hurt after a Syrian military airport was hit by missiles, state media said, amid global alarm over a suspected chemical attack on a rebel-held town.

    Monday's attack hit the Tiyas airbase, known as T4, near the city of Homs.

    Syria initially said the West was involved. The US and France threatened to respond to the alleged chemical attack, but deny striking the base.

    Israel, which has previously hit Syrian targets, has not commented.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • As I said before, I do think we should get involved in things like this, but there are so many players there already, that this field is a little bit crowded, so you maybe right.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • US President Donald Trump has promised a "forceful" response to the alleged chemical attack in Syria, as Western leaders consider what action to take.

    "We have a lot of options militarily," he told reporters. He added that a response would be decided "shortly".

    Theresa May is meeting her national security council right now to discuss our response to this attack. She has already spoken to the French president who favours military action against Assad and she will talk to Trump later.


    The Americans have just announced that they will call a security council meeting at 8pm our time. Sky News is speculating that the Americans want to get proper evidence of the chemical attacks (note, the pleural) before deciding on what to do. The Russians have also called a for a UN meeting.


    Blair has popped up on tv today also calling for UK action, but it's because of his Iraq actions that this Syrian mess happened. If it weren't for that, Cameron would've supported military action against Assad years ago and the Americans wouldn't have backed down then.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • If the UK gets involved which is looking more and more likely it will end up being another Iraq, I wonder if IS will appreciate the UK fighting on their side, nice to know we will be supporting the same organisation that has carried out attacks in the UK.

    Young boys in the park jumpers for goalpost that's what footballs all about isn't it.

  • I wonder if IS will appreciate the UK fighting on their side

    This is exactly why we shouldn't get involved. Both sides are as bad as each other and which ever one wins, and it sems Assad is likely, it'll be just as bad for the Syrian people.


    If the gas turns out to be chlorine. That could be made with any common household chemicals (e.g. Mix bleach and Vim) and since the hell is being bombed out of the place anyway this could just as well be a ghastly accident.


    The Russians are saying that they will target the source of any attack, such as ships or submarines, this could blow up into a full scale war. :rolleyes:

    History is much like an Endless Waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.

    4312-gwban-gif

    If my post is in red it is moderation. Take note.

  • Apparently May is not bothered what the rest of parliament thinks about us getting involved she is not going to put it to a vote in parliament, all sounds a bit familiar, will probably be getting a few sexed up documents ready to support us going in too.

    Young boys in the park jumpers for goalpost that's what footballs all about isn't it.

  • Here's the BBC story:

    The prime minister has summoned the cabinet to discuss the government's response to the suspected chemical weapons attack in Syria.

    Ministers will consider the options for backing military action threatened by the United States and its allies.

    Theresa May is prepared to take action against the Assad regime in Syria without first seeking parliamentary consent, sources have told the BBC.

    Of course Blair did have a vote in parliament, but it's the last vote when Cameron was struck down is what she is worried about.


    The Americans are going to attack in the next few days, of that I've no doubt and May has to decide does she support Trump in this attack, or let him and the French deal with this this.


    Because of the Russian (not anyone else!) chemical attack on us and now this, she is keen to send a message to Putin, that chemical warfare will not be tolerated. I fully support her and if it came to a vote, we know what Corbyn and comrades would do in any case, so why bother with parliament?

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Just not convinced that UK going in is the right thing to do, and I will stand by that, the ministry of defence should be just that, there to defend the UK and it's territories from aggressors, and not used for enforcing other nations regime change.

    Young boys in the park jumpers for goalpost that's what footballs all about isn't it.

  • Just not convinced that UK going in is the right thing to d

    I agree. According to reports the gas was Chlorine, this could be an accident or IS deliberately gassing civillians to make the West attack their enemy.


    We do know that IS will do anything to further their aims and as they're loosing badly any thing is possible.


    It would seem according to the latest Yougov poll taken on April 9th that the public are not convinced:



    History is much like an Endless Waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.

    4312-gwban-gif

    If my post is in red it is moderation. Take note.

  • I think the poll indicates that people don't want to see us drawn into a long conflict in the middle east, but one way or the other, we've been involved in that region for hundreds of years and while we still need the black stuff flowing from that place, we still will be.


    As I said, this is as much about sending a message to Putin, but if the Russians shoot down one of our planes, then May has a tough decision. Back down and look weak, or start something which could potentially be very serious with the Russians.

    Just not convinced that UK going in is the right thing to do, and I will stand by that, the ministry of defence should be just that, there to defend the UK and it's territories from aggressors, and not used for enforcing other nations regime change.

    The mission would not be regime change, because if we do that, you then get the genocide in reverse. Those who've been the victims of Assad, will do the same to his supporters, but the danger is that if we start dropping lots of bombs on Assad's forces, which is what it looks like may happen, that could weaken them so much that the regime crumbles.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • I agree. According to reports the gas was Chlorine, this could be an accident or IS deliberately gassing civillians to make the West attack their enemy.

    Exactly anyone can manufacture chlorine gas if they have the right chemicals which are readily available anywhere, also like you say it could also have been an accident.

    Young boys in the park jumpers for goalpost that's what footballs all about isn't it.

  • As long as Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell stay out of things, I hope there would never be sexed up documents again.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Why this exaggerated outrage when it's a gas or chemical attack?


    Is the agony of death significantly different between dying of wounds caused by an air strike versus a chemical attack?


    Is the proportion of dead versus seriously wounded significantly different between chemical versus non-chemical weapons??


    Does one really need to paint a bigger red line on the method of killing as opposed to extent of killing generally or extent of killing innocent civilians?


    Does anyone have enough knowledge to determine who is the real enemy, the bad guys?


    Does anyone know for sure who are the innocent civilians?


    Does anyone believe that in the madhouse that is the Middle East there is a military solution that can bring lasting peace or even a peace that lasts a few years?


    Does anyone believe the the best outcome for the West is to keep out of it, let them kill one another without interfering, meddling or taking sides, so that the bedraggled survivors can have a year or two of peace before starting all over again to kill one another for whatever reason enters their manic heads?

  • s long as Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell stay out of things

    Tony Blair has declared the UK "will have to" back any US-led military intervention in Syria or give "carte blanche" for the future use of chemical weapons.


    The former Prime Minister called for Theresa May to act and said she did not need the approval of MPs through a vote in Parliament.

    Speaking after a suspected chemical attack in the city of Douma that reportedly killed 70 people and injured 500, Mr Blair said those responsible must be "held to account".

    You just knew he couldn't not meddle with it and also, just as with Brexit, he want's to ignore the democratic process. :rolleyes:


    As for who's responsible we don't know for sure.


    Does anyone believe that in the madhouse that is the Middle East there is a military solution that can bring lasting peace or even a peace that lasts a few years?

    So long as there are two main versions of Islam out there that are implacably opposed to the other they'll always be at each others throats and lobbing a load of bombs and missiles at them will just kill more innocents.


    Iran and Saudi are also having something of a war by proxy in Syria and Yemen amongst other places. As I've stated before if you wade into a dog fight you'll be bitten.


    Let them kill one another without interfering, meddling or taking sides, so that the bedraggled survivors can have a year or two of peace before starting all over again to kill one another for whatever reason enters their manic heads?

    Until they can come to terms with each others religeous beliefs that is what will happen IMO.

    History is much like an Endless Waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.

    4312-gwban-gif

    If my post is in red it is moderation. Take note.

  • The international outcry over the use of chemical weapons, as I'm sure you would know, is not related to how many have been killed. As you say, if you get blown to bits by conventional bombs, bullets, fire etc, these can all cause horrific injuries and death.


    This is all about sending a message that chemical weapons will not be tolerated by anyone. The world decided a long time ago that these weapons were not to be used as part of warfare and most of the countries of the world agreed to this. And without derailing this thread in a different direction, from the UK's point of view, we additionally want to send a message to Russia over their chemical attack in Salisbury.


    The real enemy is evil and unfortunately there is plenty of it in that region and no I don't think this region will be at peace until democratic governments can rise. All seems a long way off at the moment, but at least Iraq is a work "in progress." Military power can at least kill/tame the current crop of bad guys, but of course then others pop up to take their places.


    I'm an interventionist, as I believe that as Britain was the former world power which messed up half the world in the first place, we are uniquely placed to try and correct some mistakes of the past, or at least try and put current wrongs to bed.


    Most of the countries of the Middle East were created by ourselves and the French and like Africa, as an imperial power we seemed to have a habit in the past of drawing borders for places we had very little knowledge about which is the root of many of the problems in these places today. The Sunni/Shia thing, is something we'll never solve or should we. That's nothing to do with us and about the only mess we did not create in that region.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Iran and Saudi are also having something of a war by proxy in Syria and Yemen amongst other places. As I've stated before if you wade into a dog fight you'll be bitten.

    Israel attacked a Iranian base in Syria the other day, so it has all the ingredients for a "little" world war, or a big one if we start fighting the Russians.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • As long as Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell stay out of things, I hope there would never be sexed up documents again.

    When it comes to politics and pushing through an agenda all politicians are capable of that it's not restricted to just one party, I know supporters of one political party or other will always try to paint the opposition as the devil, while viewing the party they support as holier than thou, it's like a disease of the mind.

    Young boys in the park jumpers for goalpost that's what footballs all about isn't it.

  • True, Ron, but in this case this is not non-existent WMD in Iraq but real WMD being used on people, which we've seen the effects of on our tv screens and in our papers. There is no need for any dodgy dossiers, because the facts are there for all to see.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Well they certainly showed us something, but was it what really happened or something somebody wanted us to think happened?

    Young boys in the park jumpers for goalpost that's what footballs all about isn't it.

  • Sorry, but I don't buy that ISIS or someone else did the chemical attack to try and get the Americans involved in toppling Assad.


    The only players capable of the chemical attack are Assad and Russia.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment.