MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
China calls for restraint in Syria and says military intervention can only worsen the crisis
China's foreign minister urged restraint in the growing tensions over Syria, saying any military intervention in the crisis would only worsen turmoil in the Middle East. China all along has tried to maintain a neutral position on the issue, not accompanying the West’s intentions of imposing sanctions to Syria but calling on Damascus to begin talking with the rebels. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesNow why would Russia, Syria's main arms supplier, block action? What's Russia's record like on exterminating people? There's a lot of talk about how “it must be the rebels” because Assad is winning. Examine that. “Someone” fires chemical weapons into a rebel-held area. And kills rebels? Then, the regime hopes, support for the rebels will be reduced. Has Assad shown any concern about the UN? Not so's you'd notice. He figures Russia will keep it off his back. Let's look wider. How much of Syria does Assad now control? 40%. Do you think he might want the other 60% back? How many times has Syria, or its proxies, attacked surrounding countries. Why does Syria manufacture and stockpile so much chemical weaponry? Why did Assad stop the UN chemical weapons inspectors visiting the areas for FIVE days. Who shot at the UN inspectors? Oh, as a matter of interest, argieland is currently a temporary member of the Security Council. What does it say? Another laugh on the way. Takes time to work “colonialism” and “imperialism” into such a situation. Has Libya turned into a British imperial colony?
Aug 29th, 2013 - 08:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0.......the Yanks are going to show restraint and limit it to missile strikes.....they could do much more!
Aug 29th, 2013 - 09:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0And Argentina is doing what precisely?
Aug 29th, 2013 - 09:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0http://news.yahoo.com/uk-syria-attack-legal-justified-125728122.html
Aug 29th, 2013 - 10:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0Only a matter of days before the United Kingdom (as if they had not already done so with the Iraq emprise), CEMENTS FOR THE AGES THEIR STATUS AS A ROGUE, MURDEROUS STATE.
Why else would these Brits already be massaging the issue of “legality”. They know such a strike would be ILLEGAL.
The post-war international laws are quite clear about this:
1. Military action can only be undertaken with the support of the UN security Council resolution (like the first Iraq War).
Circumstances make strange bed fellows... here were all the dumb Brits blasing Argentina for wanting the VETO power of the UNSC discarded. How dare those argies? Well, here is a great example of how such a reform would have HELPED the UK, US, and France. LOL... oh the irony.
2. Without Security Council backing, the only legitimate use of force is self-defense (i.e Falklands).
Simple enough. You are attacked, all bets and rules are off and you can retaliate as you please. And no “preemtive strikes” are completely illegal and criminal under this self-defense clause.
3. Any other intervention outside these two must be of “peaceful” means. This means that the talk that “humanitarian” emergency allows for military action outside the above two is utter QUATSCH / N'IMPORTE QUOI / BULLOCKS / DISPARATE.
So by all means go ahead Cameron. There will no doubt then that you will not be able to leave UK territory again.
@4;
Aug 29th, 2013 - 10:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0God that's a boring post.
Say something cheeky or interesting, or both. FFS.
You guys must feel pretty inadequate though, not having any armed forces really worth mentioning, - eh?
How did I know, deflect, deflect, deflect.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 11:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0Only evil countries place all their pride on military blood.
UK being exhibit A.
I guess the truth hurt so much that it wounded you and so truthful it left you without retort.
@6 Seriously?
Aug 29th, 2013 - 11:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Why are you so upset about this? Your country has no role in policing anything in the world and you want nothing to do with foreigners anyway.
However, there are civilised countries with a moral and legal duty to act when such atrocities occur. To do nothing would be far worse.
TTT, you sound like the type of person who would walk passed an innocent being attacked because it is nothing to do with you. Some people would consider it their moral duty to help the person being attacked.
It's not even clear, at this point whether Parliament will support armed intervention. France, the U.S. and G.B. will almost certainly wait for the U.N. weapons inspectors report.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 12:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But this isn't Iraq part 2. The evidence that the Syrian regime is using chemical weapons against rebel held areas is far more compelling. A question for you Tobias: if your country was being ruled by a pitiless dictator willing to use chemical warfare and unconcerned about whether his victims included children, would you be so concerned about the legalities involved in an attack on your oppressors?
Syrians are fleeing to Iraq because it's safer for them. Bombs are now going off in Lebanon. Refugee camps in Turkey have been attacked. Russia sells 9.5Billion$ worth to Syria p.a. It's their only strategic base and sphere of influence in the Middle East and they have just ordered two warships to head to the Med. The Saudi's offered them an incredibly lucrative oil & gas deal as well as promising them no attacks from Chechen terrorists. Putin turned them down flat.
China wants a 'political solution'. There will be no political solution until the rebels are so decimated that they have no negotiating power. Which could take a while. Years perhaps.
Russia will use it's veto. This has to end. Who is willing to enable this to occur?
You are so politically uncouth Elaine it makes me embarrassed for you.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 12:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I don't want anything to do with foreigners, but I can still give an opinion to their actions.
Hate to break it tou you, NO ONE nor any COUNTRY gave the UK the role of “policing”. That is a self-awarded “title” that has no legitimate legal basis.
The UK is not civilized and it has proven it here once and for all.
Finally, your analogy is so happlessly jejune it merits with all sincerity pity and deep reflection on how flawed your understanding of the world is.
There is no innocent person being attacked here. There are radicalized factions fighting each other, no “innocents” here. It is a CIVIL WAR. And in such both sides commit atrocities, and this is especially the case here where there is no good side.
Please do try again, and I would advice the Brits to show some vestige of human noetic control, and behave less like instinctive creatures. No one gives a rat about your delusions of grandeur as a society/country.
You are neither civilized nor a major player in anything.
@6:
Aug 29th, 2013 - 12:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ermmm.......No. Not at all.
I'm an ex-Soldier remember, - I don't give a Fcuk about civvies getting wasted, - It cant be helped.
@8
Aug 29th, 2013 - 12:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Hyperbole not permitted. Hypotheticals are irrelevant here. Fact is it is a CIVIL WAR, which means it is citizen vs citizens. THIS IS NOT THE SAME AS A VERY REDUCED POWER ELITE using such weaponry on the entire population, that would a bit different. What part of Civil War do you British do not process? The 'civil' or the 'war' part??
What if the UK had a regime that was opressing its own population by spying on their every e-mail, their every phone call, monitored their every move on the street, on the underground, what if it detained people without cause for hours no lawyers, no rights, no food, what if it engaged in illegitimate wars, what if it killed people in the street just because of their nationality (like, uhm, Brazilian in a subway station), what if it squashed the media when reporting on their activities, what if it used the middle class's money to cover the losing bets of billionaires?
Oh, wait... t
...that regime is not fiction. It is the reality of the UK today.
What if another country was libertarian and regarded all of the above as a humanitarian crisis? So I guess they are in their full rights to start cratering London, right?
“There is no innocent person being attacked here. There are radicalized factions fighting each other, no “innocents” here. ”
Aug 29th, 2013 - 12:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0TTT is your access to news so restricted that you have not seen the evidence of the children killed by chemical weapons?
Hard as it is for your to understand, developed and civilised countries do play a role in policing especially when innocents are being attacked and when banned weapons, such as chemical weapons, are being used. These weapons were outlawed under a treaty in 1925. It would be remiss of any society to ignore it.
12 @ElaineB
Aug 29th, 2013 - 12:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It is a waste of time, Toby's cannot grasp reality. Remember his declarations on the then upcoming England tour of Argentina:
“Now that Argentina plays regularly with the former SANZAR powers, Argentina will just be another stop over in the June tests for the Northern Hemisphere to be massacred.”
His grasp on the real world seems even less firm than his knowledge of rugby.
@toby
How did that tour pan out Toby? At least you got one word right, “massacred”.
Oh the children... is that beyond tragic? What do you want me to say? NO?
Aug 29th, 2013 - 12:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I know it may be new for you, but in war there is something called “collateral damage”. It sounds heartless, but it is what it is.
If you were so concerned about Children, you would have opposed Iraq as that killed far FAR more children than Saddam was killing. If it a matter of numbers, ditto. If it a matter of principle, same.
It does not change the reality of the political facts. It is an internal struggle between at least a half dozen military factions of a country. It is not Kosovo where one government is systematically deracinating or eradicating an entire population.
So reading the responses here the British are war thirsty again... and yet they claim they were so opposed to Iraq. You guys said the same thing back then, were proven wrong, and tried to rewrite history. Quite pathetic and pusillanimous.
Watching the parliamentary debate on this subject on TV at the moment.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 12:31 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Shame others can not watch it, it's democracy it's democracy in action.
I personally do not support intervention and think the house will vote against it, when it eventually votes on the question.
Changing my opinion on our MP's, gorgeous George Galloway, the darling of the Malvanistas, was a very good orator, shame he he is such a nut job..
@13 I know. He lives such an isolated, angry life. He gives more away in every post with statements like 'he is underestimated in real life', indicating he has an enormous inferiority complex and is not respected by his own people. He also spends too much time playing video games if he can refer to the murder of children with chemical weapons as 'collateral damage'. He lost touch with humanity a long time ago.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 12:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@14. You are a very sick young man.
The sad part here is that I am saying something that would be BETTER for the UK. To stay out, is the best choice. To go ALL in would be least worst.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 12:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But to just do some cosmetic symbolic rocket strike would be the WORST thing to do. Then all sides would blame you for either getting involved, or getting involved and not doing enough.
In war there is not skulking, pussy-footing, or fudging the lines. You are in or your are out.
An attack as proposed would be devastating for the UK in the long run. It will achieve nothing, leave all sides unsatisfited and with animus, and set up your country for more extremist attacks.
@17 The sad part here is that you live without any conscience at all. It is better for everyone that you isolate yourself from society.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 12:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Syria has broken international law by using chemical weapons, and using them against their own people. It would be unthinkable for the world to ignore this breech of a law that has been respected for close to 100 years.
The easiest course of action would be to look away and say it has nothing to do with us. That would also be a crime. This is not like Iraq.
@15 Unfortunately we are still suffering from Blair's lies. People believe this will be another Iraq but it is nothing like that. It is not a ground war or involvement in Syria's civil war. It is punishing the Syrian government for breaking the treaty and international law by using chemical weapons. Failure to take action will open any other country to do the same. Should we only react if they use chemical weapons against us? Or our allies?
It will not be devestating on the UK.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 12:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Pray tell, how could it set us up for more terrorist attacks?
You do realise that extremists have been blowing up things here long before the Spaniards even landed on your continent. Look up Guy Fawkes.
Fear will not be a consideration, shame you can not watch the HofC debate taking place, you might see something to change your biased opinion.
The UK will not intervene, because the British people and through them their parliament will not support it.
Elaine,
Aug 29th, 2013 - 01:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You were close, I am a young man, minus the sick and very part.
You are a woman, and may I put on my Machismo hat, hence a feckless source of military objectivity.
This is your problem (as a woman in general): you have your heart in the right place but this location displaces your cortex.
You want to “punish” the Syrian government. By all means, go ahead.
Call for a mobilization to war, call for a PROPER DECLARARATION OF WAR. Call for 150.000 to 200.000 Brtitish troops, that for the invasion ALONE. Do you have children? Call for a draft, as I know the UK does not have enough active personnel or reserves to both invade and hold the country after the war. Call for rationing as the UK has a major budget deficit and would need to spend TRILLIONS on this conflict. You do not have trillions, thus major sacrifices from the populace would be needed.
You see, that is the only way you will “save the children” (of course in the process killing as collateral damage, which you so womanly deny exists as a concept, thousands of other children). Your bombs are not either perfect nor accurate all the time.
The above is what it would take to have the desired effect. Your emotional womanly side will fight your noetic side and your pride will lead you to respond to me as being a sick, out of touch bastard, but any military general would concur with me more than they would with you.
True military experts dispise these feel-good attacks. They have no mission, they have no goal, they have no purpose. It is all politics and emotion.
This is your problem: you want to quench your “pangs of conscience”, you, as a woman, want to believe you did something to save the chidlren. So you want a rocket attack of a day or two. That will douse your pathos.
And that is exactly why “great military female leaders” remains the one area were women have been unable to ever show equality with men. A military leader knows its all in or all out, all else is nugatory.
Women fail here.
15
Aug 29th, 2013 - 01:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Shame others can not watch it, it's democracy it's democracy in action.”
..........there is no legal obligation for the government to get parliamentary approval before committing British forces.
The prime minister has the final say on deploying British troops in conflicts, using Royal Prerogative powers.
.......the key word here is Parliamentary “Debate”......and permission is not needed.
The basic premise of the intervention is......
We are going to kill people to save people......
I am sure there is some logic in that somewhere but I can't see it!
@20 Racist, xenophobic and misogynist. It explains why you told us you NEVER date women.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 01:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@19 I am not sure that we will not intervene. I don't think there is any intention by the US, France or the UK to get involved in the kind of scenario TTT fantasises about.
Syria has broken treaties and international law and that will have consequences. It must have consequences.
A_Voice.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 02:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Are you actually watching the debate?
Please do not tell me you do not live here, cos a aint gonna believe it!
@22 ElaineB
Aug 29th, 2013 - 02:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Racist, xenophobic and misogynist.” abbreviates to Argie.
@24 A certain type, yes. All of them? Not in my experience. I have met many quite lovely and rational Argentine men. TTT is not typical in any country. IMO
Aug 29th, 2013 - 02:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@22,24
Aug 29th, 2013 - 02:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Name call till the gloaming, I remain right.
Sorry to go on about it, but the HofC debate is galvanising.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 02:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Lessons from the Iraq war have obviously been learned.
I do not think the house will vote for intervention, the arguements seem to be balanced.
@22
Aug 29th, 2013 - 02:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So you don't want to save the children, you just want to kill people. How nice.
That's all rocket attacks will do. To stop the killing of children, you have to get in the ground, simple as that.
Man you are so immature.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 02:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Do you have any children?
You can not, because you would not have asked such a stupid question!
The UK can probably lob in 40 cruise missiles. If we spent the £40 million on aid for the displaced that would make more sense. Oh, and if we just lob one onto Assads palace that would let him know what we think....
Aug 29th, 2013 - 02:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As for the little squirt, isn't he pathetic, and as for AVoid, the usual vacuous diversions that don't work. Gollum should give them their cards.
@27 The PM does not need the support of the house, though to ignore it would be political suicide. The spectre of Blair's lies looms large in people's minds to this day. Unfortunately people are still confusing the situation in Iraq with this scenario.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 02:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The US and France will go ahead with a consequence for Syria, if only to stop other countries thinking they can go ahead and do the same. If the UK opts to ignore it, it will diminish our position. France always seems to step up. We should remember that.
All that said, I live in a democracy and the will of the people should prevail. Something that did not happen under Blair's government. The damage that man did......
Agree totally with you. Watching the debate which is still currently going on and listening to MP's from all parties, it is obvious that for once we are seeing true representation from the people. I get the impression that they are reflecting their own personal views at last listening to the views of their constituents and to be very, very honest both pro and anti interventionists are making sound arguements.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 03:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What is coming through is the need for evidence, where is the evidence that Assad was responsible? it seems that they are loath to trust the intelligence people, who know talk in terms such as “Probably” and “Maybe.”
Do not get me wrong, I appalled by the use of these weapons, but we have done enough.
Well for me as an ex serviceman who has watched our young men come home from the last two incursions, those who have come home, maimed and mentally scarred. it's not enough.
If we must commit our young men, then we should commit them to protecting our own for once in a decade or two, like our people on the islands.
32
Aug 29th, 2013 - 03:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You are being convinced by the debate......which is reiterating my parting comment @21 why should you kill people to save people!
@33 They are all mindful of not being in anyway associated with the misinformation and blatant lies that so tarnished Blair's government.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 03:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I can't agree that we should only act if we are directly under threat. One needs to take a world view or we may as well disband the UNSC which seems pretty useless at times but has acted as a deterrent. I am certain that standing alone we would not have been victorious in past wars. We are grateful other countries did not turn their backs and say it was not their problem. We need to remember that.
Syria's actions are beyond any justification and letting them get away with it unpunished will be something we regret in the future. Of course, consequences can manifest in many forms. A ground war is definitely not being considered.
A_Voice.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 03:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0No. I was convinced before the debate.
Let me state my position, even if it is proven that the Assad regime carried out this attack, I do not think the UK should intervene.
The strongest arguement I am hearing so far, is that those responsible should be held accountable at International Law. If not now then at some time in the future.
As for killing people to save people, perhaps you should address your question to those who are being killed or should I say, who will be killed. I take it you agree there are people being killed or why else would there be a need to save them?
Are you trying to change my opinion, by posing philosophical questions, not that the question was directed at me, but nevertheless it is worthy of thought, does one fatal action stop another?
Better mind than mine have considered the subject, notice I did not use the word evil.
The old age question of killing, is it right to kill to save life?
Well,
Aug 29th, 2013 - 03:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0We all have an opinion,
I happen to think that Russia and china should be made to take their share of the blame,
Right or wrongly, they both support this dictator, and both especially Russia have been supplying Syria with military hardware for years,
They are both as guilty and should not be allowed to sit there whilst the innocent get slaughtered,
Far to many people blame us,
Well [Soddy offy]
It aint nothing to do with us,
And the French have only a slight interest , as the last time the French got involved it cost em thousands of lives,
But having said that, can the west sit back and let a mad man use chemical weapon when it likes to kill the innocent,
And if he is left unpunished, who then will step into the breach next, Egypt , Iran , north Korea , Somalia ,
And yet Russia and china sits there like vultures on a pogo stick,
Attack and we risk years of slaughter and death, do nothing and we may well soon regret it,
Yet simply, if the whole world condemned it, refuse to trade with it, and Russia put pressure on Syria to back off, perhaps we all sleep safe in our beds,
But make no mistake,
Don’t blame us for tribal unrest,
And don’t ignore the fact that Russia is just as guilty for keeping this nut in power,
[having said that]
Just what would replace him ????
Just an opinion…
.
your missing the point Briton,
Aug 29th, 2013 - 04:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Should we get involved?
or like me. do you think we have done enough and this is nothing to do with us.
If America wants to attack, let them. They will anyway, we just give cudos to their actions. Get the Brits on side, they are always good for that!
After all. Obama wants our support, yet he offers none to our Islanders.
Is that fair? He wants us to put our young men alongside his. Fine, okay, then let him reciprocate in kind.
Friendship is a two way street. (My favourite saying) along with. you scratch my back. I'll scratch yours, unfortunately. it does not appear to work that way!
Obama will not attack without the support of the Brits. Though a sneaky bit of me thinks he will do it if the French come on board.
@4 Love it. Just condemned argieland, haven't you? As I've said before - 40 million war criminals!
Aug 29th, 2013 - 04:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@6 Oh no. You can have that prize. Just imagine sending 66,000 troops to attack 1,500 civilians and 80 Royal Marines. Brave, eh?
@9 You prat. Not to mention a specious tosser!
@14 Yep, you don't read anything you don't want to see. Didn't the Syrian army open fire on peaceful demonstrators?
@17 But the UK has been asked, right!
@20 Don't be ridiculous. You wouldn't know how to be a “man”. And did you know that the UK has 250,000 troops. With, amongst other things, the only undefeated main battle tank in the world. Then there's the RAF, the Royal Marines (capable of holding up an entire argie invasion) and the Royal Navy. Seen all those cruise missiles? Submarine-launched, air-launched. But you shouldn't comment. Being a member of one of the most murderous states in recent years.
@28 You are such an arse. Our weapons aren't like that crap your palestinian pals use.
@35 And I agree with Briton @36. China and Russia have their own agenda. China doesn't care. A couple of million bodies mean nothing to them. Russia has a similar mentality. And is the main arms supplier. China and Russia are obliged to supply forces for UN use. Let them do so. China has 1,700,000 ground troops. They wouldn't notice losing 250,000.
@37 I understand your point. But the REAL POINT is to do the right thing. TiT for brains believes in standing by and doing nothing. But that's because he's an amoral coward. Britain is different. We have matured. Assad thinks he's like an old type Persian King of Kings. In fact, he's a shit. No different to Hussein and Gaddafi. He, and his family, need to be executed.
No, the point is, our guys have been fighting and dying for more than ten years. Time to stand them down.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 05:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You never know, they may well be needed down south!
This is not our fight, no A Q in Syria!
It is our responsibility in my opinion. And the consequences of doing nothing will affect us in the long term. If we are not prepared to act in our role as one of the UNSC veto-wielding powers, maybe we should relinquish that power and hand it to, say, Brazil or Argentina? France and the US are stepping up to the plate and so should we. If we want to have power we have to shoulder the responsibility that comes with it.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 05:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There is a much bigger picture to look at than 'give our guys a rest' and we are not talking about putting forces on the ground. There is no time when our role maintaining peaces and security ends when we are in a position of power. It is a long-term role.
If we start opting out of world politics and become isolated we will be far more vulnerable and no less of a target.
40
Aug 29th, 2013 - 05:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well there you have it......opted out of world respect and a future leading to obscurity.......Not a role model for the world.......not so Great Britain......little britain just gave the OK for the rest of the world to use Chemical Weapons.....
The warmongers have lost, Britain won't be getting involved in the Syrian conflict. Some MPs are actually listening to the vast majority of British people at last. About time!
Aug 29th, 2013 - 05:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#41. Will your darling Rgland be taking steps to condemn chemical weapons or actually do anything about it? No! No balls at all in RGland, total cowards, like yourself slime ball.
@41 If you remove your obvious personal bias, you have indeed agreed with the point I was making.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 05:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And I should just add that Russia and China - the other UNSC members with veto power - have done the same. Though China seems to be more fence-sitting, Russia actively supports Syria for economic reasons.
The US has the biggest responsibility as the only super power so my respect goes to France. A socialist government with a conscience stepping up.
It is not an end to the debate. When the UN inspection report is filed it will continue.
42
Aug 29th, 2013 - 06:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0At least I've got Teeth .......Gummy......ha ha that was a classic.......got caught out good and proper......you didn't really think we would believe your excuse......did you?
43
You are right.....new evidence will appear it's always going to be Damned if you do and Damned if you don't. If the US go ahead the UK will be drawn into it one way or another......a well aimed Scud at Cyprus perhaps.....
#44 Expert at deflection and avoiding embarrasing questions:.and can't read a sentence. What is RGland doing? Answer - the Tango, and corned beef - totally useless...
Aug 29th, 2013 - 06:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 045
Aug 29th, 2013 - 06:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I've Googled boot polish and it says........It's also very good for......polishing Boots!
Not top of the list for the poor and needy though.....let me see......
Oliver Twist.....“Can I have more please?”
”More What? Boy!
More......Boot Polish Sir!
Why the Dickens do you bother posting......easy meat!
Do you practice at it? or does it come naturally?
Aug 29th, 2013 - 06:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@44 I agree Cyprus may be the tipping point/reason/excuse. We have already send aircraft to the area to defend any possible attack.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 06:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I still think if you have the power you have to take responsibility. The government needs to widen the case and explain fully the consequences of not punishing the use of chemical weapons by Syria. Punishment can take many forms.
47
Aug 29th, 2013 - 07:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0......naturally
Well ....you got what you desired with the debate.......
Now who is going to step forward and shape the world for future generations?
Some things are right and some are wrong and there always has to be someone to stand up for the right......the Valiant... the Righteous...
What's wrong are you afraid to die.....no one lives forever...
Land of Hope and Glory, Mother of the Free,
How shall we extol thee, who are born of thee?
Wider still and wider shall thy bounds be set;
God, who made thee mighty, make thee mightier yet,
God, who made thee mighty, make thee mightier yet.
.When Britain first, at Heaven's command
Arose from out the azure main;
This was the charter of the land,
And guardian angels sang this strain:
I will not cease from Mental Fight,
Nor shall my Sword sleep in my hand:
Till we have built Jerusalem,
In Englands green & pleasant Land
48
ElaineB......I agree see above......
AVoice has left the building............in disgust!
@48
Aug 29th, 2013 - 07:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0280 SU on Oympus, radar sees into Syria and all of the Middle East right into Turkey. Nothing will move in the skies of Syria without 280 SU seeing it, unless of course they have stealth capability, Makes you wonder? at the time of this alleged chemical attack, what were they seing on the mountian? All recorded of course.
”What is coming through is the need for evidence, where is the evidence that Assad was responsible? it seems that they are loath to trust the intelligence people, who know talk in terms such as “Probably” and “Maybe.”
Aug 29th, 2013 - 07:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Agreed completely
“Give peace a chance. Give diplomacy a chance. Stop fighting and…start talking.”
Who with and will it stop such actions from happening again?
Aug 29th, 2013 - 07:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Probably not.
Using western standards, the ones who leaked the pics of the dead children, should get at least 35 years in prison...
Aug 29th, 2013 - 07:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Your double moral in transparent, not invisible...
And in the words of the yanks, You buddy are one sick mother F****r!
Aug 29th, 2013 - 07:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Now be a nice commie and run off and ask your political masters what piece of shitty propoganda you should post next!
Oh and do us a favour, ask them to come up with sometything more original, or could it be that you were not around the last time that one was used!
I'm the sick one? Manning showed the world pictures of US soldiers killing civilians from an apache helicopter and he got 35 years for that... And I'm the sick one... You know what? In your sick and twisted world view, I'm ok being the sick one...
Aug 29th, 2013 - 07:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You tell me, if telling the world about that sort of crime costs 35 years, what would the apropiate punishment for the actual crime be?
If Assad did what the papers say he did, he needs to be charged for genocide, but after so many lies with Iraq and Afg, your governments have no credibility.
Your words simply can't be trusted.
In other words, your governments lies. To us. To you. Mostly to you.
Like Peter and the wolf...
“We don't kill our people ... no government in the world kills its people, unless it's led by a crazy person.”
Aug 29th, 2013 - 07:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Syrian President Bashar al-Assad
7th December 2011
55
Aug 29th, 2013 - 07:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Like Peter and the wolf...??
The duck got eaten the bird .....escaped into the tree.....Peter caught the Wolf and took it to the zoo...
A great piece of Classical music though!
You didn't mean the Boy that cried Wolf......did you?
......time for bed....said Zebedee!
Pedro y el lobo... Peter and the wolf... The boy who cried wolf...
Aug 29th, 2013 - 08:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Classical music or sound of silence, those governments lies...
Also China isn´t the only one actively protesting here, Merkel plans to talk with Putin to bring another solution at UN both have agreed that war in Syria should be resolved through political efforts.
Aug 29th, 2013 - 08:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0two different stories.......
Aug 29th, 2013 - 08:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0this is Peter and the Wolf.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_and_the_Wolf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_and_the_Wolf
this is the Boy that cried wolf .......one of Aesops fables
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_and_the_Wolf
and this is the famous classical piece.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_and_the_Wolf
.....ho hum
Great Avoice, your knowledge is truly astonishing and deserves an elogy, but it does little to change the fact that those governments are a bunch of wolf cryers...
Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0Which was, as you yourself noticed, my whole point.
If you wish to talk about classical pieces, I'm not the one to do so with, as you already have realized...
38 Conqueror
Aug 30th, 2013 - 02:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So you want to execute Assad, his wife and their children?
Well here she is AND at present she has British Citizenship by birth, can't find any photos of the children.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/10273495/Syria-conflict-Asma-al-Assad-is-having-her-Marie-Antoinette-moment.html
If you did that, kill his wife and children, how would you be any different from Assad (if he did do the chemical attack)?
Rebels Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack: http://www.infowars.com/rebels-admit-responsibility-for-chemical-weapons-attack/
Aug 30th, 2013 - 04:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Report: US Attack On Syria to Begin Saturday:
http://www.infowars.com/rebels-admit-responsibility-for-chemical-weapons-attack/
Elena I like your wisdom!!!
Sep 02nd, 2013 - 08:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The wisdom and judgement of the CPC is the reason why the PRC is the world's premier country.
Sep 03rd, 2013 - 01:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!