MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, August 18th 2022 - 11:39 UTC



UK drops out of military intervention in Syria; PM Cameron loses vote in Parliament

Friday, August 30th 2013 - 00:19 UTC
Full article 129 comments

British MPs have rejected possible UK military action against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's government to deter the use of chemical weapons. A government motion was defeated by 285 to 272, a majority of 13 votes. Read full article


Disclaimer & comment rules
  • CaptainSilver

    At last, politicians listening to the people!

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 02:31 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Be serious

    Totally agree, British Armed Forces are their to defend British people and British interests, not foreigners or foreign interests. Cameron presented a poor case and it was rightly voted out. Lets have a vote on foreign aid next.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 02:50 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Redrow

    @2 Ahh splendid isolation. I wonder who will get our seat on the UNSC?

    Our involvement in Syria would have probably been no greater than it was in
    Libya and yet Iraq is being used to explain last night and yet it had no bearing on Libya? And what if it is now established that Assad's forces did use the chemical weapons? Will Ed and the coalition rebels demand a military response? Strange days indeed.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 03:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • travellingscotsman

    Meanwhile the Syrian government napalms a school! Assad is probably writing his thank you letter to the commons right now.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 04:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    @3 Redrow

    I agree that people are incorrectly using Iraq. I also find it very hypocritical of Labour to vote against this, when they and they alone are responsible for what happened in Iraq.

    Although I don't want to see UK Armed Forces involved in conflicts, I also don't want to see Syrian people murdered in this way.

    How many people dead is enough to force people into action?

    Do we have to wait until it's a million people, like in Rwanda?

    Shame on the politicians who voted against this, especially the war-mongering Labourites.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 04:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • verdane

    @3 Redrow

    If Britain's only justification for a seat in the UNSC is to ask how high when the US demands when we jump, then I think we are better off not having a seat.

    However, having a seat I imagine we can veto any vote to remove us.

    I am so thankful that we are not engaging in yet another US led military assault.

    I feel for the Syrian people, but do not understand what gives we Brits the responsibility for being deputy to the US world sheriff. Turkey and Saudi Arabia are neighbors and have significant military resources to bring to the table. Why not let the locals sort it out for themselves if they are so inclined.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 04:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    As I mentioned in the other long thread about this. As a veto-wielding member of the UNSC we have a responsibility and moral duty to uphold INTERNATIONAL peace and security. That includes sanctions and military action. We signed up to that and enjoy the power so should step up when required as we have always done.

    If we choose to only react when Britain is attacked, who is going to come to our aid? Who will support us in our hour of need? The consequences of not taking up our responsibilities is far-reaching.If we are no longer going to be a functioning member of the UNSC we should hand over that power to a willing country and we can wave goodbye to pretty much all of our armed forces.

    We don't live in isolation. We are a small island with business and political interests all over the world. If we want to maintain our position of influence we need to be sitting at the top table, not sloping off because we don't think the use of chemical weapons is our problem. It very much is.

    The ghost of Blair has certainly scared the bejeezus our of MPs terrified of being tainted by an Iraq-like scenario. This is nothing like Iraq. This is another Rwanda and anyone with a conscience should be ashamed that the world turned its back while that genocide was happening.

    Who would have thought the French had more cojones?

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 05:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • darragh

    I suspect that last night David Cameron got down on his knees and thanked his God that the H of C has got him off the hook. Now when the US comes knocking on the door of no 10 he can say “sorry can't help, the H of C says no”. Obama who is as anti-Brit as KFC will mutter under his breath about Brits but deep down will wish for somebody to get him off the hook he got himself onto with his daft 'line in the sand' comment.
    There is no doubt in my mind that Obama is the worst US president since the nineteenth century and here he was playing the 'foreign war card' (just like KFC and her Falkland Islands strategy) to try to rally the US people round to improve his popularity but the latest poll states that only 9% of US people agree with intervention. If and I repeat if there is any foreign intervention to be done then let it be done by the UN and/or the Arab League.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 05:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • trenchtoast

    I'd like to see some action from Turkey, Iraq, Egypt or Saudi Arabia before calling on the British to get involved again. All huge countries on Syria's doorstep with loads of shiny new weapons doing sod all.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 05:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Redrow

    6,8&9 Do you honestly believe that general war in the Middle East is preferable to a weekend of missile strikes by the usual suspects? Be careful what you wish for.

    Obviously, the missile strikes would not have ended the civil war in Syria but they might have weakened Assad's aerial ability and altered his General's calculations the next time they were considering gassing civilians - either of which would have saved more lives than the missiles would have taken.

    Either way, young Ed is now more of a busted flush internationally on foreign policy that even DC is this morning so we are out of the game for years now. EM looked as sick as he did the day he beat his brother to the leadership.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 05:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • verdane

    @10 ok I see your point.

    You are also correct to say that missile strikes would not end the civil war. But there are no guarantees that it stops with a few missiles chucked from an American destroyer either.

    Why should it matter that we are “out of the game?” Why do we need to be in the game in the first place? Being in the game has only led to reduced sovereignty, terrorism on British soil & a dislike of Britain and British foreign policy across large parts of the world.

    What do we gain? Access to the US defense procurement for BAE which is so integrated into the US DOD that its practically an American company now anyway?

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CaptainSilver

    Personally, I am fed up with wars you cannot win, that is all middle east wars. Instead of sending cruise missiles at £1 million a pop, send the money through the Red Cross and other decent charities to relieve suffering of the innocents involved. As for a seat on the UnSC, what is that worth? The UN has always been a spineless organisation and almost totally useless.
    If such a chemical attack is repeated and its conclusivly proven that it was Assad I would back anihalation of Assads air force. A threat should be made along those lines. There is a good possibility that the last attack wasn't Assad but just a ploy to draw us into yet another war.
    Let's save the cruises for any possible conflict that actually threatens British people or inhabitants of BOTs.
    As for Cameron, now a lame duck, move over please...

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • War Monkey

    I was against this on the grounds that DC and his mates are still in the process of stripping out the British armed forces and what little is left is needed elsewhere such as the Falkland Islands or maybe even our own back yard.

    That said I do feel for the Syrian people but with this comment in mind:

    “As I mentioned in the other long thread about this. As a veto-wielding member of the UNSC we have a responsibility and moral duty to uphold INTERNATIONAL peace and security. That includes sanctions and military action. We signed up to that and enjoy the power so should step up when required as we have always done.”

    So are China and Russia. What are you going to do when they vote us down? Why are they not getting involved and sending military help to the rebels? Just as importantly, where is the Arab League? What is Turkey doing? So many others who should be stepping up but never have. Maybe our message is 'sort your sh!t out'.

    Finally. If Barack Obama wasn't so anti British the result might have been different. Maybe we are sending him an important message too. 'We are not your poodle, your guard dog or your deputy. You are either with us or you are against us. Choose'.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Mr Ed

    Excellent news, the Briish armed forces, the Blairmacht, might actually be used to defend British territories in future, rather than stir up hornets' nests in far-flung places and impose women's right in Helmand.

    The 'evidence' presented was lamentable, 'open-source material' = Youtube.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:21 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • verdane

    @7 there are 5 permanent members on the security council and most of them have not had to spend the last 15 years bombing the middle east to justify their role.

    Either they therefore have no role, they play a role without recourse to constant military action or their role and therefore the authority of the security council is meaningless.

    Either way i'm not going to loose sleep because Britain for once wont be joining in with the missile waving.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Idlehands

    This is a rock and a hard place situation.

    Nobody really wants to get involved in Syria because it's a murderous dictator fighting what is mainly a large group of Jihadis. However there's the separate issue that chemical weapons have been used and the broader ramifications for the future of the world.

    Their use has elevated the conflict into the world of realpolitik where it doesn't deserve to be. I don't believe that in the 21st century a chemical attack should happen without repercussions

    It's a shame that the way that international law works it would actually be illegal for any military action to be “punishment” rather than “preventative” even though one cruise missile bouncing off Assad's head would probably be just, cheap, effective and cause the least amount of casualties.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:23 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conqueror

    @1, 2 Very poor thinking.
    @3, 4, 5 I will now blame weak Milliband, those who voted “his” way and people like @1 & 2 for every Syrian death that takes place following any action involving chemical weaponry. Some people don't seem to understand what the word “precision” in precision strikes means. Let's try a scenario. It's obviously impossible to put an effective “guard” around chemical weapons manufacturing and storage facilities without major “boots on the ground”. But we could have destroyed them! Remember the attack by RAF Mosquitos on Amiens Prison in 1944? There were deaths amongst the Resistance and political prisoners, but 258 escaped! So, messages to the Syrian resistance and then destroy the facilities.
    @6 You don't? Then I'll explain. Between 1939 and 1945, Britain and its Commonwealth were the only ones to continously oppose and fight the Axis powers. The ONLY ones. The United States did NOTHING until 1942. The Soviets did NOTHING until late 1941. Too busy grabbing territory in co-operation with the nazis. France did nothing meaningful after June 1940. Britain therefore demonstrated its commitment to democracy, freedom and peace. In a second phase, Britain became, and continues to be, a nuclear power. Thus having the ultimate weapon of force. It is for these reasons, and its generally moral stance, that Britain has a permanent seat on the Security Council. By comparison, can you imagine argieland having a permanent seat? Elaine has made the point. We have a moral duty and responsibility.
    @8 All that the House of Commons has shown is moral cowardice. I am not keen to see British troops on the ground in Syria, but we managed without in Libya, didn't we? Apart from necessary observers and controllers.
    @10 Very much agreed.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:29 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Marcos Alejandro

    Britain went to war in Irak based on a big lie, hundreds of thousands of innocents civilians die because of that.
    Britain lost the war there and their PM Tony Blair became a Middle East peace envoy(believe or not) and certainly they are not winning , as usual, in Afghanistan.
    The yanks don't need them anyway.

    “No 10 curses, but Britain's illusion of empire is over”

    “Last night in the Commons a great switch was thrown in the national psyche and nothing may ever be quite the same again. This is not a left-right shift, but a long-delayed acceptance that Britain is less powerful and poorer than it was, weary of wars and no longer proud to punch above its weight. No more pretending, no more posturing.”

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Stevie

    You lot have the obligation and moral duty to stay home.
    Not to mention the outlook...

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • darragh

    Go and play with your Lego Marcos the grown-ups are talking

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • LEPRecon

    @18 Marcos

    The Guardian, as you well know is a rag.

    The Empire ended 60 years ago.

    Do try to keep up with CURRENT events.

    Also we didn't 'lose' in Iraq, but we didn't win either.

    @19 stevie

    Tell me Stevie, when does the world have a moral duty to get involved to protect the lives of innocent civilians? Men, women and children?

    Now, when most lives can be saved, or after a couple of million are dead, and it's far too late?

    It's easy to sit around and say 'it's nothing to do with us', but there is international law, and if someone breaks international law, they should be held accountable.

    So tell me Stevie, just when should the international community get involved to stop the use of chemical weapons?

    When 3,000 people have been murdered? Or 30,000? Or 300,000? Or 3,000,000?

    Just how many dead women and kids are too many dead women and kids?

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Marcos Alejandro

    Go and shoot some badgers, that's all your dead empire can do nowadays.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 07:00 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    BAE is worth 20B to our economy.

    There is a lot of very short term thinking here. We criticise heavily Argentina's isolationist policies and then want to do the same?

    We are a developed country and part of the civilised world. How can we look away when Syria has broken international treaties by using chemical weapons against children. And now nepalm in a school playground. This is provocation by the Syrian government and if, as UNSC members, we ignore it, we ignore it at our peril because it creates a precedent.

    We are not getting involved in a civil war. We are punishing the use of chemical weapons. That IS our responsibility.

    All credit to France for stepping up.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 07:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CaptainSilver

    Ho Ho #22 Marcos, Darragh is from Ireland.... shot yourself in the foot again. Dumbkopf!
    British Empire ended 60 years ago, do try to keep up.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 07:34 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Nostros

    This is a fine line, the people of Britain have been misled by Blair over Iraq & Afghanistan and look where that got us, we removed Hussain from power and alas, the Muslim extremists flourish , Saddam kept them at bay, now they are all over the place, I hear people saying oh, we simply must get involved as people are dying, well I see that, but see this, the Arab League & the other Middle East countries need to step up, not us, why are we always stepping up and sending our kids to fight in a foreign land to lose limbs and be killed, the Middle East is rich in oil, they have plenty of money to fight a war, problem is they would rather the stupid westerners do it for them, so I say to all those who say we should be stepping up, when will they the Arab nations step up, it seems they only have armies to fight civilians in there own nations, you never see them going to war elsewhere or defending the rights of people on the other side of the world. There are many wars going on right now, not just Syria, just that Syria is in the news, thousands of people are dying everyday all over the world, men, women, children are starving in Africa, do we send the army in there? people have unrealistic expectations of the world and see things as a moral duty that we simply must do, lets not forget, even our allies in the past have waited it out before coming to our aid, and then that was in the final hour, if we keep attacking middle east nations then extremists will be more and more common, I think we have enough enemies already, I'm not a heartless person, but if the Americans are so convinced that chemical weapons have been used, then let them go check it out, like last time...

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 07:44 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • travellingscotsman

    @22 - the UK is the 2nd largest provider of military equipment in the world. We are no longer the power we used to be, but even in this state we can still wipe the floor with Argentina any day anywhere my friend. The RG's could only hope to be the country that the UK is. That's where all this hatred has come from hasn't it, jealousy of a superior nation.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 07:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Redrow

    Just because the opposition are mostly islamists and former Assad-supporters doesn't give Assad the right to use WMD in civilian areas. Indeed, if the opposition used the WMD then I'd say the same thing. The international responsibility is not to get involved in the civil war per se but to impose a consequence for the use of WMD on civilians.

    I was in Aleppo the year before the war started and nearly everywhere I went has been destroyed. In January, Assad's planes bombed the University and killed 80 students sitting their exams - it barely made the news here. Yes I would be delighted to see the EU or the Arab League or the BRICs sort it out but they aren't going to, are they? That Miliband can't find common cause with a Socialist in France and a Democrat in America to protect Arab children is a true measure of his incapacity for high office.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 07:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pete Bog

    I'm going with the anti-Syria side.
    The UK needs to concentrate on protecting its responsibilities like itself, Gibraltar and the Falklands.

    Cameron is also doing his best (ie like John Knott) to emasculate our armed forces. we don't need another action to increase our defence expenditure when soldiers are being axed.
    Cameron f1cked up over the GR9 Harrier. Modified at great expense to stay in service till 2018-so it was not falling apart.
    And we have no decent maritime Patrol capability.

    If these sacrifices have to be made-we clearly do not have the money to mess with Syria, unless of course the USA pull some dollars out and pay us.

    @13 War Monkey-I agree with your comments on this.

    Obama expects the UK's support but does not reciprocate American support.

    Britain stayed out of the Vietnam war, I don't remember the USA showing us the door after that.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 08:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conqueror

    @19 But think how much more popular we would be if we actually managed to kill Assad. Or, second choice, arrest him, and his ugly family, put them all on trial and see them executed. Either would be popular amongst millions of people. And we could demonstrate our ability to fly a missile in through a Casa Rosada window and splatter some plastic.
    @21 I can never make up my mind whether the Guardian is a yellow rag or a brown one. It's always full of shit.
    And it's no good asking Stevie about morals, he doesn't have any. Being a latino, his idea of “morals” is “Gimme, gimme, gimme. Otherwise leave me out of of it!” When was the last time any latino place stepped up to the plate? 40 million argies decided to attack 1,500 Falklanders. 46 million Spaniards attack 30,000 Gibraltarians.
    @22 Didn't know you were a badger, Margo. But you'd be an “off-badger”. Badgers have “stripes” of white fur. Whilst your stripes are yellow!

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 08:03 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Clyde15

    Sense has prevailed. Surely the lesson from history is do not get involved in a civil war. I thought that the Americans would have remembered Vietnam.
    OK, we fire a salvo of missiles and destroy what ? If that does not work, then some more. Then it's a few “advisors” to help the rebels. Who are the rebels ? Islamic jihadists ? See this article.
    Whatever regime replaces Assad, I am sure they will be no friend to Britain.
    Let the UN sort it out. The fighting doesn't seem to bother Russia or China. What are our EU chums doing. Apart from France who always have had an interest in Syria, they don't appear to be doing anything.
    Are Germany, Italy , Spain, Poland, Sweden, Austria etc champing at the bit to get involved... it does not seem so.
    So, why do we have to “lead the pack”. Do we have an especial moral duty ? I don't think so.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 08:04 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    Why does getting involved in UN responsibilities preclude us from protect our BOTs? They are not under military attack and there are no chemical weapons being used there. They are not involved in a war. Were troops taken from the Falklands during the Iraq war? Gibralta and the Falklands are diplomatic issues.

    And there is no questions of us taking sides in a civil war. The only issue is retribution for using chemical weapons. No more than that. We are not arming rebels or supporting the government. We are policing international laws that outlaw the use of chemical weapons. It is our collective responsibility to do so.

    We are not leading any pack. The US as the only superpower is taking due responsibility and France are giving support, as we should. A joint operation. And, yes, as a civilised society we do have a moral duty and responsibility.

    I don't think people realise the long-term implications of the UK not stepping up.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 08:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Idlehands

    “Retribution” would definitly be illegal. It has to be argued and directed as a measure to prevent further attacks and protect the civilian population. That's why it is so difficult to achieve anything through limited bombing - because bombing chemical stockpiles isn't wise. It would need to be a massive aerial assault to prevent it possibly happening again.

    I don't know what the best course of action is but I don't think doing nothing is the right one.

    I notice today that the BBC is reporting a napalm like attack on a school which can only have been Assad forces - unless the rebels now operate jets too!?!?

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 08:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • JohnCFI

    Argentina has the Presidency of the UNSC, So they should take a lead and sort out Syria, she wants the power so now pay the price. instead of using the SC Presidency to further her own gains and as an anti Falkland platform.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 08:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Idlehands

    I forgot about that. What has the illustrious president of the security council had to say so far? All I've seen is this from Timidman:

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 09:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Marcos Alejandro

    What has the illustrious PM of Britain had to say so far?

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 09:32 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • War Monkey

    23 ElaineB (#)
    Aug 30th, 2013 - 07:14 am

    Elaine I hear you but who used the gas against who? Because apparently:

    “Turkish security forces found a 2kg cylinder with sarin gas after searching the homes of Syrian militants from the Al-Qaeda linked Al-Nusra Front who were previously detained, Turkish media reports. The gas was reportedly going to be used in a bomb. Why is this not being reported in the UK as much as the alleged gas attack by Assad? Its so nice to know that Sarin Gas is in the hands of Al Quaeda”

    Who should we bomb? Assad? The rebels? Which rebels? I want to know exactly who my government is siding me with.

    What happens in Gibraltar or the Falklands if we get drawn into a protracted conflict and our eye is off our own ball? We can't be everywhere at once.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 09:39 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • agent999

    I would have respect for the outcome of this vote if it had been delivered purely on morals and ethics rather the opportunist move by Millipede and the labour party. (Labour members were not given a free vote - they had to tow the party line)

    Unfortunately, I feel, the only winner at the moment is Assad and he will continue committing these the atrocities!

    The latest from Syria
    Syria crisis: Incendiary bomb victims 'like the walking dead'

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 09:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pedro

    @ 5 War mongering Labourites? Yet you advocate war - war monger! So the World should do something when people are killed by chemical means? Killing kids with bullets is therefore ok?Killing innocent civilians is killing. The means do not make it worse or better. Its been going on for months now. Because of chemical attacks its terrible? Its terrible period. UN investigators are still busy assessing the situation. So wait until you have evidence. Ever heard of Wiki Leaks and Snowden - Do you believe everything you are told?Are the rebels innocent with no atrocities committed and they have not killed or bombed anyone? Brittain and the US are supplying the Rebels, China and Russia supplying Assad with arms escalating the conflict. How about a bit of diplomacy? It would have been over long ago without interference.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 10:01 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Be serious

    Blame who you like. Democracy has spoken. Now the US Congress wants some of the same. Will the Worlds most powerful democracy be denied.
    Of course If you feel that strongly go volunteer and fight Assad in Syria. Let us know how you get on.

    Comfy chair at the UN? Special relationship? - Neither are worth the time of day.
    29th August - UK INDEPENDENCE DAY.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 10:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Skåre-Vuggevise

    Democracy in action. Argentina could learn much.

    Far from damaging Britain, you only have to look at the international media coverage to see that the overwhelming sentiment is one of admiration for the Mother of Modern Democracy.

    But good to see that we can always rely on the usual warmongering imbeciles to cheer the prospect war, and the bombing of innocent civilians, from the safety of their sofas.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 10:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anbar

    personally: glad it was a “no” vote.

    let the French sort this one out, they sat out of everything else.

    ...and the Syrians are welcome to the Untrustworthy States of America.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 10:59 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Fbear

    Maybe people are NOT incorrectly using Iraq as a deterrent to getting involved in Syria. Perhaps the lesson they see is that the main point of getting involved after 9/11 with Afghanistan was an indirect way to help the USA get at Iraq in the first place. With this in mind, maybe they are wondering if siding with the US about intervention in Syria is just an indirect way of getting involved in America's dog fight with Iran. What too many of us forget in world affairs are the IMPLICATIONS involved in momentary acts.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 11:15 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    I am glad the vote went NO, if only to put Cameron under pressure to vacate his office.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 11:16 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • andy65

    @ ElaineB Could not agree with you more this is not a good day for The United Kingdom.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 11:17 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Idlehands

    I think it will be a damp squibb in the end and change very little.
    It'll last 3 days. 1 to strike, 1 to assess and then the 3rd to finish the job.

    There's talk of Assad striking Israel in retaliation but that would be like poking the dragon after the dog has bitten you on the bum.

    In a couple of weeks it'll be back to reporting the daily casualty lists in the civil war.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 11:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    @44 Indeed. It is the bigger picture that is important here.

    As an additional point, the vote was very close and I am pretty sure Miliband did not expect to win. He hoped to occupy the 'attack the government' seat because he does not actually stand for anything. Now every time we see images of children dying because of chemical weapons, we will know who led the 'let's do nothing' party. This will come back to haunt him.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 11:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conqueror

    @30 “Let the UN sort it out”. Could you tell us, Clyde, which UN body doesn't have various nationals in it? How about the UN Military Staff Committee? [2.The Military Staff Committee shall consist of the Chiefs of Staff of the permanent members of the Security Council or their representatives.] Various partisans then. The problem, Clyde, is that, being a member of a small, insignificant, selfish country without any ability to affect the world, you have no idea. Your “moral”, “responsible” attitude is to let someone else do it. You should really avoid matters outside your “moral” compass. Stick with such vital questions as whether food aid should consist of haggis or porridge!
    @33 Australia takes over on 1 September. At last an intelligent nation! Expect more from Australia than argieland could suggest in a million years.
    @35 Recently? Fart over argieland and spain, I think. Should get both running!
    @36 I hate to use this word but Think. Syria manufactures over a hundred tons of chemical agents for weapons use EVERY year. The rebels may get their hands on some, but not to the extent that the regime has stockpiled. The evidence says that the regime has already used chemical weapons 14 times. You have a problem with stopping further chemical weapons use?
    @38 We could appreciate your vociferous comment. Are you a weapons expert? How do you feel about stopping all chemical weapons use? If we tell Assad to stop using chemical weapons, would you believe his response?
    @39 No, cowardice, moral and actual has spoken. Here's a thought. We could have said that a British Expeditionary Force would have been inserted to destroy every chemical weapons manufacturing and storage facility. I do hate it when the uneducated try to “guide” a nation. Take a look down south at argieland. The uneducated guiding “something”. At least argieland will be a disaster. Now THAT we should avoid. Let it die!

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 11:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Think

    (40) Skåre-Vuggevise

    My dear Scandinavian half-brother... You say..:
    “Democracy in action. Argentina could learn much.”
    I say ....:
    Our democratically elected government(and all the opposition parties) have publicly stated that any military intervention in the Syrian conflict is totally unacceptable without the auspices of the UN.
    It did so BEFORE David Cameron's defeat at the English Parliament....

    You say further...:
    “Far from damaging Britain, you only have to look at the international media coverage to see that the overwhelming sentiment is one of admiration for the Mother of Modern Democracy.”
    I say...:
    We agree..... It won't damage Britain.... With a bit of luck, it will even loosen the leash of America's English poodle a bit...

    At the end you say...:
    “But good to see that we can always rely on the usual warmongering imbeciles to cheer the prospect war, and the bombing of innocent civilians, from the safety of their sofas.”
    I say...:
    Them Turnips skulle skydes med noget billigere end krudt...., skulle De!

    Gode Hilsner fra
    El Think, Chubut, Patagonia, Argentina.

    Please, all English Patriots, sign the E-Petition below ;-)

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 11:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Rufus

    Having the motion defeated does mean that British missiles won't be being fired at Syria, however it doesn't mean that RN and RFA ships won't be supporting and potentially resupplying the USN and MN ships that are.
    More to the point, they'd be perfectly within their rights to defend themselves and the surrounding area, including the USN and MN ships (and that's likely to be quite a big area too), from any return-nastiness coming from Syria.

    Incidentally, just because it didn't get through the HoC this time doesn't mean that should the situation deteriorate further (although it's difficult to imagine how much further than nerve agent attacks on civilians) that there couldn't/wouldn't be another one.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 11:42 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Be serious

    No not cowardice just common sense.

    Landing an invasion force and enforcing a no fly zone would be heroic..... not for the politicians or arm chair warriors though.... but the soldiers, sailors and airmen who have to carry out the dirty foreign work.

    Surgical strikes will only spread the chemical weapons high and wide killing more innocent civilians and other strategically placed hostages.

    Not even Cameron had envisaged boots on the ground or so he said.

    Anyway no more Iraq's. no more Afghanistan's and no more Lybia's.... all disasters which must never be repeated despite what our Middle East Peace Envoy might have to say..... Peace envoy!? what a firkin sick joke.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 11:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Fido Dido

    Camoron is fuming because he can't use his sick games (war) to hide Britains real issues (rising unemployment, rising costs and savers and pensioners being screwed). Yep, they know they are in trouble and that's why Camoron is desperate for a war..(history repeats, when they are in trouble, they take you to war so that the usefulidiots and cowards who never served in the army but has a loud mouth infront of the computer, like conqueror, continue to follow their beloved leaders that screw them, over and over..they love it.)
    Everybody knows the game is over, everybody knows that the so called FSA is that fake/bogus “Al qaeda” (meaning the toilet...lols) being used for their sick game, divide and conquer. The game is over!!! :D...btw, does anybody really think that those losers (US, France,UK and their sick fake alies starts with an I and ends with an L..the brits at mercopress donot allow you to talk about it..) would win that war? Answer is No. Last time the US won a war is ww2, the rest all lost.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 11:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Conqueror

    @48 I shall be sure to inform the British government that enemies are accessing their site. In the meantime, find a 12 foot steel spike are force it up your arse. Sure you'll enjoy it! Buy a ground auger. Shove it up Think's arse and switch on. Minimum 30 feet.
    @49 Agree with you. Protect British assets and watch. Watch the Syrian shits prepare. Then kill them. And take the British cowardly “members” and kill them too.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 12:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • agent999

    We did win in '82!

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 12:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Marcos Alejandro

    ”Churchill was in no doubt that gas could be profitably employed against the Kurds and Iraqis (as well as against other peoples in the Empire): *I do not understand this sqeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilised tribes.*

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 12:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • screenname

    @51 Fido Dido: “Camoron is fuming....”

    I can't remember any footage of Cameron really angry at any stage in life. Me thinks you are making things up to suit your agenda (how unusual for a malvinista...not).

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 12:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anbar

    lol@51 Fido Diedo - yup, you forgot the little war a certain south american country lost in the early 80s. Muppet.

    Personally I reckon Cameron is quite happy the vote was “no”... we dont need another war, and all the Untrustworthy States would want from us is base access in cyprus anyway...and the political angle of “It aint just the US of A doing this”.

    The poodle has nipped-back, finally.

    The Labour Child-Leader though has proven to be right wavering, quivering, train-wreck though - cant make his own mind up, swaps his party line too suit and is generally a bigger prat than Cameron.

    Hope he chokes on it.

    There aint a World-Government though and there is no requirement for the UK to intervene.. despite all the wishy-washy liberal sentiment bollocks - Assad isnt Hitler trying to conquer the world and its got naff-all to do with the UK.

    Keep the troops safe at home ready to crush the neo-colonialist like CFKs Argentina.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 12:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Skåre-Vuggevise

    @46 ElaineB

    “Now every time we see images of children dying because of chemical weapons, we will know who led the 'let's do nothing' party”

    I trust you have the same images when you remember that the United States has, in my lifetime, used more thermite, napalm and white phosphorous than all other nations combined … ever. I trust you have the same mental images when you remember the Americans who indiscriminately dropped thousands of illegal phosphorus and MK-77 (son of napalm) incendiary bombs on civilian targets in Iraq … and supplied the same to Israel, who then used them to illegally shell civilian targets in a UN compound.

    No? Well, if not, then your double standards are shameless in the face of the fact that there is no conclusive evidence as to who it was who used chemical weapons in Syria.

    If nothing else, Iraq should have taught us the dangers of hasty intervention, on the basis of fabricated evidence and without a clear goal, is a hiding to nothing that should never again be repeated - especially when it is against one side in a conflict where either party is as bad as the other in their own way .. and when Camron failed so miserably to make any even remotely convincing case for either guilt (and in fact continues to admit that there is no conclusive proof) or the clear legal basis for intervention.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 01:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • cornishair

    I think people are confusing British national intrest, with Amercian national intrests a bit to much here. We have no intrests in Syria. Wasn't a British colony, isn't in the Commonwealth ( why do you think France is so intrested). The only allies in the region are Turkey and Jordan, and they don't seem to be in too much danger (+ any attack on turkey will be an attack on NATO).

    Anyone who says we've losted power in the UN Security Council, really does not understand anything about Realpolitik. China & Russia don't go around bombing countries in the name of international law, yet there still on the Security Council. (I've notested Sky news seem to think its the end of the world, Murdochian media at its best lol).

    On a side note, watching the debate like 5 or 6 MP's brought up Israels use of White phosphorus shells in the last Gaza War, which is illegal under international law.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 01:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    It's great to see the Brit's at each others throats when there is no common enemy.....
    That's it Guys and Gals attack your Government, your MP's and each others posts.....I always knew you were a divided bunch of tribes.
    It's almost a mirror reflection of the scenes in the HOC last night....
    Calm down it will blow long did Freedom Fries last?.....No lasting harm to the French.....the way Obuma fawned over them....
    Warmongers......Armchair Generals......relax, if the Yanks kick off there is no doubt a stray missile will find it's way to a NATO your delight.....even if the Yanks have to do it themselves....Turkey perhaps or Cyprus.....

    BTW Screenname if you couldn't see that Cameron was fuming BTW he leaned forward and curtly said “I Get It” then you are not very competent at reading folk. Who would to be defeated in Parliament by his own party members?

    Ed Millipede......great effort from a Belgian/Pole.......looks like some sort of beady eyed Muppet....I think!

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 02:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    @57 Why can't you make a contribution to the debate without zoning in on posters trying to make it personal? I guess because you don't know how to debate.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 02:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    We are now seeing the edifying spectacle of the “French cheese eating surrender monkeys” to quote Bush standing side by side with Obuma against Syria.

    Perhaps another distraction by a government in the deep doodoos?

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 02:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Condorito

    @Skåre-Vuggevise / @War Monkey
    100% agree.

    “The only issue is retribution for using chemical weapons. No more than that.”

    They always go for more. I think it's called “mission creep”. Once all the assets are in place...they'll finish what they started.
    In Syria no solid evidence has been given to show who was behind the use of chemical weapons and even if it were conclusive, there is no certainty that intervention will achieve anything and could well make the situation worse. What is the point of avenging the death of 300 people by condemning the lives of 1000s more?

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 02:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Clyde15

    Well if I have got up your nose then I must be on the right side of the debate. I am quite happy to be a member of a small insignificant selfish country with no ability to affect the world. Your problem is that you are in the same boat but still can't grasp that fact.
    Queen Victoria is dead. As for moral compass, yes it is about time you gained one. Almost everyone of your post consists of nuke them, kill them ....including children. A nuke is not a precision weapon.
    As a citizen of England ..( not the UK as according to you it does not exist)..with grandiose ideas why don't you unleash our, sorry YOUR invincible forces against the Syrians and see what happens.
    All these superb tanks, ships and aircraft could walk, ( figuratively speaking), through Syria unaided. No, wait a minute, you have them allocated to the Falklands. You have a difficult decision as Chief of Staff.
    I presume that you would insist that every Scot in the Army, Navy and Air force should be removed from their posts as they may be third columnists against your English forces. That would deplete your numbers and effectiveness somewhat. However, from your posts you could make up for all of them by attacking all on your own.
    No trouble for a mighty man like you.
    All you do is rant and rave and threaten with nothing to back it up. Why don't you stand for the English parliament and get people to vote for you. I'm sure you would be welcome in the BNP....sorry, the English National Party.
    By the way, did not a lot of English MP's vote against action, probably some Welsh also ?
    You will have to put them against a wall and shoot them too.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 02:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    We all have an opinion and good ones to,
    So we can ignore the macho Latinos who always condemn us, yet sit of the fence and do nothing,
    So they can hardly use the moral high ground..
    As a veto-wielding member of the UNSC we have a responsibility and moral duty to uphold INTERNATIONAL peace and security.
    Im going to agree with you, but add the following,
    That Russia and china also have responsibility and moral duty to uphold INTERNATIONAL peace and security.
    All 5 in this case,
    Some ask, will it affect our standing in the world,
    I don’t think so, time waits for no man, but kneejerkers end up looking rather foolish,
    When the UN come up and produces’ the evidence, and the Americans settle on what they have,
    The British may well , with UN approval yet get involved,
    As for the French,- saying it and backing it up, may well be two different things, so let us wait and see what they may do,

    And finally- what if…..
    As Russia and china opposes us, and backs Syria, what will they do, ??
    And lastly,
    Israel, will the bad guys manage to drag her in, will she stay out,
    Will the middle east change sides if she hits Syria [ fully]
    One feels that the next couple of weeks could well change the middle east for decades to come,
    And define ,those why say they will, against those who actually do,
    ,do something..
    Just a thought…..

    .so dont all shoot at once lolol

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 03:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • cornishair

    64. Considering Israeli history, i would say there not much better then Syria.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 03:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CaptainSilver

    A Voice, living in a dictatorship with a harpy in charge, you obviously aren't used to grown up discussions between free people. Stick around and learn..

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 03:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    Oh yeah I'm Special relationship with the Master......there's a new poodle on the block....French friends in the EU......the future is rosy for the UK......isolated and alone and powerless even to protect women and children from weapons banned for nearly a century.......
    Obuma will be thinking......What use are these sorry bunch of has beens to me if they won't fight and no influence in the EU.
    I've learned that little britain has given the green light to every tin-pot third world country that it's OK to use Chemical Weapons... as you will go unpunished!
    I'm sure the world was quite shocked to learn 'not so great britain', has become a spineless isolationist!
    Anything else I should learn?

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 04:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • screenname

    @59 A_Voice: “ you are not very competent at reading folk”

    meeeeeeeeeeeeow meow Thinko... but I'm afaid your claws are not quite sharp enough for this old hide.

    The only way Cameron could look angry is if you put him next to Duncan Norvelle. You just continue with your fantasy though, it's amusing to see how much you are arousing yourself through your posts.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 04:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • toooldtodieyoung

    67 A_Voice

    I leant a few things as well.... Shall I tell you what I learnt?? That we are damned if we do and damned if we don't.

    You trolls!! you are so funny, so predictable, so brainless... It's called independant thought. You should try it y'know? Think, sock puppet A_Voice, Tobi, if you are there. Instead of writing what your lords and masters want you to write, try having a thought that is your own.

    So, to Syria.

    Tobi, is working himself into a lather, convinced that this us Imperialists, Empire building agian..... Just like we did in Iraq ( ?? )

    Now that we arn't going in, we are what??

    “isolated and alone and powerless even to protect women and children from weapons banned for nearly a century”

    Again, you are such a fool and so completely clueless that you are missing the point.

    I wonder do you really KNOW but refuse to acknowledge that you know on purpose or are you as lame as everyone on here points out?

    “I'm sure the world was quite shocked to learn 'not so great britain', has become a spineless isolationist!”

    oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.............. Run home to your momma's titty little one... Leave the comments on this forum to the Adults ok?

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 04:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • alan

    The Falklands Islands still belong to the Falkland Islanders.
    Gibraltar still belongs to Gibraltarians.
    Democracy still best in UK. You must hate it.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 04:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • cornishair

    63 Clyde15

    I do find Conqueror pretty tiring, but its not like he's talking for anyone but himself. He's a bit of a contradiction, wanting to kill all the argie's one minute, then talking about human rights the next. It's a bit sad really...

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 04:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    ........ “I leant a few things as well..”

    What did you lean against?

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 04:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pedro

    @ 47 So what has expertise in weapons got to do to know that bullets, bombs and chemicals kill people? Your holier than thou morality about chemical weapons stink. The thousands killed by non chemical means because of Bush and bloody Blair? And now you and Cameron want to moralize about chemical weapons. You are apparently a weapons expert and statistician with proven facts about how many tons of chemical weapons Assad manufactures. Is this to win the argument at all cost? Do you know insiders in the regime? It is in any case irrelevant if you consider the stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons the US and Britain have stockpiled. Have'nt used them for a while but still have them -why? You probably never even held a rifle in your hand or fought in a war. If you did you would certainly be very anti war - bullets or chemicals. Britain and the US should work to stop, not escalate the war and so should you. Retribution for chemical weapons use is a feeble excuse to kill more children and civilians even if they are Assad supporters.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 05:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • toooldtodieyoung

    72 A_Voice

    So you have resorted to a spelling lesson now have you little child?

    Can you spell “Coward”? or “spineless” ?? oh, oh, oh I know!! Can you “Corrupt”? or the biggy.......

    Can you spell “Buying a vote”??? or what about “Ballot box rigging”

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 05:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    ........Beats having the spelling abilities of a child.
    .....and ...take the time to read my posts before replying.
    you asked can I spell spineless?
    ....and from my post that you were replying to........
    .......'not so great britain', has become a spineless isolationist!

    Boy o' Boy are you stupid......give it up before I embarrass you further......;-))))

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 05:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • alan

    “spelling abilities of a child”
    Did you know Albert Einstein failed in non-science subjects.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 05:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • toooldtodieyoung

    75 A_Voice

    Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!!!!!!!

    You sssssoooooooo funny!!!! You sssssoooooooo funny!!!!

    Tell me child, can you spell “Coward”???

    and Argentina, of course, has always been a force for good in this world hasn't it.......... oh wait a minute, no it hasn't!! in was only a couple of years ago that they stopped pushing nuns out of planes wasn't it???

    “Boy o' Boy are you stupid......”

    and you have never had a thought of your own... have you child???

    I won't keep you up any longer because it must be way passed your bedtime, make sure you brush your teeth before you go to bed.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 05:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    .....“make sure you brush your teeth before you go to bed.”

    .....if you are British it would be a first for you.....wouldn't it?
    .....nah! old timer, you probably have them in a jar by the side of your bed!

    Don't forget your cup of cocoa and your incontinent nappies (diapers).....old man!

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 05:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • CaptainSilver

    Dear oh dear oh dear, A Voice. I seem to have touched a raw nerve. You must learn to control that temper, its a bit like the jealousy that you so often fail to conceal. We know you come from a shitty failing country run by thugs and dictators but really its no excuse.
    Leave the discussion to free decent Thinking people.
    Naughty little blighter, now off to by byes. Nighty night.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 05:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    79 raw nerves ...I was merely stating what I had learned in the last couple of days, although sharing it appears to have upset a few people.....I dare say that I'm only reiterating what a lot of people are thinking and views that have no doubt already been expressed by the media.......are they jealous too?

    You did, after all, ask me to stick around and learn......and now have the net result!
    .......Tha's nowt as queer as what I say!

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 05:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Think


    Nice to see so many young Englishmen having learned the lessons of Iraq, Afghanistan & Libya.....

    Also nice to see that two of my harshest interlocutors on the “Malvinas Issue”(Norwegian Mr. Skåre-Vuggevise & Tswanian Mr.Pedro) are in agreement with me on the “Syrian Issue”….

    Do keep the old Viet-Nam wisecracker in mind, lads…:

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • aussie sunshine

    Well done to all politicians who have voted to halt the British attack on Syria!!
    You have demonstrated again that you are the oldest democracy in the world and that Parliament works....damn well!!


    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • alan

    “reiterating what a lot of people thinking”
    Who do you speak for - apart from yourself?

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • aussie sunshine

    Let´s get something straight here!! Why would Assad gas his own people knowing that would be a motive of retaliation by the west........
    there are darker forces at work here and fortunately it has backfired on them...let´s hope Obama is not silly enough to do a “Bush”!!!!! even if the ” Death Industries in the USA are putting pressure on him to act,,Stay cool MR President, please. God bless:

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Troy Tempest

    “Tell me Stevie, when does the world have a moral duty to get involved to protect the lives of innocent civilians? Men, women and children?”


    “Stevie” is a self-proclaimed “anarchist” - his only message is “smash the state!”

    He has no respect for institutions of Law or otherwise, and no qualms about human casualties.

    His goal is to create a non-functioning vacuum that can be easily filled by the opportunistic totalitarian of his choosing, whether they be Communist or Fascist.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • The Truth PaTroll


    So it is all about status after all.


    Aug 30th, 2013 - 06:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Marcos Alejandro

    PM Camoron is feeling so bad after his defeat.
    It's holiday time again.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 07:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • FI_Frost

    So, the UK ums, ahs and dithers about the morals and responsibility of taking action in a nasty civil war in a foreign country; ~1400 people+ gassed to death.....may be more to come....

    Meanwhile, on the brighter side, A_Voice_of_Think make the most of a chance to sneer from the gutter at all this indecision.

    What sad, bitter, envious people you truly are. 1982 must be one terrible humiliating millstone to bear. You guys are really scarred.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 07:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • aussie sunshine

    *87 It is not about defeat!! Democracy has won!! Something the UK knows a lot about!!

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 07:18 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • FI_Frost


    Are you seriously trying to educate and convince Marcos about the virtues and transparency of UK democracy!!!! Are you insane?

    You've no chance: this guy believes the Falklands should be ethnically cleansed and colonised by the Fatherland ASAP!

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 07:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Marcos Alejandro

    The ''Head of state'' of the UK is the Queen, the chief of armed forces of the UK is the queen. These facts raises the question, is the UK a democracy?

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 09:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • FI_Frost

    @91 Marcos

    “is the UK a demoKracy?”. Well, does Pope Francis sh!t in the woods???

    Maybe try asking the Swedes, Danes, Dutch etc what they think of the UK's democratic status. They are universally seen as top of the pops when it comes to the gold standard governance and democracy.

    You'll notice the first world pays little interest (and even less respect) to the true and only home of demoKracy. Sorry.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 09:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Marcos Alejandro

    Britain who?
    John Kerry, the US secretary of state, praised France as the oldest ally of the US and made no mention of Britain.

    Aug 30th, 2013 - 09:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • FI_Frost

    @93 Marcos

    Alas, Britain is a has-been; done for; past it; a dead Parrot. Brazil & India are the new dudes: Marcos, you and your buddies should polish up your gimp suits and start making friends.

    Even so, “Malvinas son Argentinas” will be just that - a slogan. The Falklands however will be same. Nothing is going to change that.


    Aug 30th, 2013 - 10:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anglotino


    The trolls came out in droves to attack the UK for contemplating attacking Syria.
    Now they come out in droves to castigate it for not attacking Syria.

    UK is the US's lapdog and will do what ever it wants it to do.
    UK lost out to France who is the new US best friend.
    UK is alone because the US doesn't now need it.

    UK is imperialistic and looking to expand its empire AGAIN.
    UK is declining and no longer important. A faded empire wannabe.

    UK and US killed children in Iraq and Afghanistan and this was reprehensible.
    Syria....... oh has anyone actually criticised Syria for killing children?

    Supposedly it is the Britons and “anglos” on here that are always hypocritical.

    Well thankfully this thread showed the true colours of some others.

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 12:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • toooldtodieyoung

    93 Marcos Alejandro

    Are you really thick or are you just acting brainless?

    No don't answer that, we all know the answer to that one.

    Just to let you know, in case you have a short memory, or in your case, if you are truly stupid..... when the US wanted to attack Iraq, the French told them not too so the UK became the US's “oldest ally”.

    The French are just returning the favour this time round, that's all.....


    Aug 31st, 2013 - 06:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • aussie sunshine

    *91 yes It is a democracy and a very good one.....
    keep an eye out on the fraking dispute and you will see democracy at its best....

    (let me see: if everything is written correctly before Anglotino tries to correct my INGLIS) damn!! he must an English teacher !!)

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 07:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Clyde15

    America has its own agenda as it should. Its voters require their govt. to do what is best for them. The “special relationship” is only special when America wants something from the UK.......POLITICAL SUPPORT. It only goes in one direction, west across the Atlantic.
    When the Falklands are mentioned, no support but platitudes.
    The USA does not need any military contribution from the UK.
    It can handle the job itself. At the most, it may need RAF Fairford for some refuelling tankers or RAF Akrotiri on Cyprus. The latter could possibly cause problems with the Cypriot govt.
    At least the UK MP's were given a vote on action and rejected it. I believe that is called democracy. In Kerry's speech last night he quoted irrefutable proof of Assad's involvement. It appears that the UK govt. were unaware of much for a special relationship.!
    I also saw on Newsnight some spokesmen from Congress who said that they should have been given a chance to discuss this before any action is taken. It was also said that 50% of the American population were against any action.
    Heinous as the crimes were does anyone really know what the result of a strike against Assad's regime would be. They may lob some missiles against Tel Aviv. You can imagine what the Israeli actions would be against this. Then it would be a case of Muslims being attacked by Zionists so Arab popular feeling would swing round to Syria. Israel then might decide it had nothing to lose and attack Iran's nuclear facilities. You can imagine the reaction to this.
    As Israel is the only country with a special relationship with the USA, they would have to get involved. The consequences could be catastrophic for all.

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 07:51 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ElaineB

    TTT, it is not all about status, though I can understand why you would think that. It is something you crave as you revealed in your comment about being underestimated in real life. It is about accepting that as a developed and wealthy country, and as a veto-wielding member of the UNSC - therefore holding significant power - we should take responsibility and fulfil our obligations. Power and responsibility should alway work hand in hand.

    But I live in a democracy and accept that this vote not to get involved it the will of the MPs representing the voting public. I don't think it is the end of the story, yet, but it is the current situation.

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 08:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    .......“Un gran pouvoir impose un lorde responsibilité.” ....Voltaire
    ........Avec le bon pouvoir viennent les bonnes responsabilités
    or my favourite.....
    .....With great power comes great responsibility ...

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 10:08 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Troy Tempest


    ”(let me see: if everything is written correctly before Anglotino tries to correct my INGLIS) damn!! he must an English teacher !!)“

    No, ”A_ThinkVoiceOver“ is the ”English teacher”. He brought the subject up in the first place - always alluding to patterns of improper English to identify posters, yet never going out on a limb and stating what they are.

    Now you seem to be picking up the ball and running with that one.

    You two Trolls seem to be unusually fixated on something so minor.

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 10:46 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • FI_Frost

    @100 Think

    Power. Responsibility.

    Big words, big ideas; alas your heirs will never, ever see it exercised in their usurped land.


    Aug 31st, 2013 - 11:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • War Monkey

    63 Clyde15 (#)
    Aug 30th, 2013 - 02:47 pm

    I think that just about covers it.

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 11:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anglotino


    One does not need to be an English teacher to see how bad your English is.


    It is weird how Think and A_Voice never correct, castigate or attack the English of thise that agree with them. They never wanna look to close at Argentine sycophants.

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 11:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    “One does not need to be an English teacher to see how bad your English is.”

    Oh! Dear Skip......

    “It is weird how Think and A_Voice never correct, castigate or attack the English of thise that agree with them. They never wanna look to close at Argentine sycophants.”
    ......of thise???.....of those
    ..... look to close ???....too close

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 11:52 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • FI_Frost

    @105 Think've just been reeled in. LMAO.


    Aug 31st, 2013 - 11:57 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    106 are never going to make Detective Frost if you keeping thinking I'm highlights a distinct lacking on you part, that you are unable to tell the difference!
    Or is it a compliment to refer to me as Think?
    Or are you thinking you are dastardly clever for being able to spot Mr Think in disguise?
    Either way mug is more applicable to you than I.....ermm..I think!

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 12:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    A_Voice (in the wilderness)

    No, I don't think we will bother, we can't be arsed as they say.

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 12:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    and that is entirely your prerogative.....:-)

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 12:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Troy Tempest

    @105 A_ButtVoice

    Ja ja... Sucked in........ by such an .... obvious ploy... ja ja ja LOL... !!!

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 12:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Fbear

    8 darragh (#) Though Obama is far from a good president, if you think he is worse than George W. Bosh, you are sadly misled.

    Actually Obama was “selected” at this time because he would be malleable in the hands of hos owners, corporate America, and an out-of-control executive branch, which no president since World War II has been able to actually head up.

    However, I will promise you that had he not been in office and a republican had won in 2012, there would have been no question of an invasion of Syria already being a reality. The oil men want this so much, as it is the back door to their ambitions in Iran.

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 12:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • A_Voice

    Calm down ....take your valium and gather yourself, you are appearing as a demented's undignified for a “Brit-Type”
    Let's have some decorum!

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 01:00 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Troy Tempest

    112 ButtVoice

    You would know about lack of decorum and being “a demented Troll”

    How much of your hatred, ranting, and mealy-mouthed insults have we endured, on a regular basis?



    Aug 31st, 2013 - 02:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    Where great Britain leads,
    The rest now follow,

    Once again we stand tall and the rest want to stand with us,

    Cameron lost to parliament,
    Obama will wait for congress to approve Americas entry,
    We think congress will say no,

    Leaving the glorious French to lead itself into history and oblivion,
    But something tells me even the French, without the British, and now the Americans will also, suddenly seek approval,

    The world will now await until say [sept 9th onwards]
    It would have been very awkward, would it not, if Obama attacked now, just a few days before shaking putins, hand at the g20.

    As we said before , jump quickly and make a hash of it,
    Or wait and see, [good advice from the British people]

    Britain will now wait,
    Canada will wait and so will Germany,
    The USA will now wait, and so, we predict, the French and the rest of the world, CFK will save her wind for the g20,
    Syria like all bad guys will get what’s coming, just be patient,
    [ British, ,you know we make sense,,] lol...
    make no mistake we wont be far away..

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 03:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    It seems that Obuma is pulling a B Liar stunt here.

    Read the posts, he has little support anywhere.

    BTW Brits. The erstwhile Senator McCain says we are no longer a World Power!

    But he will soon change his mind when the USA wants something from us that we COULD give them, but by then SHOULD we?

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 05:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • aussie sunshine

    obama !! DON´T ATTACK!! you will go down in history as another flop!!

    Somebody is trying to bring you into the war.assad would never have used poison gas on his people...that would be suicidal...somebody else did it to draw you in....remember you were given Nobel Prize for peace.....

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 05:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Troy Tempest


    Whatever appeal you make, it sounds contrived coming from you.

    I am sure that Cameron and Obama are much smarter than you are - certainly they don't support CFK, do they?

    Obama will weigh his choices and make the best decision he can with the information he has.

    BTW, “Pirat-hunter” according to his FB page, wants USA and the West to stay out of Syria just like you do. He has YPF, CFK, and La Campora all over his site.

    He was very against the West going into Libya, just like you and A_ButtVoice.

    You how well regarded“ PH” is -“110%” on support of CFK, “110%” against the West and the Falklands etc.

    You are in like-minded company!!

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 07:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anglotino

    @105 A_Voice

    Oh A_Voice. You took less than 30 minutes to fall for that one.

    But you missed my third mistake.

    Tsk tsk. No soup for you. You need to lift your game.

    That reply wasn't for Aussie_sunshine as I'd already replied to him elsewhere. It was for you or Think to prove my point.

    Witch you did!

    Anglotino has left the thread.

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 07:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • aussie sunshine

    *118 witch??????????????????
    oh my!! my!! DIDN´T YOU MEAN .....WHICH??

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 07:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anglotino

    God it really is too easy!

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 08:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • aussie sunshine

    * I am having second thoughts about you!!?? *120

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 08:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anglotino


    If you had picked up on the theme of my posts 104 and 118, you would now look less like a fool.

    Also if you want to sound more authentic, use more contractions.

    I'M not having second thoughts about you.

    Aug 31st, 2013 - 09:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Briton

    What a shower of hypocrites. 'Chemical export licenses’ were granted by Business Secretary Vince Cable’s Department for Business, Innovation and Skills last January 10 months after the Syrian uprising began'.

    If true,
    Tut tut.


    Sep 01st, 2013 - 03:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Ranger

    Might be wrong. But look at the big picture. Dave comes over looking presidential. Small p but firm and wanting to launch something from our T boats. Parliament looks a bit shambolic but democratic. who's to blame? no one. let's face it the 'freedom fighters' in Syria scare the Iranian's. Is that a place to start?

    Sep 01st, 2013 - 10:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • John III (Pope)


    You may wonder why an 'Australian' would post British propaganda on a site run from the Falkland islands. Why would that be?

    Sep 02nd, 2013 - 02:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anglotino


    Sep 02nd, 2013 - 03:18 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anbar

    “”“You may wonder why an 'Australian' would post British propaganda on a site run from the Falkland islands. Why would that be?”“”

    possibly to counter the massive number of fake-account part-paid-for Argentine trolls.

    The use of the word “Propaganda” tickled me though: I looked it up in an Argentine dictionary and it means “anything we dont like hearing today”.

    with an editorial comment saying “Anything we are told we should not like hearing today”.

    and a Publishers note: “Anything we are paid not to like hearing today”


    “”“obama !! DON´T ATTACK!! you will go down in history as another flop!!”“”

    a bit like all your boyfriends...

    cant really blame them though.

    Sep 02nd, 2013 - 07:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • aussie sunshine

    *127 You actually know how to read a dictionary!! WOW!!!
    and we have a homophobic on the forum!!!!
    This is the 21 st century my dear lad!! Homphobics like you are ugly little sh....heads with no brain!! Do you belong to the BNP??????

    Sep 02nd, 2013 - 08:36 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Anbar

    wow, so many clichés in one post, how do you manage it?

    Sep 03rd, 2013 - 08:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!