The National Midday Sun

Signals => General Chat - English => Topic started by: Bez on April 14, 2018, 11:46:55 am

Title: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Bez on April 14, 2018, 11:46:55 am
Thoughts?

Are we puppets of the US and the "chemical attack" was faked or are we riding white chargers into save the world.... :-\
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Nïckslïkk2112 on April 14, 2018, 12:02:10 pm
Puppets? Co-dependents.

Chemical attack faked? Who knows.

A few bombs now, too little, too late? Probably.

What's the point of the UN?
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Matt2112 on April 14, 2018, 12:38:38 pm
Great, so we step in as the jihadists' Air Force, in response to a chemical attack apparently by a slightly less deranged tyrant, who was already trouncing the opposition militarily. 

None of those actions make any sense, but then this is the fog of war; monsters on one side, theocratic lunatics on the other.

And that's before you throw the Russians into the mix.

What a complete mess.  :-\
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: captainkurtz on April 14, 2018, 16:38:31 pm
I'm not sure who to believe. 
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Nick on April 14, 2018, 18:56:28 pm
Worryingly Mrs May has the power to do this without recourse to Parliament.
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Nïckslïkk2112 on April 14, 2018, 19:17:49 pm
Quote from: Nick on April 14, 2018, 18:56:28 pm
Worryingly Mrs May has the power to do this without recourse to Parliament.

As would any UK PM.


We'd be safe with Jezza though, he'd roll over and have his tummy tickled whilst the rest of us were gassed :)
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Nïckslïkk2112 on April 14, 2018, 19:19:13 pm
Quote from: captainkurtz on April 14, 2018, 16:38:31 pm
I'm not sure who to believe.

Don't believe the Russians - or Syrians - at all.
Don't believe 99.9999% of what anyone else says.


Hope this cleats things up :)
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Nick on April 14, 2018, 19:56:19 pm
The truth is Pravda.
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: zoony on April 15, 2018, 08:14:17 am
I'll just let everyone else argue about it 😁.
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Slim on April 15, 2018, 09:46:12 am
I was pleased to hear this news. I think it's a measured and proportionate response. It makes total sense from a humanitarian point of view. And it makes absolute, 100% sense from a point of view of defending British interests - because it is advantageous to no-one that the use of chemical weapons, anywhere, becomes normal.

Given the indiscriminate carnage that we've seen in that country over the last six years or so it makes me laugh to see people getting upset over strikes on chemical weapons facilities in which no-one appears even to have been injured.

I would have been happier to see the action backed up by a UN resolution, but the Russians have a veto which renders the security council useless in this case.

Obama had the good sense to set a "red line" over the use of chemical weapons, but he didn't have the will or courage to back up his words with actions, when it was crossed. I believe that those 70+ people who died in the most recent attack would be alive now, if he had. That's what weakness gets you.

Fair play to Trump and his administration, I'm one of the first to criticise when he says or does something stupid, and with that comes a responsibility to give credit where it's due when he does the right thing. Bravo Mr President, and thank-you.

Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Matt2112 on April 15, 2018, 14:25:47 pm
But that's just it, it may or may not be the "right thing", how can anyone know?  It seems that Trump can only ever be right in the same way a stopped clock is right twice a day.
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Slim on April 15, 2018, 16:44:11 pm
If that's the case, how can we ever comment on, approve, or disapprove of anything? Why even vote?
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: döm on April 15, 2018, 17:07:24 pm
Check out @danielmkovalik's Tweet: https://twitter.com/danielmkovalik/status/985220841066696704?s=09
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Slim on April 15, 2018, 17:31:59 pm
I did, someone with nothing to say.
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Matt2112 on April 15, 2018, 18:13:37 pm
Quote from: Slim on April 15, 2018, 16:44:11 pm
If that's the case, how can we ever comment on, approve, or disapprove of anything? Why even vote?



Not sure how you arrive at that, but I suppose it depends on what's at stake.
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Slim on April 15, 2018, 22:49:23 pm
Perhaps I misunderstood you - why do you think that no-one can know if the decision to attack the Syrian sites was the right one?
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: döm on April 16, 2018, 10:27:51 am
Quote from: Slim on April 15, 2018, 17:31:59 pm
I did, someone with nothing to say.
dro


Have you seen Flint Town on Netflix? Fascinating doc showing just how impoverished and downright dangerous some parts of America are to live in.  Well worth a watch.


As to Syria, it does look like a proportionate response, provided there is 100% certainty that it was actually Syria that dropped the chemical weapons.
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Matt2112 on April 16, 2018, 10:46:17 am
Quote from: Slim on April 15, 2018, 22:49:23 pm
Perhaps I misunderstood you - why do you think that no-one can know if the decision to attack the Syrian sites was the right one?



Probably a lack of clarity on my part.


It just strikes me, in this particular case, given the messy complexities of the situation, the conflicting assertions of all the actors, and the apparent lack of verifiable evidence on the face of it, that it's nigh-on impossible exactly what to think - I'm just expressing exasperation at the whole thing really.


Perhaps the coalition's action will be (is?) vindicated - I hope so; and it's interesting that the Russians' response was effectively to mutter disapproval under their breath rather than, for example, strike our air base in Akrotiri.


One thing is for sure, the answers don't lie with the hand-wringers of the regressive left (such as Chakrabarking on this morning's news); if that lot were making these decisions we really would be screwed.   
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: DavidL on April 16, 2018, 13:48:33 pm
A lot of judgements have been clouded on this issue by the complexity of the situation. There may be an element of guilt that Obama looked the other way when his line was crossed so blatantly. It alters nothing to consider it but it was a missed opportunity to act before Russia became such a major factor. The limited nature of the strikes suggests that this is just gesture politics from the alliance. At best, an inconvenience to the regime, at worst a boost to the jihadist's cause.
Demonstrates, yet again, that the (new?) left would never be prepared to make big decisions around committing our forces. The strike was legal in international law and any grizzling about parliament being given a say just displays the lack of a backbone from Corbyn et al. Emily Thornberry, on Peston, would not confirm that Labour would ever take action, regardless of irrefutable evidence.The fact that Macron has taken a lead has taken some of the wind out of the left's sails for sure.
UN must be reformed if it is ever to be effective in situations like this. Nightmare situation that shames all our leaders, really. What about atrocities being committed in other parts of the world by our 'friends'? (Yemen)
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Slim on April 16, 2018, 17:27:24 pm
I accept that there's a case to answer for the PM and cabinet taking this action without parliamentary approval, but as I understand it, it is not actually required.

Here are legitimate reasons for not seeking parliament's consent:
Here's a less legitimate reason:I suspect a bit of all three, but I accept that she didn't actually need  parliament's approval either. The office of Prime Minister entitles her to take the responsibility for these decisions herself.

I can accept a bit of disquiet about it from the moderate left, but I find the hard left's objections extremely hypocritical and distasteful. It seems to me that Corbyn, Abbott, Provo McDonnell and the rest will always view any military action through a leftard lens in which the West is necessarily the brutal bad guy, helping itself to a bit of imperialistic aggression.
Compare and contrast Corbyn's reaction to the government for carrying out these strikes, in which as far as we know no-one was even injured, to his reaction to a terrorist group deploying a large bomb aimed at murdering the British cabinet, in 1984; an action which killed five people, and which was carried out without the democratic consent or approval of anyone except themselves, a criminal gang.

No hand-wringing anger on that occasion, oh no. Instead he invites a few of them round to the Commons, and he's been on friendly, supportive terms with them ever since.

(http://truth.justdied.com/images/filth.jpg)


I'm afraid the blunt truth is that Corbyn and friends would never support any form of armed action taken by their own country. Only against it.

Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: DavidL on April 16, 2018, 18:58:47 pm
It's unbelievable that some are giving Corbyn a realistic chance of running the country.
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Nick on April 16, 2018, 20:34:23 pm
Are we happy then to watch people get dismembered and blown to pieces in Yemen rather than choked to death in Syria?
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Bez on April 16, 2018, 20:39:05 pm
Quote from: Slim on April 16, 2018, 17:27:24 pm
I accept that there's a case to answer for the PM and cabinet taking this action without parliamentary approval, but as I understand it, it is not actually required.

Here are legitimate reasons for not seeking parliament's consent:

       
  • a debate in parliament with a 'yes' vote telegraphs to the Syrians that the bombs are coming and puts
    UK service personnel lives at risk, as well as potentially limiting the effectiveness of the strike

  •    
  • for operational reasons the PM  was never going to tell parliament exactly what was going to happen
    anyway

Here's a less legitimate reason:

       
  • She knew she might not get the necessary approval



Some thoughts on the above...

1. Trump already told the Syrians, the Russians and the rest of the world of Twitter that the bombs were coming.

It's generally accepeted that the Russiians were warned of the targets so that no Russian personel were harmed.

2. Agreed, although the suggestion of a "war powers act" makes a lot of sense

3. LoL!
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Bez on April 16, 2018, 20:41:20 pm
Quote from: DavidL on April 16, 2018, 18:58:47 pm
It's unbelievable that some are giving Corbyn a realistic chance of running the country.


The reason that he has a "chance" is the inability of the Torys to command a "proper manadate" and the Lib Dems haven't recovered from their savaging after coalition....

Any decent party would be grinding Corbyn into the dirt... :-\
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: DavidL on April 16, 2018, 21:36:07 pm
Quote from: Bez on April 16, 2018, 20:41:20 pm

Any decent party would be grinding Corbyn into the dirt... :-\
Agree, it's the Tory reserve team on the park at the moment.
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Nïckslïkk2112 on April 16, 2018, 21:53:35 pm
Quote from: Nick on April 16, 2018, 20:34:23 pm
Are we happy then to watch people get dismembered and blown to pieces in Yemen rather than choked to death in Syria?

That's good old proper dismemberment and blown to piecesism. Not being gassed, completely different kettle of fish.
The Saudis buy our weapons too...
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Slim on April 17, 2018, 10:57:36 am
Quote from: Nick on April 16, 2018, 20:34:23 pm
Are we happy then to watch people get dismembered and blown to pieces in Yemen rather than choked to death in Syria?


As distasteful as it may be, dropping high explosives on people or riddling them with machine gun bullets isn't a violation of an international convention, providing they are of course "collateral damage". I would say that, if it could be shown that civilians were unambiguously being deliberately targeted in Yemen, even with 'conventional' weapons, then the international community should act to deter it.

But a failure to do so in that case doesn't make a failure to act in Syria right.
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Slim on April 17, 2018, 11:13:15 am
Quote from: Bez on April 16, 2018, 20:39:05 pm


3. LoL!


I mis-worded my third point, because of course that approval wasn't "necessary". And that's the point - doesn't matter if parliament doesn't like it, she and the cabinet have the right and responsibility to take that decision for themselves. And that's what Cameron should have done in 2013, as well.

I was heartened by the number of Labour MPs who spoke out in support of the government yesterday, but I assume many or all of them will be deselected to make way for mouth-breathing leftard extremist class warriors, eventually.

This was brilliant:

https://twitter.com/theJeremyVine/status/985922617172471809

Also, presented without comment:

https://twitter.com/P_G_Thompson/status/985977817610575873
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: DavidL on April 17, 2018, 11:43:37 am
Quote from: Slim on April 17, 2018, 11:13:15 am


This was brilliant:

https://twitter.com/theJeremyVine/status/985922617172471809 (https://twitter.com/theJeremyVine/status/985922617172471809)

Also, presented without comment:
>:(
https://twitter.com/P_G_Thompson/status/985977817610575873 (https://twitter.com/P_G_Thompson/status/985977817610575873)
Yes, indeed, both wonderful in their own way. Surely an MP swap is needed - Chris Leslie for Ken Clarke?
That batty old Corbyn groupie is priceless - "he's a doctor for heaven's sake".  Bet she's got her stripes for Greenham Common! Bless
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Matt2112 on April 17, 2018, 19:59:56 pm
Anyway, don't worry folks, Giles Fraser and his merry bunch of regressive clowns have ridden to everyone's rescue, hobnobbing with Assad's top brass while tweeting some nice, pretty tourist pictures from downtown Damascus.

A classic example of how piety rots the brain.  ::)
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: DavidL on April 17, 2018, 22:26:45 pm
Quote from: Matt2112 on April 17, 2018, 19:59:56 pm
Anyway, don't worry folks, Giles Fraser and his merry bunch of regressive clowns have ridden to everyone's rescue, hobnobbing with Assad's top brass while tweeting some nice, pretty tourist pictures from downtown Damascus.

A classic example of how piety rots the brain.  ::)
What a Jodrell
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: DavidL on April 20, 2018, 23:24:58 pm
So, apparently the Ruskies have said they briefed the coalition as to the targets that would be acceptable to avoid escalation. If you believe them, proof positive that the strikes were just an example of gesture politics - virtue signalling with cruise missiles. At least we've found a testing ground for our latest hardware, if nothing else.
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: Slim on April 25, 2018, 22:01:49 pm
I don't understand the logic there - we don't have to include Russian targets to make a meaningful difference, do we? I don't believe this was a "gesture" at all but a genuine impact on Syria's chemical weapons capacity and real deterrence.
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: döm on April 25, 2018, 22:07:20 pm
Quote from: Slim on April 25, 2018, 22:01:49 pm
I don't understand the logic there - we don't have to include Russian targets to make a meaningful difference, do we? I don't believe this was a "gesture" at all but a genuine impact on Syria's chemical weapons capacity and real deterrence.



Agreed, the last thing we would need would be to damage some Russian infrastructure or find that some Russian soldiers had become collateral damage. Really no need to make a bad situation 10 times worse.
Title: Re: So, Bombs on Syria....
Post by: DavidL on April 25, 2018, 23:19:56 pm
Quote from: döm on April 25, 2018, 22:07:20 pm

Agreed, the last thing we would need would be to damage some Russian infrastructure or find that some Russian soldiers had become collateral damage. Really no need to make a bad situation 10 times worse.
I'm suggesting the Russians chose the Syrian targets. I guess the effectiveness may be revealed in due course but the delay in acting could mean they were not very effective at all.