Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 113

Thread: David Cameron loses Syria vote in Commons

  1. #41
    Sage
    Moot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:46 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    27,461

    Re: David Cameron loses Syria vote in Commons

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    IMO, the vote reflects:

    1. A lack of compelling British strategic interest in military intervention in Syria (something that is true for the U.S., as well)
    2. Information related to the responsibility of the chemical weapons attack that does not rise to the standard of confidence necessary to justify a use of force.

    On the latter point, Washington has used the word "circumstantial" to describe the case and has, at last word, declined to make public the reported electronic intercepts. The reality is that there is probably high confidence that a chemical weapons attack took place, but not the degree of confidence as to who was responsible. In other words, sufficiently significant uncertainty exists.

    It will be interesting to see what the UN investigation reports perhaps as early as this weekend.
    Can the UN report say for certaintly who is responsible for the chemical attacks? I think the inspectors are only there to confirm that chemical weapons were used.

    If Assad's government didn't have complete control over their chemical weapon stockpile....then it is possible that the rebels may have gotten hold of some.

  2. #42
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: David Cameron loses Syria vote in Commons

    The level of PR - false PR - pushing for this war is incredible. THEY MUST HAVE A WAR SOMEWHERE WITH SOMEONE. What other excuse is there for building mega costly replacement weapons and new weapons systems?

  3. #43
    Guru
    Fallenangel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Israel/Russia/UK
    Last Seen
    11-12-17 @ 03:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,416

    Re: David Cameron loses Syria vote in Commons

    I know a place where some champagne bottles are being open right now...


    Fallen.
    Click me > My Artsy Stuff

    "You’ve got one life, there’s no save-point and you’re going to die. Go out like a ****ing man!" - Brad Rigney

  4. #44
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: David Cameron loses Syria vote in Commons

    Quote Originally Posted by Ben K. View Post
    I think it reflects more on members of parliament and congress not being elected on foreign policy. Previously, the case was dependent on a degree of trust in the executive, because MPs and Congressmen have no clue, their constituents don't elect them on what they know on ME policy. That trust has been eroded for decades now.
    I agree. On account of that situation, Parliament is rightly exerting its oversight role with a lot more effort than in the past. With grave decisions, such oversight is not unhealthy. The national interest (not theoretical appeals that Syria's possession and use of chemical arms means that British forces might someday be subjected to their use) and sufficient and credible evidence for responsibility are important matters. The reality is that major British interests would not be severely hampered no matter who wins the sectarian conflict in Syria, Syria posed no credible and imminent threat to the UK or strategic UK allies, and the case for responsibility appears to be circumstantial with no proverbial smoking guns.

  5. #45
    The Light of Truth
    Northern Light's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:01 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,965

    Re: David Cameron loses Syria vote in Commons

    Keep in mind that a vote in U.S. congress is no longer required for the POTUS to deploy the military to "intervene" where he so chooses. Congress abdicated that power not long ago.

    Britain is still bound by the Parliamentary vote for war deployment, which surprises me actually. I would have thought that the war hawks would have dispenses with the voting requirement there as well.

    With Russia and China both positioning themselves against another U.S. war, it would be very messy for us to go in there. Not to mention, the evidence for it is shaky, once again.

    We need to do everything in our power as American people to stop our military-industrial complex from waging another senseless war.

  6. #46
    Guru
    Ben K.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,717

    Re: David Cameron loses Syria vote in Commons

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    I agree. On account of that situation, Parliament is rightly exerting its oversight role with a lot more effort than in the past. With grave decisions, such oversight is not unhealthy. The national interest (not theoretical appeals that Syria's possession and use of chemical arms means that British forces might someday be subjected to their use) and sufficient and credible evidence for responsibility are important matters. The reality is that major British interests would not be severely hampered no matter who wins the sectarian conflict in Syria, Syria posed no credible and imminent threat to the UK or strategic UK allies, and the case for responsibility appears to be circumstantial with no proverbial smoking guns.
    Well that oversight should probably be exerted after the UN report. It's rightful oversight when all the arguments are made, it's simply politicking on the basis of domestic issues on this vote.

  7. #47
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    11-03-13 @ 04:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    376

    Re: David Cameron loses Syria vote in Commons

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    That's great news Andalublue, hopefully our congress will vote on it here as well and vote the will of 91% of Americans!
    Be careful about percentages. I read that 10% of America owns 90% of the wealth and assets. What if the 90% voted to take everything from the 10% and kick them out of USA? That was how the Pogroms in Russia worked. Congress is supposed to do whatever is constitutionally right, and the POTUS is as well. They are not supposed to do whatever the 51% say; which is really just "mob rule". POTUS says Syria is threatening the safety of USA. He has access to information we will never be told about. We hired him to make the best decisions he can, and he has to do that for 8 years. I say let our Commander do his job. I don't say let our Commander do whatever the 51% mob rule tells him to do.

  8. #48
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: David Cameron loses Syria vote in Commons

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Can the UN report say for certaintly who is responsible for the chemical attacks? I think the inspectors are only there to confirm that chemical weapons were used.

    If Assad's government didn't have complete control over their chemical weapon stockpile....then it is possible that the rebels may have gotten hold of some.
    With chemical sites scattered about Syria and the rebels controlling parts of Syria, the possibility that at least some of those facilities are in rebel hands is not improbable. Russia alleges that it documented a rebel use of sarin (Syria chemical weapons attack blamed on Assad, but where's the evidence? - CBS News), but as is the case with the latest use of chemical weapons, much information is not known.

    If the U.S. or UK want to take military measures for purposes other than a credible and imminent threat to their critical interests or allies, the evidence should be far more than circumstantial. Circumstantial evidence leaves too much room for error, at least when it comes to justifying a grave decision such as military action where no critical interests are involved.

  9. #49
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,189

    Re: David Cameron loses Syria vote in Commons

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    The level of PR - false PR - pushing for this war is incredible. THEY MUST HAVE A WAR SOMEWHERE WITH SOMEONE. What other excuse is there for building mega costly replacement weapons and new weapons systems?
    The most laughable excuse I saw for Syria was Obama on PBS claiming that Syria could use chemical weapons to attack the US. This is right up their with Condoleezza Rice and the mushroom clouds coming from Iraq to America.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  10. #50
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: David Cameron loses Syria vote in Commons

    Quote Originally Posted by Ben K. View Post
    Well that oversight should probably be exerted after the UN report. It's rightful oversight when all the arguments are made, it's simply politicking on the basis of domestic issues on this vote.
    I would agree, but the Prime Minister called Parliament into session ahead of the report. From earlier news accounts, it appeared that both Washington and London were ready to make the decision before the UN even concluded its investigation. Waiting would have been more prudent. Gathering information to make more than a circumstantial case would be useful. As things stand, there probably are too many uncertainties to justify military action. When no significant national interests are involved, it makes even more sense to err on the side of caution.

    Finally, nothing precludes Parliament from revisiting the issue were sufficient and credible information to become available. However, it is entirely plausible that the U.S. could conduct military strikes on its own even before that happens and such strikes may still be more likely than not on account of a number of factors (Congress is not exercising the kind of oversight Parliament did, the White House has essentially pre-committed based on its "red line" language, the White House is willing to accept circumstantial evidence to justify attacks against a regime it opposes, etc.).

Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •