• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

David Cameron loses Syria vote in Commons

The U.S. government may be considering military action in response to chemical strikes near Damascus. But a generation ago, America's military and intelligence communities knew about and did nothing to stop a series of nerve gas attacks far more devastating than anything Syria has seen, Foreign Policy has learned.

In 1988, during the waning days of Iraq's war with Iran, the United States learned through satellite imagery that Iran was about to gain a major strategic advantage by exploiting a hole in Iraqi defenses. U.S. intelligence officials conveyed the location of the Iranian troops to Iraq, fully aware that Hussein's military would attack with chemical weapons, including sarin, a lethal nerve agent.


http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articl...prove_america_helped_saddam_as_he_gassed_iran
 
Do you know who our #6 creditor is for USA debt? Russia. Know who #2 is? China. Only the American Public holds more USA debt than China. Economists are saying Russia will have a debt crisis by 2030 no matter what. Vlad Putin absolutely will not go to war with USA and risk USA defaulting on a few hundred billion dollars of debt. Russia's GDP is 1.8 trillion, whereas USA is 14.99 trillion. We can afford a $200 billion default, but Russia absolutely cannot. China, with a GDP of 7 trillion can afford a few hundred billion; but that's not what we owe them. We owe them a tad over $1.1 trillion; which they cannot afford for us to default on. China also does $500 billion in trade-goods with USA on the export side and $100 billion on the import side. She can ill afford for both of those numbers to go to $0. I am honestly not worried about China or Russia. Just like USA, they stand to make a lot of money supplying arms and rebuilding the countries that get leveled.

Thanks, I know all this.

Debt is not war prevention, it is the cause of wars. Countries who feel they have nothing to lose will be more willing to take outlandish risks when they are hard on their dime. As far as the economy is concerned, the more debt holders who square off in Syria, the better. It gives them an excuse to not deal with the economy anymore. Plus, it makes them money, if they have a fairly well oiled military industrial complex like the U.S. does. Endless war has been one of our national strategies of producing revenue for certain companies.

Two words: human denial. War is great for distracting people from all the horrible domestic **** you're doing. Except it seems that this time a lot more people aren't buying it.
 
Tank God!

So far, so good. :)
 
how many more people have to die before we intervene?

Why do we have to intervene? It's the Syrian Government fighting against Al-Qaeda led Jihad. Last time we intervened in a "civil" (Jihad) matter was the Balkans. US backed the early up starts that became Al-Qaeda because of the "tragedy" and look how that turned out. Now it's those Balkan muslims who make the largest part of the forces fights the Syrian Government. You and others say the tragedy, oh the humanity.. I say let them fight it out.. not our problem, its a problem for the part of the world who gives two ****s about us.
 
How is it possible to have a vote in the US Congress when Boehner will not call them back into session?

He's too busy golfing, campaigning and fund-raising.

He'll just let Bush's losers like Rummy lay another big turd as Rummy pulls for the all-white guy in Russia.

You do realize Obama doesn't want a Congressional vote, because if it fails like in the UK, it'll show there is NO red line.
 
I just posted the story in the Europe subforum. If a mod sees this, you can delete that one, It's just spam at this point. Didn't see this thread here.

Anyway, I don't believe intervention is correct. Unless the intervention is full fledged military warfare where allied forces occupy Syria and then see to installing a democratic environment where the people will elect their leader. And then bud out. There is no "good side" in Syria. The rebels are islamist terrorist who, if they win, will start doing the genocide of christians in Syria (30% of the population) and institute sharia law, and if Assad wins, well, he is not a legitimate leader. He killed tens of thousands or hundred of thousands of his people and caused the fleeing of almost 1mil from the country.
 
I believe we should act to eliminate the chemical weapons no matter which side has them. I don't see the Free Syrian Army as likely having done this, but I wouldn't put it past the Islamic Front or al-Nusra. Either way, nobody in the conflict, not even the FSA, should be trusted with chemical weapons.

In the early talk about possible targets, strikes on the chemical weapons facilities were all but ruled out on account of environmental and health risks. IMO, that's understandable, as the expected harm to civilians would likely be disproportionate relative to the excessive military objective to be attained. What is interesting is that no mention was made with respect to production facilities constituting possible targets. Targeting the latter, at least, would slow the growth of chemical weapons stockpiles. Removal of Syria's chemical weapons would require an on-the-ground presence. The latter is not likely until there is a resolution in Syria's civil war and it's unclear whether any party to that conflict would accept such an outcome. More likely, should the Assad dictatorship survive or the anti-Assad movement gain power, they would articulate Syria's traditional rationale that they need the arsenals to deter Israel. That such rationale lacks merit, both in practice and theory, would not matter. If Syria winds up in a de facto partition of sorts, the chemical arms will also very likely remain out of reach.

In any case, the "red lines" proved useless in deterring the use of chemical weapons. IMO, that proved to be the case, because such red lines were not consistent with U.S. interests. In effect, the U.S. was issuing warnings/implying commitments that extended beyond its actual relatively small interests in Syria. That gap limited the credibility of those warnings. Not too surprisingly, deterrence failed.
 
and how many kids in Afghanistan and Iraq were killed by British and American bombs... your hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Yeh except we don't aim for children and try to avoid targeting civilian areas in general! The same can not be said for the Syrian regime given the weapons they are using and the death toll since the start of the war.
 
Speaking of Bush, I think this is all a case of "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice....erm, y'know"

Bollocks Andy! This had nothing to do with "lessons learned from Iraq" this was a case of a hung parliament to spineless to make the hard choice in a election year, this was political.
 
Yeh except we don't aim for children and try to avoid targeting civilian areas in general! The same can not be said for the Syrian regime given the weapons they are using and the death toll since the start of the war.

Oh yeah.. US never hit a wedding party just to kill some bad guy in Pakistan or bombed an area with a 500lb jdam to kill a few guys just "happens" to kill civilians.
Why do we ignore the civilians killed in American wars? - Washington Post

That's numbers with the "best" trained military in the world.

And there is no evidence Syrian Government are directly aiming for children. What you fail to understand is there is another side that is fighting too who are even more poorly trained then the Syrian Army. That do fire randomly and are using indirect fire as well. They hide in and around civilian areas on purpose. That the Syrian Government can only fight the "enemy" where they are at and that's where they are at.

Do you (or even the US) blame the IDF (Israel) when they bomb a few areas and civilians die knowing they are in the area? No, you say Israel has a right to defend itself. If I told you that the UK Government couldn't go after PIRA, INLA, or even RIRA or CIRA because they live amongst the civilians and you risk civilian deaths by rolling up in your Saracens.. you'd tell me I'd cut your legs out from under you. It's why the British Government never paid no mind to international pressures during "The Troubles" in their policies of conducted "policing". But you want to cut the legs out from Syria because they are fight terrorist groups. How feckless of you.
 
What a world we live in. The French still appear to be up for it (theirs appears to be the only western public narrowly in favour of intervention) but Hollande doesn't need to seek approval anyway. Furthermore, it's the French left who want action. America and France, coalition of the willing?

The British ruling class better hope the Republicans win the next presidency, I'd reckon the special relationship is going to be in trouble for a while if the Tories are viewed as incapable at delivering promises and Labour as backstabbers.
 
and how many kids in Afghanistan and Iraq were killed by British and American bombs... your hypocrisy knows no bounds.

That's the problem with our foreign policy in general, hypocritical.
 
Yeh except we don't aim for children and try to avoid targeting civilian areas in general! The same can not be said for the Syrian regime given the weapons they are using and the death toll since the start of the war.


That is blatantly false on both counts.
 
Oh yeah.. US never hit a wedding party just to kill some bad guy in Pakistan or bombed an area with a 500lb jdam to kill a few guys just "happens" to kill civilians.
Why do we ignore the civilians killed in American wars? - Washington Post

That's numbers with the "best" trained military in the world.

And there is no evidence Syrian Government are directly aiming for children. What you fail to understand is there is another side that is fighting too who are even more poorly trained then the Syrian Army. That do fire randomly and are using indirect fire as well. They hide in and around civilian areas on purpose. That the Syrian Government can only fight the "enemy" where they are at and that's where they are at.

Do you (or even the US) blame the IDF (Israel) when they bomb a few areas and civilians die knowing they are in the area? No, you say Israel has a right to defend itself. If I told you that the UK Government couldn't go after PIRA, INLA, or even RIRA or CIRA because they live amongst the civilians and you risk civilian deaths by rolling up in your Saracens.. you'd tell me I'd cut your legs out from under you. It's why the British Government never paid no mind to international pressures during "The Troubles" in their policies of conducted "policing". But you want to cut the legs out from Syria because they are fight terrorist groups. How feckless of you.

Actually I have been very critical of Israel for a number of year especially over the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.

Your comparing the Syrian civil war with the troubles in Northern Ireland is absurd and out of place, obviously their is a terrorist element to the Syrian rebels however they do not make up 100% of their fighting force and the whole struggle started as a grass roots peaceful protest which turned violent when the Assad regime cracked down on it. You post is confusing on many levels especially given the fact you are very critical of Americas military/ British Military, you accuse the rebels of having a terrorist agenda and you finish it with defending the Syrian government. So you openly support this violent dictatorships fight for power?
 
Bollocks Andy! This had nothing to do with "lessons learned from Iraq" this was a case of a hung parliament to spineless to make the hard choice in a election year, this was political.

I'd like to think there remain a few men in parliament with a sound mind, that have learned the folly of joining the US in another senseless conflict.
 
That is blatantly false on both counts.

Oh ok can you show me some evidence that the American or British military have actively targeted civilians during Iraq and Afghan?
 
I'd like to think there remain a few men in parliament with a sound mind, that have learned the folly of joining the US in another senseless conflict.

You would like to think that! Fact is many Labour MP's didn't even bother to turn up, Cameron lost because his own party has lost confidence in him and are trying to distance themselves from him.
 
Oh ok can you show me some evidence that the American or British military have actively targeted civilians during Iraq and Afghan?

Can you show some EVIDENCE that Al Assad has actively targeted civilians during his struggle to defend Syria from jihadist terrorists?
 
Actually I have been very critical of Israel for a number of year especially over the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.

Your comparing the Syrian civil war with the troubles in Northern Ireland is absurd and out of place, obviously their is a terrorist element to the Syrian rebels however they do not make up 100% of their fighting force and the whole struggle started as a grass roots peaceful protest which turned violent when the Assad regime cracked down on it. You post is confusing on many levels especially given the fact you are very critical of Americas military/ British Military, you accuse the rebels of having a terrorist agenda and you finish it with defending the Syrian government. So you openly support this violent dictatorships fight for power?

Being critical and calling for intervention (over throw) are two different things. You've chosen to go one step further with Syria.

I am not comparing, I am pointing out the hypocrisy. Both events are totally different and don't disagree on that account but the British didn't want anybody telling them what to do so why expect Syria to want that advice? But your are down right ignorant if you think the Syrian Free Army isn't a terrorist group, they hire foreigners to fight or train them. Hell, if your Muslim from the Balkans and a vet of those wars, you'll get $2,000 a day. Then they act like it (they use the same tactics as the PIRA did) and they've committed war crimes according to the UN. UN: Syrian Rebels Suspected of War Crimes

If they were doing that towards the US or British Government they'd be called Terrorist.. but since they fulfill the purpose of poking Iran in the eye via Syria.. they are "Freedom" Fighters.

Yet, FSA isn't the most effective and reliable rebel force in Syria. It's actually Al-Nusra Front. They are the go to force. It's the force the FSA sends to fight the Syrian Army and do the dirty work, then the FSA wipes their hands clean and says no, no, they aren't part of the FSA. These guys are a nasty and will do anything. They are all foreign.

There is estimates that up to 50% of the fighters in Syria are foreign and that's growing every day. Turkey sees hundreds a week funnel into Syria.
 
Last edited:
"If they were doing that towards the US or British Government they'd be called Terrorist.. but since they fulfill the purpose of poking Iran in the eye via Syria.. they are "Freedom" Fighters."

You are absolutely correct austria!
 
Being critical and calling for intervention (over throw) are two different things. You've chosen to go one step further with Syria.

I am not comparing, I am pointing out the hypocrisy. Both events are totally different and don't disagree on that account but the British didn't want anybody telling them what to do so why expect Syria to want that advice? But your are down right ignorant if you think the Syrian Free Army isn't a terrorist group, they hire foreigners to fight or train them. Hell, if your Muslim from the Balkans and a vet of those wars, you'll get $2,000 a day. Then they act like it (they use the same tactics as the PIRA did) and they've committed war crimes according to the UN. UN: Syrian Rebels Suspected of War Crimes

If they were doing that towards the US or British Government they'd be called Terrorist.. but since they fulfill the purpose of poking Iran in the eye via Syria.. they are "Freedom" Fighters.

Yet, FSA isn't the most effective and reliable rebel force in Syria. It's actually Al-Nusra Front. They are the go to force. It's the force the FSA sends to fight the Syrian Army and do the dirty work, then the FSA wipes their hands clean and says no, no, they aren't part of the FSA. These guys are a nasty and will do anything. They are all foreign.

There is estimates that up to 50% of the fighters in Syria are foreign and that's growing every day. Turkey sees hundreds a week funnel into Syria.



Britain didnt need anyone to tell them what to do because they were not dropping napalm or bombing catholic areas with our Tornadoes.
There is always an excuse not to intervene in conflicts like these that is why we hesitated in the balkans, watched Rwanada happen in front our eyes and it is why we have sat back and watched the Syrian government use their far superior firepower to destroy its own people and its infastructure. The Syrian government is aided by Iran, Hezbolla, China and Russia and they heavily outgun the rebels. In despertaion have the rebels turned to more extremists groups to help fight this war maybe, but this shouldn't be used as a " get out of jail free card" by the West so we can continue to sit back and watch the continued bloodshed. If we back off and allow the continued use of chemical weapons in Syria then we are on a slippery slope.
 
Can you show some EVIDENCE that Al Assad has actively targeted civilians during his struggle to defend Syria from jihadist terrorists?

yeh look at the estimated civillian deaths and read civillian eye witness accounts.
 
Can you show some EVIDENCE that Al Assad has actively targeted civilians during his struggle to defend Syria from jihadist terrorists?

A UN report issued earlier in the year concluded that both parties to the sectarian conflict were ignoring their civilian-protection responsibilities.

Excerpts:

Government forces and affiliated militia committed the crimes against humanity of murder, torture, rape, enforced disappearance and other inhumane acts. War crimes and gross violations of international human rights and humanitarian law — including arbitrary arrest and detention, unlawful attack, attacking protected objects, and pillaging and destruction of property — were also committed.

Anti-Government armed groups have committed war crimes, including murder, torture, hostage-taking and attacking protected objects. They continue to endanger the civilian population by positioning military objectives inside civilian areas. Where armed groups carried out bombings in predominantly civilian areas, it had the effect of spreading terror and amounted to the war crime of attacking civilians.


http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/CoISyria/A.HRC.22.59_en.pdf
 
Back
Top Bottom