Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"THEY" are going to attack...........

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • "THEY" are going to attack...........

    David Cameron to give Syria ultimatum

    David Cameron is pressing for United Nations action against Syria following the gassing of thousands of civilians in a suburb of Damascus.

    Mr Cameron is said to have been left sickened by images of children killed by the chemical weapons. Photo: ANDREW WINNING/WPA POOL









    By Robert Watts, and Richard Spencer in Cairo

    9:00PM BST 24 Aug 2013


    The Prime Minister spoke with President Barack Obama by telephone to ask for help with convening an emergency session of the United Nations Security Council.


    He wants to put forward a “game-changing” resolution that would give the Syrian government, led by Bashar al-Assad, “one last chance” to disarm.


    Mr Cameron is said to have been left sickened by images of children killed by the chemical weapons.

    One charity yesterday said at least 355 people had died and 10 times that number were treated for poisoning.


    Britain and France have blamed the Assad regime for the chemical attack.

    Related Articles


    On Saturday night four American destroyers were moving closer to Syria, armed with Tomahawk cruise missiles, which are capable of precision strikes.

    Gen Sir Nick Houghton, the Chief of the Defence Staff, is to take part in a summit in Jordan tomorrow with his US, French, Turkish, Saudi Arabian and Qatari counterparts.

    It follows the strongest indications to date from Washington that direct military intervention by the West was possible in the conflict.

    Diplomats talked of a “change in the American posture” following the attack on the suburb of East Ghouta on Wednesday.

    Mr Cameron’s officials were drafting the text of a resolution to put before the UN said to be modelled on one that offered Saddam Hussein, the late Iraq leader, “a final opportunity” to disarm in 2002.
    The move risks a public row with Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, who does not want any action taken against his ally.

    But US officials were studying the Kosovo conflict, in which Nato launched weeks of air strikes without UN support and in the teeth of Russian opposition.

    The Prime Minister is also to hold a meeting of the National Security Council. However, senior military figures have said privately that the “window of opportunity” for a successful intervention in Syria has long been closed.

    Three Syrian hospitals yesterday told the humanitarian group Médecins Sans Frontières that they had received around 3,600 patients suffering from symptoms related to the attack. Of these, 355 had reportedly died.

    President Assad’s regime has denied that it has used chemical weapons, describing the claims as “absolutely baseless”.

  • #2
    Re: "THEY" are going to attack...........

    I sence that Obama does NOT want any part in this, the America camp see's a war with Russia leading to nukes. Not much in America's intrest here.........if i were Russia i "explain" to Israel that what ever happens they WILL get Smoked........get Israel to tell the US NOT to help Britan or France.........

    Personaly............its not looking good.
    Mike

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: "THEY" are going to attack...........

      I think you exaggerate, sir.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: "THEY" are going to attack...........

        U.S. Warships Move Towards Syria

        Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: "THEY" are going to attack...........

          Obama doesn't want to go in there purely out of self interest. He knows it will only end badly which will make his already weakened position in office even weaker. If he sends in the airforce, and just one plane gets shot down, you'll see some backlash. He can't afford this going badly. The idea though that Assad is actually using chemical weapons is such a joke to me. The guy who allowed the international inspectors into the country to investigate the matter in the first place, and the guy who is winning the fight solidly, chooses to throw chemical weapons into the mix? Giving the west the exact excuse they would need to send in the guns? Never bought into that, especially since the reports are always unconfirmed as to who actually used it. Many reports out there of chemical weapons found in rebel strongholds and smuggled by rebels near Turkey. The way I see it right now is that both sides are clearly bad, but Assad is the lesser of two evils, not the rebels. I've seen too much of what these rebels do to people to ever consider them as a viable option. Assad is at least a secularist. Put those rebels in charge and you'll get a state akin to Uganda. Absolute poverty and civil wars without end. So I'm glad Obama is hesitant, even though it is not because he actually cares about Syrians. The thing that annoys me the most about this is how much the British and French governments are yelling for a strike to happen, but they wont up and do it themselves. These people are willing to fight and die to the last American.


          Comment


          • #6
            Re: "THEY" are going to attack...........

            William Hague: choice between military strikes on Syria or allowing tyrants to use chemical weapons

            Britain faces a choice between military strikes against Syria or allowing tyrants around the world to use chemical weapons "with impunity", William Hague has said.

            "This is a man presiding over slaughter," Mr Hague said, about the Syrian leader Photo: SERGEI SUPINSKY/AFP/Getty Images, REUTERS/Francois Lenoir








            By Tim Ross, Political Correspondent

            9:22AM BST 26 Aug 2013


            The Foreign Secretary refused to rule out bombing Assad regime targets within days as he warned that diplomatic efforts to resolve the crisis had “failed”.


            He denied any difference in approach between Downing Street and the White House, insisting that Britain, America and France were united in their determination to act.


            However, Mr Hague risked angering MPs by suggesting that it may not be necessary to recall Parliament prior to launching military action.


            His comments came as the crisis deepened in the aftermath of what is believed to have been a chemical gas attack on a suburb of Damascus last Wednesday.


            Britain and the United States believe it is all but certain that forces loyal to the Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, carried out the atrocity, which is reported to have killed at least 355 people and wounded 3,600 others.

            Related Articles


            On Sunday, the Assad regime finally bowed to intense international pressure to offer access to the site to UN weapons inspectors, who are due to begin work on Monday to gather evidence on who perpetrated the attack.

            As Britain and the US finalised preparations for a possible cruise missile strike on Syrian targets, which could begin within days, President Assad warned in a Russian newspaper that military action against his forces would not succeed.
            However, in an interview with BBC Radio, Mr Hague warned that the west was considering military strikes and that diplomatic efforts at the United Nations had failed.

            “We have tried those other diplomatic methods and we will continue to try those, but they have failed so far,” the Foreign Secretary told the Today programme.

            He suggested that it was possible and legal for countries to take military action in response to chemical weapons attacks without securing agreement from the UN Security Council first.

            “Here is a large scale chemical attack for which there is no possible explanation other than that it has been carried out by the Assad regime,” he said.

            “Certainly, we and the United States, and many other countries, including France are clear that we can’t allow the idea in the 21st century that chemical weapons can be used with impunity.”

            Mr Hague declined to discuss “the military options” that the government is considering but refused to rule “in or out” a strike within days.

            He said taking military action or doing nothing in the face of a gas attack "may be the choice" that Britain faces.
            Military commanders are preparing plans which could see Royal Navy assets in the region used for a cruise missile attack by the US, Britain and France on targets inside Syria.

            British government sources said on Sunday that such a strike could take place within the next week.
            The Prime Minister spoke from his holiday in Cornwall with President Obama, the French President, Francois Hollande, and Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor over the weekend.

            He is due to hold further talks with President Obama in the next 48 hours and a meeting of the National Security Council, including senior Cabinet ministers and military commanders, is also expected imminently.

            Some reports have suggested that the White House is cooler on the likelihood of military action against Syria.
            However Mr Hague insisted that there was no difference between Britain and the US and France on the prospect of military action, insisting the three countries’ approach was “absolutely the same”.

            Mr Hague insisted that the Coalition had a “good record” of consulting Parliament before taking military action.
            But he stressed that the decision on whether to recall MPs from their summer recess, which is due to end next week, would depend on the “timing and nature” of the response.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: "THEY" are going to attack...........

              Originally posted by verdo View Post
              The way I see it right now is that both sides are clearly bad, but Assad is the lesser of two evils, not the rebels. I've seen too much of what these rebels do to people to ever consider them as a viable option. Assad is at least a secularist. Put those rebels in charge and you'll get a state akin to Uganda. Absolute poverty and civil wars without end. So I'm glad Obama is hesitant, even though it is not because he actually cares about Syrians. The thing that annoys me the most about this is how much the British and French governments are yelling for a strike to happen, but they wont up and do it themselves. These people are willing to fight and die to the last American.

              I think Adolf Hilter's had the same thinking when he gassed the Jews. The world wouldn't care a damn. He was right.

              This is no longer the problem of the United States. I think the UN should react if it can be proven that the Syrian Baath Party is behind the chemical attack.

              But I don't think the US should go alone, despite the fact that Obama declare the red line a year ago.
              Last edited by touchring; August 26, 2013, 05:20 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: "THEY" are going to attack...........

                Except that Assad isn't Hitler. They have different objectives, and different ideology. Plus there are several key differences between the use of chemical weapons here and Hitlers killing of jewish people. Firstly, what Hitler did in holocaust was in almost total secret during the war. He didn't invite international inspectors in to come check out what he was doing. Few governments knew about the holocaust until after the war with Germany was pretty much over. Secondly, the accelerated, mass murder (through gas chambers) of jewish people under the final solution came in 1942, at a time when the tide was turning against Germany. They were trying to hurry up the process because they were loosing ground in the war and wanted to complete their insane task quickly before the labor camps could be liberated by the Allies. That's when they did the bulk of their exterminations. And lastly, lets look at this and assume everything I just said was incorrect and the western powers knew everything about Hitler throwing jews into gas chambers earlier in the war. Even if the Allies did find out about the mass exterminations what would it have mattered when the world was already engaged (for all intents and purposes) in a world war? There really was no need to worry about a superpower coming in to screw you over because they were already in the game against Germany.


                Now in contrast to today with Assad, you have a dictator who's army couldn't even phase any of the superpowers (unlike Nazi Germany which had one of the most modern armies there were). He lets international inspectors in so they can see what's going on for themselves. Assad is beating the rebels on almost every front, and reports have already come out showing that the rebels do have chemical weapons of their own.

                http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...94409Z20130505

                The democracies of the West are tired of the constant intervention, and will not allow politicians to intervene further unless something happened which challenged their conscience. If I were to believe that Assad were using chemical weapons, it would only be in the context that the rebels used it first, and even in this scenario I don't quite see him doing it, because you can't win a war on sarin gas. You actually need troops, leadership, and strategy...all of which the rebels lack, which is why they are stupid enough (or smart enough depending on how you look at it) and desperate enough to use such a weapon. The motive for the rebels is that they are loosing, weapons from the west are hardly making it into their hands fast enough and so they need to use anything they can to win. Plus, western governments don't mind stretching the facts a little (through the media that they largely influence) if it means they can create a pretext. It's a win/win for them, and a total loss for Assad. It's hard to actually defend a guy like Assad on his own, but if we're strictly talking in the context/confines of who should be in charge, (Assad or these rebels) Assad like magic becomes the easy choice for myself

                You have rebels who want power, and do things like beheading innocent Christian civilians (who make up a minority 10% of the Syrian population...so they're a religious minority not unlike the Jews in Nazi Germany) out of a radical fundamentalist hatred for people of opposing religious beliefs

                http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012...n_2387421.html

                Collateral damage and targeting killings are two different things. Both are bad, except one was not intended to happen, while the other was. You can't accidentally behead someone

                This is my perspective. Assad is one of the few secularist leaders in the middle east, making him one notch better than the rebels (and in some ways better than a few other middle eastern rulers), even though one could argue that they all swim in the same dirty pool. The rulers in Bahrain are extremely heavy handed with protesters as Assad (they have been known to kill/torture protesters) The only difference is that Bahrain is a vital U.S. ally.

                http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ally/?page=all

                The West will poo poo on their practices with words to give themselves left cover, but they wont dare intervene militarily. As long as you're an ally with the west and continue to supply us with that we want, you can do what you want. The moment you become independent of the west (like Qaddafi), you loose your license to do what you want with your people. Geopolitics is a dirty game, and I don't believe there are truly any good guys left.
                Last edited by verdo; August 26, 2013, 12:06 PM.


                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: "THEY" are going to attack...........

                  They will attack soon or later. Assad's Syria is the only ally of Iran in the region.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: "THEY" are going to attack...........

                    Originally posted by makimanos View Post
                    They will attack soon or later. Assad's Syria is the only ally of Iran in the region.
                    Do you really think that the lack of a US attack response á la the Magreb is for lack of will?

                    I for one don't.

                    There are many reasons not to invade Syria.

                    There are few reasons at this point not to launch a cruse missile at military installations.

                    But I'll give you one big reason.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: "THEY" are going to attack...........

                      Assad will be more than happy to have inspectors come in, since I doubt he is the one who used chemical weapons, if any chemicals were used. I see the CIA working with Al Qaeda on this, as always.

                      Verdo has most of it in his post.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: "THEY" are going to attack...........

                        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ld-Reagan.html

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: "THEY" are going to attack...........

                          When all news is pointing to Assad beating up on the rebels and holding the upperhand militarily, why would he cross a designated red line? The rebels keep wanting this to drag out because they know if they keep it going long enough the odds of US intervention rose. Why would he do anything to draw in the leviathan that is the US? Even keeping the US away from installing a no fly zone, threfore erasing his air advantage, is a win for him. It makes no sense. What makes sense is rebels using gas on other rebel groups' people an filming it for propaganda purposes. The US hasn't respected the Westphalian idea of national sovereignty, and the US has been fomentign this rebellion using al-qaed aligned fighters. I'm an American, but embarrassed how the supposedly dovish Senator turned into Mr. Hawk. If you believe this pitch, have I got a 30 year high yield corporate bond to sell you.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: "THEY" are going to attack...........

                            Its ON!
                            http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-0...rriving-cyprus
                            Talk round the camp fire is "They" are going to try to split Syria into 2 or 3 bits......
                            Mike

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: "THEY" are going to attack...........

                              I think this is the 'wars and rumours of war' in Matthew 24:6-8 (KJV)

                              6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.
                              7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
                              8 All these are the beginning of sorrows.


                              So really, it's just another regional war...I hope Our Glorious President can stick to his peaceful ideas, and keep us out of the mess! We don't NEED any more sorrows just now!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X