[Kazanne]

Corbyn will be rubbing his hands with glee,any opportunity to have a go at May and he is there like a ferret up a trouser leg, he just wants to come across as caring and peaceful,yeah right.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

Corbyn will be rubbing his hands with glee,any opportunity to have a go at May and he is there like a ferret up a trouser leg, he just wants to come across as caring and peaceful,yeah right.

Unfortunately, some are easily fooled when they hear what they want to hear. Idealism is often not rational.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Jack_

How true..

[Maru]

France issues report detailing evidence of Assad role in chemical attacks
http://thehill.com/policy/internatio...le-in-chemical

France issues report detailing evidence of Assad role in chemical attacks

France declassified a report on Saturday laying out evidence that officials said proves that a chemical attack in Syria last week was carried out by the government of President Bashar Assad.

The report claims that several chemical strikes were carried out in the Damascus suburb of Douma on April 7, and that symptoms experienced by the victims — skin burns, suffocation and other breathing difficulties, among other markers — were consistent with the effects of chlorine gas.

"Reliable intelligence indicates that Syrian military officials have coordinated what appears to be the use of chemical weapons containing chlorine on Douma, on April 7," the report, released by the French Foreign Ministry, reads.

The report also states that the Syrian government has carried out a number of chemical weapons strikes since April 4, 2017 — the same day a chemical attack in Syria's northern Idlib province left more than 80 civilians dead.

The U.S. issued an assessment on Friday night pointing to the Syrian government's role in the alleged chemical attacks in Douma.

That report cites "multiple media sources, the reported symptoms experienced by victims, videos and images showing two assessed barrel bombs from the attack, and reliable information indicating coordination between Syrian military officials before the attack."

The assessment also suggests that the Syrian government not only used chlorine in the attack on Douma, but that reported symptoms were also consistent with exposure to sarin, a deadly nerve agent.
The French and U.S. assessments came hours after leaders in Washington, Paris and London authorized "precision strikes" on targets in Syria believed to be associated with the country's chemical weapons arsenal.

Syria and its allies, Russia and Iran, have denied that Assad's government used chemical weapons, and have sought to blame both foreign actors and militant groups for staging the attacks in Douma.
Russia has accused the U.S. and its allies of failing to produce adequate evidence of the Syrian government's role in the chemical attack.

The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the international chemical weapons watchdog, launched an investigation into the alleged chemical strikes on Douma on Saturday.

The allied strikes on Friday were cast by U.S. officials, not as a punishment for Assad's government, but as a means to eradicate Syria's chemical stockpile and production capabilities.

Lt. Gen. Kenneth McKenzie, the director of the Joint Staff, said Saturday that while the allied attacks dealt a blow to Syria's chemical weapons program, Damascus likely retained "residual" elements of its chemical arsenal.

President Trump and other U.S. officials have said that they are prepared to take further action in Syria, unless Assad's government ceases its alleged use of chemical weapons.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

How true..

I don’t think there is any nastiness intended in that - people just want to protect their own and their own way of life. People would prefer to help in other ways. We are a small Island and given time, probably not very long, the country will change too much and lose its identity - I don’t think that’s what many want - and they have every right to feel that way - most countries do if honest.

[Brother Leon]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

Corbyn will be rubbing his hands with glee,any opportunity to have a go at May and he is there like a ferret up a trouser leg, he just wants to come across as caring and peaceful,yeah right.

Yeah. The guy who has been against meddling in affairs in the Middle East his entire political career is only speaking out because it will make Theresa May look bad...

Solid logic there.

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

Corbyn will be rubbing his hands with glee,any opportunity to have a go at May and he is there like a ferret up a trouser leg, he just wants to come across as caring and peaceful,yeah right.

It's odd how antiwar noises in this country are usually made by the left wing.
Whereas in US, at least this time round, it's the right wing, Trump supporters who are unhappy with the Syria strikes. Fox News, Braitbart etc take a very critical view of Trump getting involved there.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

It's odd how antiwar noises in this country are usually made by the left wing.
Whereas in US, at least this time round, it's the right wing, Trump supporters who are unhappy with the Syria strikes. Fox News, Braitbart etc take a very critical view of Trump getting involved there.

I have to ask myself why some people, as you say usually on the left, are against military retaliation in this kind of situation. Is it because they are more concerned about the potential effects on themselves, especially with Russia involved, than the people in Syria?

Talking to the likes of Assad or Putin won’t work, it hasn’t so far as they simply shows defiance in response. Attacking people with chemical weapons is inexcusable and something the West has to be involved in for everyone’s sake. If some dictators are seen to be getting away with it some other dictator will try it on too.

The implication some try to make that the left care more than the right is ridiculous as self-preservation could be the motive either way - it is definitely not an indication they are morally superior. Pretty sick of the impression some try to give - tantamount to patting each other on the back and saying what a good boy/girl am I.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

It's odd how antiwar noises in this country are usually made by the left wing.
Whereas in US, at least this time round, it's the right wing, Trump supporters who are unhappy with the Syria strikes. Fox News, Braitbart etc take a very critical view of Trump getting involved there.

Are they? I follow a fair few outlets (and other notable folk) on the right and most seem to be on board with the strikes and can appreciate us finally having responded to Syria/Russia beyond just candor.

I think the media platforms themselves are playing their cards closer to their chest (for now), as they were somewhat subdued during live coverage when they were discussing the strikes. (CNN though wouldn't shut up about Trump's tweets )

Fox News seemed to be level-headed/supportive of those strikes that night. However, I think no one wants to be seen as warmongering, and who can really blame them after the public's sharp reversal during the Iraq War. That was partially how we ended up with Obama in office, because he ran completely counter to Bush's foreign policy... it's what propelled him to top of the Democrat ticket and his anti-war policies were a big deal for his base.

Now Trump staunchest supporters, yes, they're irritated because he's backed away from a lot of his campaign promises. One of those included us being pulled out of major military operations abroad and focusing on domestic. His reversal on gun control and his waffling on immigration is still stinging for other folk as well... I think Breitbart may have fit those shoes, given they were the unofficial Trump news platform before the election and were on board with his then policies... and perhaps they still feel they are the "direct line" to his base.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Brother Leon

Yeah. The guy who has been against meddling in affairs in the Middle East his entire political career is only speaking out because it will make Theresa May look bad...

Solid logic there.

No BL something I have noticed,even when there are political appeals by the parties on TV ,the labour ones always has to have a swipe at the Tories ,as for the topic in question,the job is done ,sometimes waiting isn't an option.I think she did the right thing.

[bots]

People seem to be concerned about this as it may escalate things into a bigger issue. That's simply not the case. If Putin wants to escalate things, he will do so (and has been doing so in the recent past). He doesn't need a reason. Putin is someone who has killed more of his own people than any foreign country, so a couple of missiles fired that had no impact on his country is meaningless. How people can forget so quickly incidents like the dutch civilian jet that was shot down by Russian forces killing hundreds is scary. We should never back down to Putin.

[MTVN]

There has always been a strand of the right in both countries which doesn't like foreign intervention, mainly those on the libertarian wing. The hard left have a world view which is generally anti-Western which they phrase as 'anti-colional' or 'anti-Imperialist' which leads them to oppose pretty much every military action no matter the circumstances. The centre-left are a bit more favourable to it as we had with Blair and as they have in France with Macron and Hollande before him.

I don't really want us to get involved because this is how major conflicts start - one incident in a far off country which we have no direct involvement with but affects the global balance of power. I do accept that in the case of chemical weapons we do have a bit of responsibility though

[Brother Leon]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

No BL something I have noticed,even when there are political appeals by the parties on TV ,the labour ones always has to have a swipe at the Tories ,as for the topic in question,the job is done ,sometimes waiting isn't an option.I think she did the right thing.

Errm. Did you have a look at any of Theresa May’s campaign last election?

Her whole campaign was basically just Corbyn slander to the extent that people didn’t even know her policies.

[Headie]

Originally Posted by Greg!

WWIII here we come ladies

Originally Posted by reece(:

Not prepared to perch a bomb shelter

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I have to ask myself why some people, as you say usually on the left, are against military retaliation in this kind of situation. Is it because they are more concerned about the potential effects on themselves, especially with Russia involved, than the people in Syria?

Talking to the likes of Assad or Putin won’t work, it hasn’t so far as they simply shows defiance in response. Attacking people with chemical weapons is inexcusable and something the West has to be involved in for everyone’s sake. If some dictators are seen to be getting away with it some other dictator will try it on too.

The implication some try to make that the left care more than the right is ridiculous as self-preservation could be the motive either way - it is definitely not an indication they are morally superior. Pretty sick of the impression some try to give - tantamount to patting each other on the back and saying what a good boy/girl am I.

I think there's a fair amount of feeling superior on both sides. The right wing tend to feel superior because they claim they stand for tradition, common sense and against what they call dangers posed by unrealistic and idealistic left.
Why the left is antiwar? I think what MTVN says about being anti-imperialist and anti-colonialist is important. The left also draws on socialist ideals which tend to be very internationalist, i.e. looking for common ground with others first, and claiming that wars are usually lose-lose situations.
Downside to these admirable principles is that the left may (and often is) seen as weak on defence and security.

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Maru

Are they? I follow a fair few outlets (and other notable folk) on the right and most seem to be on board with the strikes and can appreciate us finally having responded to Syria/Russia beyond just candor.

I think the media platforms themselves are playing their cards closer to their chest (for now), as they were somewhat subdued during live coverage when they were discussing the strikes. (CNN though wouldn't shut up about Trump's tweets )

Fox News seemed to be level-headed/supportive of those strikes that night. However, I think no one wants to be seen as warmongering, and who can really blame them after the public's sharp reversal during the Iraq War. That was partially how we ended up with Obama in office, because he ran completely counter to Bush's foreign policy... it's what propelled him to top of the Democrat ticket and his anti-war policies were a big deal for his base.

Now Trump staunchest supporters, yes, they're irritated because he's backed away from a lot of his campaign promises. One of those included us being pulled out of major military operations abroad and focusing on domestic. His reversal on gun control and his waffling on immigration is still stinging for other folk as well... I think Breitbart may have fit those shoes, given they were the unofficial Trump news platform before the election and were on board with his then policies... and perhaps they still feel they are the "direct line" to his base.

Have a look at this assessment, Maru. How does it agree with your view from America?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...position-trump

And in general, Fox News hosts pushed back on the president’s bellicose remarks, largely evincing an anti-war sentiment. New recruit Tomi Lahren counseled Trump in her final thoughts segment to “remember that it’s America first”, and demanded that the US pull out of Syria entirely.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

Have a look at this assessment, Maru. How does it agree with your view from America?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...position-trump

I guess I need to watch more Fox News. I think there are some are quite valid arguments for a full pull out. Though I wouldn't exactly go to Alex Jones/Richard Spencer/Ann Coulter for my news ...

This tweet made me feel quite a bit emotional...

Sarah Huckabee Sanders Clarifies Syria ‘Situation Room’ Photo
http://www.newsweek.com/sarah-huckab...d-trump-886464

I don't know, just seemed kind of Kim Jong Un-ish. "Lookz at our mad war skillz y'all"...

My concern though is if we do a full pull out, it may inevitably hand Syria to Russia to take control/wreak havoc in that region. Assad be damned.

Also very interesting bit from your article...

As for Fox News, according to the political scientist and conservative media expert Dan Cassino, anti-globalism is also the flavor of the month there.

He thinks they have been chasing the audience discovered and nurtured by outlets like Breitbart and Infowars. Indeed, Breitbart’s audience has drifted back to Fox as presenters like Carlson have found ways to make alt-right-adjacent ideology “palatable to advertisers”.

[Twosugars]

The thing is, Maru, Syria has always been in the Russian sphere of influence. Putin is trying to hold on to it, like in old good communist empire times. He won't be chased off. He seems to be determined to reclaim as much former "glory" as possible, e.g. spoiling the west influence in Ukraine, war with Georgia, grabbing back Crimea, destabilizing the west by covert means so that he can divide and rule. He discovered Russia doesn't have to compete economically. It can make mischief.

[Kizzy]

Youtube video

[chuff me dizzy]

Ideas on this folks ...............

https://www.rt.com/news/424047-russi...ria-statement/

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by MTVN

There has always been a strand of the right in both countries which doesn't like foreign intervention, mainly those on the libertarian wing. The hard left have a world view which is generally anti-Western which they phrase as 'anti-colional' or 'anti-Imperialist' which leads them to oppose pretty much every military action no matter the circumstances. The centre-left are a bit more favourable to it as we had with Blair and as they have in France with Macron and Hollande before him.

I don't really want us to get involved because this is how major conflicts start - one incident in a far off country which we have no direct involvement with but affects the global balance of power. I do accept that in the case of chemical weapons we do have a bit of responsibility though

^ Well said.

[Oliver_W]

tbh I think it's more likely to have been done by "moderates" or rebels in Syria than have been staged.

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

Ideas on this folks ...............

https://www.rt.com/news/424047-russi...ria-statement/

Thanks, Chuff.

I'm not buying it. Two witnesses could have been bought.
But this bit is very curious:

Russia hoped that international monitors from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which is due to investigate the circumstances of the incident, will help establish the truth.

Russia needs to make up its mind on OPCW. They questioned OPCW's conclusion on Novichok in Salisbury. So OPCW was "wrong" in Salisbury but will be believed in Syria?

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

Thanks, Chuff.

I'm not buying it. Two witnesses could have been bought.
But this bit is very curious:

Russia needs to make up its mind on OPCW. They questioned OPCW's conclusion on Novichok in Salisbury. So OPCW was "wrong" in Salisbury but will be believed in Syria?

The news report and video was from REUTERS not some cheap red top newspaper ,I spotted a red flag on it right away

[Crimson Dynamo]

Abbott has been tweeting fake anti-Israeli images

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...bing-Iran.html



she really is a disgusting bigot