Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

And next, Syria?

Think the best we can do is support the refugee camps and start working on a resettlement plan as realistically most of those refugees are not going home again:(.


This seems to be what's missing from most of the rhetoric I've seen on Syria. Its imperative that the refugees are supported to keep the influx from destabilizing neighboring countries. Its not even part of the discussion. Old man McCain would rather bomb than feed people. I have no idea where Obama is coming from, but he's surely lost contact with his base.
 
I don't think we as arm chair critics thousands of miles away in another country with only the internet and tv would be in a good place to say whether Assad did or did not attack the civilians. Whether he did or did not order the attack I still think he is a dangerous cunt who is fighting for his life and would possibly do anything to survive no matter what the cost.

again valid points . But in this instance its a smallish jihadist redoubt that his army has surrounded on all sides and therefore is contained and pretty much doomed eventually. It doesnt pose anything remotely like the level of threat one would consider him feeling it necessary to employ the weapon of last resort with all the grave repercussions that entails. The western response is easily forseeable as was the American ,British and French appetite for war. There have been repeated warnings from within and without Syria that a provocation using chemical weapons could well be the basis for direct attack on Syria now its clear the proxies arent up to the task of regime change . There are very compelling reasons as to why its essential for Assad not to do it .
The surrounded jihadists however were most definitely in a situation were defeat and death looked like a real outcome for them . Theyre in a desperate situation on the ground, not Assad . They are the only ones on the ground who could possibly benefit from this .
The man is certainly ruthless but he isnt stupid by any means, nor is he insane .
 
Apologies I thought you were referring to the media speculations about the "grade" of agent contained within the projectiles. As far as the actual munitions used, I cant add much other than saying that the quality control of factories in the Middle East isn't always the same as that applied in Russia never mind in the West. I would still like to see the full report that the Russians have supposedly provided, there has been much made of lack of chain of custody for UK/US samples but I have seen no evidence of an acceptable chain of custody for any Russian samples either.

even prior to their investigation beginning the Russians were emphasising that verifiable chains of custody would be central to their investigation . The Russians insisted their experts would be following the international guide lines and requirements on such investigations to the letter and would be seen to do so . As yet I havent seen anyone contradicting their assertions on the chain of custody issue .

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/bilingual/2013-07/10/c_132529199.htm

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2013-07/11/c_132530294.htm

http://nsnbc.me/2013/09/04/russia-released-key-findings-chemical-weapons-probe/

And while I wouldnt claim to be any kind of an expert in this feild what their report claims is the grade of Sarin in the projectiles points to a home made mix not because of its strength but because of the absence of chemical stabilisers that are used Id assume as preservatives when its produced under factory conditions . Theres a bit there on the actual ingredients allegedly used in the mix , as well as data on the projectiles origins .
 
I have no idea where Obama is coming from, but he's surely lost contact with his base.

This really puzzles me. Neocons (like John Bolton) are saying they're not interested in a strike and the usually reliable warmonger Fox News (people like Jeanine Pirrot) are lambasting Obama for taking America into another war. Why did he not know Cameron would have to desert him if/when it came to the crunch? Cameron would have known it.

So, if it is not just Obama's male ego, then why is this self-declared friend of Islam continuing to plough this lonely and desperate furrow?
 

Kind of backs up CR's argument this story. Basically the Assad regime and Russia are offering to take their entire stockpile of chemical weapons out of the arena (presumably because the Russians are offering some last-ditch reassurances to the regime in case of necessity).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24022866

Looks like Kerry dropped the ball in a press conference

When asked at a news conference whether there was anything Mr Assad could do to avoid military action, Mr Kerry replied that he could hand over his entire stockpile of chemical weapons within the next week.

i.e. the sort of macho demand normally impossible for a sovereign state to comply with - but they'd already offered to do exactly this (well- not sure about the timeframe) - so they were forced to back pedal and - in effect say, even if he does this we're still threatening to bomb him.

US officials subsequently clarified that Mr Kerry was making a "rhetorical argument" rather than a serious offer.

Makes a fucking mockery of their claim that this is all about the use of chemical weapons by Assad.
 
The remark by a tired Kerry was several hours earler, US politicos getting more worked up about his "unbelievably small air strikes" line , Ban Ki Moon also now on board:)
 
This seems to be what's missing from most of the rhetoric I've seen on Syria. Its imperative that the refugees are supported to keep the influx from destabilizing neighboring countries. Its not even part of the discussion. Old man McCain would rather bomb than feed people. I have no idea where Obama is coming from, but he's surely lost contact with his base.

Humanitarian stuff tends to feature heavily in UK rhetoric. Its a big chunk of Camerons latest set piece.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speec...minister-statement-to-the-house-of-commons--2

Humanitarian aid
In terms of the humanitarian response, Britain is leading the world.

This is the refugee crisis of our time.

A Syrian becomes a refugee every 15 seconds – that’s 240 fleeing during the hour of this Statement alone.

Inside Syria, 6.8 million are in need of humanitarian assistance.

At the same time aid convoys simply can’t get through to areas under siege because of the fighting and most major routes between large populations are too insecure to use.

So in St Petersburg, I organised a special meeting with the UN Secretary General, the EU, Japan, Turkey, Canada, France, Australia, Italy, Saudi Arabia and America.

We agreed to work together through the UN to secure unfettered humanitarian access inside Syria.

We agreed to increase the focus of that humanitarian assistance on dealing with the dreadful impact of chemical weapons - including medicines and decontamination tents.

And we challenged the world to make up the financial shortfall for humanitarian aid by the time the United Nations General Assembly meets later this month.

Britain, Canada, Italy and Qatar have made a start with contributions totalling £164 million.
 
This really puzzles me. Neocons (like John Bolton) are saying they're not interested in a strike and the usually reliable warmonger Fox News (people like Jeanine Pirrot) are lambasting Obama for taking America into another war. Why did he not know Cameron would have to desert him if/when it came to the crunch? Cameron would have known it.

So, if it is not just Obama's male ego, then why is this self-declared friend of Islam continuing to plough this lonely and desperate furrow?

Well either they've got an actual objective they really think they could advance with these military strikes, or Obama & team have simply got tangled in their own red lines.

I posted when Kerry started parping on about 'credibility', and I note Obama did the same the other day. The credibility of their military threats is something taken rather seriously by the US since it's one of the ways they project power. It's not completely impossible to back down from it, but its an option they would probably take as seriously as that of actually making war, and would be viewed as something to avoid if at all possible.

Also if they back down from it and thus damage that nations threat of death credibility, then the failure of credibility needs to be quickly transferred to the individual leaders, parties etc as much as possible, which is where it gets personal for Obama. And likely the nation and its institutions would then try to find some other act of aggressively backing up a threat that they can demonstrate to the world, just in case we get any funny ideas about them being tame.
 
Last edited:
I'll retract it if you can show me some evidence of this apparently bullshit story.

Don't retract, be happy with your response. As for me, I don't want proof, there are videos apparently but I want nothing to do with finding that shit, I saw the headline somewhere about the seizure of that christian village where they still speak Aramaic, but I moved swiftly on. Dunno why I mentioned it tbh.

Anyway I'm sure it's far fetched nonsense, stuff like that wouldn't happen in a war, people; women and children being raped and gang-raped, tortured, mutilated, horribly executed etc.
 
Last edited:
Don't retract, be happy with your response. As for me, I don't want proof, there are videos apparently but I want nothing to do with finding that shit, I saw the headline somewhere about the seizure of that christian village where they still speak Aramaic, but I moved swiftly on. Dunno why I mentioned it tbh.

Anyway I'm sure it's far fetched nonsense, stuff like that wouldn't happen in a war, people, women and children being raped and gang-raped, tortured, mutilated, horribly executed etc.

I remember seeing some headlines about Assad gassing hundreds of people.
 
I remember seeing some headlines about Assad gassing hundreds of people.

I think it's time we all stopped fucking about and worked on a proper peace process. Military adventure it seems to me completely misses the fucking point.

And if I hear another Senator whining about how the American People Deserve Better I swear I'm going to upchuck all over my screen.
 
I remember seeing some headlines about Assad gassing hundreds of people.

Yep... and still far from proven, long after the initial reports; still shrouded in smoke, mirrors and secrecy. Still a distinct possibility it was the rebels who used the CW.

None of these possibilities stopped you from advocating a military attack, even back then. Even the commons didn't vote it through. Where does that leave you?

A laughing stock.
 
I can't see there ever being proper peace with Assad still in control. Too much blood has been shed already.

The idea that Assad Must Go is more important than any peace.

We will stride heroically through oceans of dismembered arms and legs if necessary, the fall of the Immortal Soul-Devouring God King Assad is the only important thing, the fate of the Universe Itself is at stake.

or whatever.
 
None of these possibilities stopped you from advocating a military attack, even back then. Even the commons didn't vote it through. Where does that leave you?

I've never advocated a military attack by the west. I've just stated that Assad has to go, whether by political means or a car bomb planted by the rebels.
 
I've never advocated a military attack by the west. I've just stated that Assad has to go, whether by political means or a car bomb planted by the rebels.

Hark at thy Indomitable Will, we beings of mere flesh are weak and are not worthy, we should caste ourselves upon the land before thy Divine Resolve which burns like a Million Suns. Verily the forces of the Evil Assad must surely fall down before thine Sacred Posts, thine mouth hath sayeth it: Assad Must Go, thy mortal bodies are as nothing when weighed against the burden of the History thy hath Ordained. eth.

Or... the boring bitter work of the negotiated peace process to stop the killings, fuck who wears the hat through 2014 and whatever UN observed election that could take place then. People are trying to keep families alive and raise children over there for fuck sakes. Missiles are not a contribution and nor is arrogance. Your assertions about what's an acceptable basis for peace is irrelevant.
 
Hark at thy Indomitable Will, we beings of mere flesh are weak and are not worthy, we should caste ourselves upon the land before thy Divine Resolve which burns like a Million Suns. Verily the forces of the Evil Assad must surely fall down before thine Sacred Posts, thine mouth hath sayeth it: Assad Must Go, thy mortal bodies are as nothing when weighed against the burden of the History thy hath Ordained. eth.

It's just an opinion on the internet. Don't get carried away now.
 
Kind of backs up CR's argument this story. Basically the Assad regime and Russia are offering to take their entire stockpile of chemical weapons out of the arena (presumably because the Russians are offering some last-ditch reassurances to the regime in case of necessity).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24022866
I am not sure Assad has agreed to it, I think he is just relieved there is someone suggesting something other than attacking him.

Indeed he (Assad) did an interview with an American TV station and in it he tellingly said something along the lines of "there is no evidence that we did this!" rather than the more direct "we did not do this!" Perhaps English is not his first language but I think it was telling.
 
The Assad regime has a bit of a track record of torturing and mutilating children. And it's still not clear whether it used chemical weapons on its own people. Not sure how him remaining in power is going to bring peace to the country.
 
The Assad regime has a bit of a track record of torturing and mutilating children. And it's still not clear whether it used chemical weapons on its own people. Not sure how him remaining in power is going to bring peace to the country.

All regimes have a track record of torturing and mutilating people. There are over a hundred thousand Americans that are pretty fucking happy right now that nobody with the means to destroy that society has taken it upon themselves to declare that The Federal Government Must Go. I think America sucks, considering all the crap it's done to people in history, but I wouldn't want their country to go through what Syria is going through despite the long long list of atrocities presided over by it's long line of potuspaths. The same goes for most countries in western Europe, including us (fuck knows what the squadies got up to in Iraq, it's only starting to drip out now) yet nobody was prepared to see London missiled because Tony Cunting Blair Must Go. He fucked-off eventually, as will Assad obviously.

My take is that you need a functioning state to bring about political change- or the state has to exist to be changed politically. Smashing the society into little traumatized pieces isn't going to fix anything. Domestic abuse in the house next door? The wife screaming and the kids slapped around? I merely suggest that fire-bombing the place isn't going to help.
 
Last edited:
yeah, heheh. they sawed her arms and legs off apparently.

and videod it. Think it was a fretsaw that was used according to reports ive seen .

The kurds arent soft either but they are fleeing for their lives in absolute terror due to the nature and scale of the jihadists atrocities against them recently. How bad does it have to be when you go to Iraq as a refugee . Hell on earth Id imagine .
 
Back
Top Bottom