Syria

[yoda]

That article is from May, so it still doesn't look like the rebels poisoned their own folk this time around.

[Tryfield]

That article is from May, so it still doesn't look like the rebels poisoned their own folk this time around.

Wasn't it May in when the first chemicals first got let off?

As Desert says, Assad may or may not be daft enough to do it, but the finger has been pointed at the rebels....if they can do it once....they can do it again.

[yoda]

The finger was pointed at the rebels by the Russian ambassador to the UN, with no real evidence (from what I can gather) to support his claims. It's all very well being sceptical of the UK and US, but by the same standard you should be sceptical of his claims.

[Tryfield]

The finger was pointed at the rebels by the Russian ambassador to the UN, with no real evidence (from what I can gather) to support his claims. It's all very well being sceptical of the UK and US, but by the same standard you should be sceptical of his claims.

Carla del Ponte is Swiss.

[yoda]

Carla del Ponte is Swiss.

I see, I was reading an article on the same attack that only cited the Russian ambassador claims. Still, she openly admits there's no proof to back up her stance.

[Reynard]

Yeah on this. Is Assad so stupid as to launch a chemical attack on his own people, in the knowledge it would give the west all the reason it needed to engage him in war? He might be that stupid for all we know of course.

Its a civil war he was winning too.

f**k knows what to think really, other than get Syria to f**k. They are killing badgers!!!

[Reynard]

Its a civil war he was winning too.

f**k knows what to think really, other than get Syria to f**k. They are killing badgers!!!

Not in Syria. Although maybe they have badgers there, I have no idea what the fauna is like.

[dorlomin]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/#.UhyklGIjf1s.facebook

The Washington Times is the mouth piece of the Moonie church. Subsidised to the tune of billions.

[AberdeenBud]

The Washington Times!

Deary me.

[captain kirk]

Britain now pushing UN for military action

(Even though UN weapons inspectors haven't even released a report yet?)

Russia claiming it had satellite evidence the chemical weapons were fired from rebel positions.

[jagfox]

Cambo saying pending strikes will be due to the use/possession of chemical weapons not the crisis in Syria!!!

Can we expect an airstrike on our weapons laboratory?

The hypocrisy is laughable, we have history of gassing Arab populations, have we not?

Also what has killed more people since WW1, Cruise missiles and their payloads or poison gas or chemocals?

[NorthAyrshireKillie]

^^^ Kens the score

[renton]

Cambo saying pending strikes will be due to the use/possession of chemical weapons not the crisis in Syria!!!

Can we expect an airstrike on our weapons laboratory?

The hypocrisy is laughable, we have history of gassing Arab populations, have we not?

Also what has killed more people since WW1, Cruise missiles and their payloads or poison gas or chemocals?

Depends: Are we including the millions of Jews gassed during the second world war?

Fact is that chemical weapons are classified as a WMD: They are capable of causing a vast amount of casualties, are persistant in a way that high explosives aren't and are relaitvely cheap to produce. Arguably they are the least frightening of the NBC (Nuclear Biological Chemical) spectrum, but their deployment represents something the UNSC can't really ignore, one way or the other.

Basically, it's about slapping Syria around a bit to get the message across to everyone else not to try it themselves.

[dorlomin]

The hypocrisy is laughable, we have history of gassing Arab populations, have we not?

No, that story emerged as it was briefly considereed to use chemical weapons against Kurds (not Arabs) in about 1921. The plan was rejected.

Also what has killed more people since WW1, Cruise missiles and their payloads or poison gas or chemocals?

The Japanese Army used them in mainland China and the Italians in their Somalia campaign (I have seen figures of 150 000 casualties). They were also heavily used it the brutal Iran Iraq conflict plus about 6 million people were killed by zyclone B in WWII.

Dont worry about getting the history wrong though. I mean why spoil a good rant with facts.

And offcourse they have been banned for very very good reasons. So those uses were illegal. Which is kind of the point why have nuclear\chemical\biological as being red lines then ignore their use?

Thing with chemical weapons is they tend to be only marginally useful against a modern battle group. The battle group is kitted to deal with them and can move and decontaminate. In modern military doctrine their primary use is to force troops into NCB kit to make their lives a hardship. Their only real use in terms of killing is unequipped armies or civilians.

Edited I should add the casualties from Agent Orange, a herbicide but one that caused mass birth defects in the affected areas and spiked cancer rates. One of the senior US officers in charge actually lost his son to cancer, his son had been operating in an Agent Orange sprayed area.

[jagfox]

The genocide of the Jews and various other races, minorities, disabled and even political and religious opponents was in different circumstances as they were captive when murdered. They switched to gas because the cost of bullets would have been astronomical. Hence the switch to industrial genocide.

Our peace keeping missions in Iraq, Libya and elsewhere have left a legacy of DU and phosphor was also in a lot of the munitions used by us and our allies.

You kill a man with a stick, an NBC weapon or an unmanned missile you still kill them.

Biological and Chemical weapons are too affected by environment to be used by the military. They are largely weapons of fear and not far up the morality scale from the gassing of imprisoned populations.

[dirtydave]

According to "The West" chemical weapons have been used agaisnt civilians (Obamas red line) by the ruling government, and we are moving closer to military intervention.

But Russia and China and "The East" say its probably anti government terrorist so don't get involved, and Iran saying western intervention will be crossing their red line!

What next ? The last few times we "Itervined" to save civilians we left behind the slowly imploding hell of Iraq and the media ignored power vacuum sectarian hole that is Lybia.

Bearing in mind the west ignores Isreals chemical weapon attacks on Palestinian , and the US's chemical attacks in the Middle East .

What next?

Any proof of these Israeli chemical weapons attacks on Palestine?

[dorlomin]

They switched to gas because the cost of bullets would have been astronomical.

6 million bullets?

Do you have the faintest of clues what you are warbling on about. 9mm ammo costs about $10 for 50.

[jagfox]

Was a bit of a rant but you get my point? Bombing Syria for just those reasons when it could lead to far greater casualties is just non-sense in my opinion.

The nazis would have found other ways of continuing their genocide. I even heard that mass deportation to Zanzibar or Madagascar was an option.

It is the will to kill that should be being addressed not adding fire power to the clusterfuck of a civil war.

[jagfox]

6 million bullets?

 

Do you have the faintest of clues what you are warbling on about. 9mm ammo costs about $10 for 50. 

Not just the bullets. The man power and resources were required elsewhere. They were fighting a war dont you know

I am struggling to get your point of view with your regurgitation of things you have read or said?

[renton]

6 million bullets?

Do you have the faintest of clues what you are warbling on about. 9mm ammo costs about $10 for 50.

I'm fairly sure the German army would have fired ten that many bullets in half a day in Normandy.