Syria: air attacks loom as Britain and US pledge to use force within two weeks

Syria: air attacks loom as Britain and US pledge to use force within two weeks

ww w.independent.co.uk

Western countries, including Britain, are planning to take unilateral military action against the Assad regime within two weeks in retaliation for its alleged use of chemical weapons on civilians in Syria.

David Cameron discussed launching missile strikes against key regime targets during a 40-minute telephone call with President Barack Obama on Saturday night and also with the French President François Hollande on Sunyda. While Downing Street said Western powers had not ruled out seeking UN endorsement for military action they added that they were also prepared to unilaterally.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Is this it? Are they seriously doing this? If they launch any kind of missile or anything else for that sake won't Russia respond?

I am confused. Russia is obviously protecting Syria and are loud and clear when it comes to any kind of attack on Syria from the west. Why on earth would the U.S, Britain and France go against the mighty bear? What do they gain from it?

ww w.independent.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Might makes right!
how can the west be wrong?

Yay for another war the UK cant aford

reply to post by HappyWarrior


They gain justifications for their military spending.
They gain the pleasure of pissing all over Putin.
They gain retribution for those without the fire power to defend themselves adequately.
They gain another head to mount on their wall.

reply to post by Thorneblood


And they reside in their ivory tower while soldiers and civilians die.

You think Obama is going to forget about Snowden and how Russia made him look like a fool?

He's not so peaceful folks, tried to tell ya's..

reply to post by Thorneblood


summed up nicely

great another war nobody except the banker and the lobbyists want.


Thanks a lot bush... I mean obama

reply to post by earthling42


Syria chose to take it to the next level. If they were really innocent in all of this then they wouldn't have let the UN sit around for a week when it would make the most sense to allow the inspectors to prove it was the rebels if that were the case. Seems to me this is what Assad wanted, why shouldn't he pay the price?

I cannot believe that without any form of evidence my country is yet again sabre rattling. Is it because we haven't sold enough weapons to the Syrians? Why the hell does my country seem to want to see countries in the ME in ruins with thousands of people hating us for our government's part in their misery?

They don't appear to learn their lessons from Afganistan, Iraq, Libya, and elsewhere that they happily interfere in.

What is between Cameron's ears only God knows because its inexplicable but he has been wanting to get his nose into Syria for some time now.

The tragedy apart from the human side and that's horrendous enough is that these countries are ancient deposits of past civilisations with relics that are priceless and their destruction and plundering is dreadful but also its the use of our depleted uranium weapons that are the most insidious murderous method of not only killing the people they target but also the killing of generations to come due to the diseases these weapons cause through their pollution.

reply to post by Thorneblood


both sides are so crooked you might as well flip a coin to decide the guilty party. both sides have means, motive and opportunity not to mention a indifference to massacring civilians.

reply to post by Shiloh7


From everything i have read Russia and Iran have made billions selling weapons to Syria....so now it's time to level the playing field. Cheer up, at least they aren't talking about boots on the ground. Yet.

@Monk
I don't know what to tell ya, this is what happens when you use chemical weapons. Since most of the major powers seem confident that Syria is the culprit behind the bombings then they likely know more then we are being told. Let us not forget that the UK has its own version of the NSA and that there is at least one 'spying center' in operation in the Middle East to monitor threats from that area.

Does it not stand to reason that they simply have communications proving Syria is at fault but are unwilling to release that information as it only draws attention back to their wide spread monitoring of internet and cellular traffic?

reply to post by Thorneblood


If it it not safe for the UN to go there? after wednesday the Syrian army fought the rebels in that area.
You would you think that Assad did it?

Originally posted by Thorneblood
reply to post by Shiloh7

 

Yet.

being the inevitable point

reply to post by Thorneblood


Ahh but the west has been doing the same by supporting the invaders by training them and suplying weapons.

Originally posted by earthling42
reply to post by Thorneblood

 

And they reside in their ivory tower while soldiers and civilians die.

I dont plan on doing nay dying over there
If the UK ever insituted a draft I will tell em were to put it

reply to post by HappyWarrior


Hi there.

What jumps out at me in this news is why say "We are going to attack in two weeks!"..?

Havnt the USA got some boats parked off the coast down in that area? m.nypost.com/p/news/international/weapons_warships_move_towards_syria_uBryxh9YzBrHlvWu6ZdwUL


They have agreed to let UN inspect, yet attack is to happen.
m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23833912


What's the thinking?

eee.

reply to post by Shiloh7


i can agree with the archaeological slant
truly a tragedy.

Originally posted by Thorneblood
reply to post by earthling42

 

Syria chose to take it to the next level. If they were really innocent in all of this then they wouldn't have let the UN sit around for a week when it would make the most sense to allow the inspectors to prove it was the rebels if that were the case. Seems to me this is what Assad wanted, why shouldn't he pay the price?

Do you actually believe what you are saying?

Rebels are:
1-al-quaida infiltrated
2-backed by the US (EU just lifted their weapon embargo too)
3-muslim extremists culpable of several atrocities

Ask yourself, why is the US government backing hostile forces in Syria, Lybia and Egypt?
Can you come up with a reason other than "kill baddies dictators" (formerly US backed too)?

Also you may have got it backwards, the attack took place right as the UN investigators arrived in Syria, as far as I've read.