The middle East

[BWFC_Insane]

No doubt on his iPhone/Blackberry. Fairly normal in the business world these days. Good on him, but I wouldn't say it was impressive.

Impressive he replied to a constituent whilst on holiday, to me at least.

I'm aware it is now the in-vogue thing to check work emails whilst on holiday, I still think there are more who wouldn't reply to such an email in those circumstances than would.

[Hoboh]

I cannot say I am really suprised by this!!

while Bolton South East’s Yasmin Qureshi is with a Parliamentary delegation in Pakistan.

Really that woman looks after our affairs, NOT!

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I cannot say I am really suprised by this!!

while Bolton South East’s Yasmin Qureshi is with a Parliamentary delegation in Pakistan.

Really that woman looks after our affairs, NOT!

Isn't it the holidays anyway?

[Hoboh]

I cannot say I am really suprised by this!!

while Bolton South East’s Yasmin Qureshi is with a Parliamentary delegation in Pakistan.

Really that woman looks after our affairs, NOT!

Isn't it the holidays anyway?

I'm assuming this is what she is doing there

http://www.mofa.gov.pk/pr-details.php?prID=1391" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I would think that the potential for loss of UK service people and possibly millions of cash from hard pressed bedroom tax payers being chucked into Syria was of more importance, no?

[thebish]

I don't have a clue!

I'm just saying, a resolution would presumably be aimed at someone.

I meant to write 'the bad guys as identified by a particular resolution'.

If Russia and China were allied to the bad guys as identified by a particular resolution, the likelihood would appear to be that a resolution would be impossible... so it seems difficult to insist on one under those circumstances.

not impossible if they abstain..

[Relentless09]

Both sides are as bad as each other, If the Muslim Brotherhood are helped by the West and gain power they could possibly be worse. As horrible as the situation is we should have nothing to do with it because intervention will only make things worse.

[William the White]

David Crausby has replied to my email saying:

My instincts are to oppose any military intervention in Syria, and I absolutely believe the world should take no action without a United Nations resolution.

I'm glad he's taken this position - perhaps constituents of our other MPs could check out their position?

Will - I am significantly less clued-up here than you - the fantasy of international law has never been my thing.

But is a UN resolution possible if Russia and China are allied to the bad guys?

but clued-up enough to make a judgement as to who the "bad guys" are?

No, but a UN resolution would presume the existence of some bad guys, wouldn't it - I'm just talking hypothetically.

Report from the Chair of the UN Inquiry into Syria (concerning atrocities in the conduct of this war) of July 2013.

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Page ... 6&LangID=E" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

March 2013

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies ... ch2013.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sept 2012

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies ... er2012.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

These are very short statements or reports by the Chair of this Inquiry. So do not take long to read.

Of the contending parties the Inquiry is more critical of the abuses committed by Assad's forces, but still clear in its condemnation of the atrocities committed by the 'free Syrian Army'.

Taken together they confirm thebish's view, with which I concur that there are only 'bad guys' here. We should intervene only with humanitarian aid. Medical aid, not missiles.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I don't have a clue!

I'm just saying, a resolution would presumably be aimed at someone.

I meant to write 'the bad guys as identified by a particular resolution'.

If Russia and China were allied to the bad guys as identified by a particular resolution, the likelihood would appear to be that a resolution would be impossible... so it seems difficult to insist on one under those circumstances.

not impossible if they abstain..

The point is that doesn't seem to be likely, does it?

I know international consensus is desirable wherever possible, but why is a UN resolution such a clear point of reference for people like Will when there are dodgy feckers like the Russians involved?

[Hoboh]

Typhoons heading for Cyprus

I really hope that leaving their reputations in tatters wakes up Camoron and Cleggless!

Dodgy feckin' Russians? You got me on that one Mummy I suspect that view is held about us and the US by many, since when are we the Worlds policemen? The Arab states have the military to get involved yet they sit back (apart from dodgy backdoor deals to both sides) and leave us to pick up the pieces.

[BWFC_Insane]

Typhoons heading for Cyprus

I really hope that leaving their reputations in tatters wakes up Camoron and Cleggless!

Dodgy feckin' Russians? You got me on that one Mummy I suspect that view is held about us and the US by many, since when are we the Worlds policemen? The Arab states have the military to get involved yet they sit back (apart from dodgy backdoor deals to both sides) and leave us to pick up the pieces.

I'm fairly certain the very last thing we want, the very very last thing is the whole of the Middle East descending into full-scale war amongst themselves.

[thebish]

I don't have a clue!

I'm just saying, a resolution would presumably be aimed at someone.

I meant to write 'the bad guys as identified by a particular resolution'.

If Russia and China were allied to the bad guys as identified by a particular resolution, the likelihood would appear to be that a resolution would be impossible... so it seems difficult to insist on one under those circumstances.

not impossible if they abstain..

The point is that doesn't seem to likely, does it?

I know international consensus is desirable wherever possible, but why is a UN resolution such a clear point of reference for people like Will when there are dodgy feckers like the Russians involved?

if we're talking dodgy feckers at the UN... have a browse back over Colin Powell's presentation of the "evidence" of WMD he made at the UN...

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Typhoons heading for Cyprus

I really hope that leaving their reputations in tatters wakes up Camoron and Cleggless!

Dodgy feckin' Russians? You got me on that one Mummy I suspect that view is held about us and the US by many, since when are we the Worlds policemen? The Arab states have the military to get involved yet they sit back (apart from dodgy backdoor deals to both sides) and leave us to pick up the pieces.

I'm fairly certain the very last thing we want, the very very last thing is the whole of the Middle East descending into full-scale war amongst themselves.

Which will happen if any of them intervene militarily. Might have to build up my drinking water supplies

[William the White]

if we're talking dodgy feckers at the UN... have a browse back over Colin Powell's presentation of the "evidence" of WMD he made at the UN...

Or recall the authors of a dodgy dossier.

[thebish]

if we're talking dodgy feckers at the UN... have a browse back over Colin Powell's presentation of the "evidence" of WMD he made at the UN...

Or recall the authors of a dodgy dossier.

indeed... Powell's presentation was pretty spectacular in its wool-over-eyes bravado..

iirc - it included 3d images of WMD-carrying mobile units that the Americans had assumed MUST exist even though they had never seen sight nor sound of one and had no evidence of any such vehicle existing - yet - up on the screen were 3d images of the very same non-existant vehicles....

it's this kind of stuff that makes me very nervous when William Hague stands up and says the evidence is there and we must act quick before the UN inspectors have time to do their inspection and make their report...

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I understand all of this.

But I still don't see the link between the case being made properly, honestly and fully, and the Russians and Chinese getting on board!

[thebish]

I understand all of this.

But I still don't see the link between the case being made properly, honestly and fully, and the Russians and Chinese getting on board!

it was posted simply because you chose to single the russians out as "dodgy feckers"...

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I understand all of this.

But I still don't see the link between the case being made properly, honestly and fully, and the Russians and Chinese getting on board!

it was posted simply because you chose to single the russians out as "dodgy feckers"...

I'm sure you know that is slightly toungue-in-cheek, and I certainly don't doubt that the label could just as easily be applied to us and our closest allies at times.

[Hoboh]

The 'dodgy feckers' view point

http://rbth.ru/international/2013/08/28 ... paign=RBTH" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Montreal Wanderer]

I suspect that view is held about us and the US by many, since when are we the Worlds policemen?

Indeed it is. The UN should control the 'World Police', not a US/UK et al alliance. Canada does not get involved unless there is a UN resolution, so we stayed out of Gulf 2. This ticked off George W. so now I need a passport to go to the US. A small price to pay. Military intervention in a sovereign country can only be justified on humanitarian grounds and with a sanction from the UN. This means, in terms of Syria, the West should get Russia onside rather than act unilaterally. The standard way would be to give them the task of negotiating a peace/ceasefire within a certain time limit. If they fail, they agree to abstain on a resolution authorizing military intervention.

[Hoboh]

And it seems there is more;

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... Syria.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

When will people learn Putin is very dogmatic when it comes to Putin!