The middle East
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
The middle East
Thought it might be better to post in here about Syria, Egypt etc than hijack the angry thread.
- Abdoulaye's Twin
- Legend
- Posts: 9215
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:27 pm
- Location: Skye high
Re: The middle East
Not as hot this summer in the Middle East. Still too hot mind
Re: The middle East
I think it's heading towards a few degrees hotter shortly.
- Abdoulaye's Twin
- Legend
- Posts: 9215
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:27 pm
- Location: Skye high
Re: The middle East
I hope they behave. There is an airbase not far from my house. There are supposed to be some RAF Typhoons there. I don't fancy having some scuds flung this way
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7192
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:31 pm
- Location: London
Re: The middle East
http://www.theonion.com/articles/so-wha ... -be,33662/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I never make the effort to follow foreign conflicts in the detail that is required to have even a half-informed view, but this does seem to sum the problem up perfectly.
I never make the effort to follow foreign conflicts in the detail that is required to have even a half-informed view, but this does seem to sum the problem up perfectly.
Last edited by mummywhycantieatcrayons on Thu Aug 29, 2013 11:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
Prufrock wrote: Like money hasn't always talked. You might not like it, or disagree, but it's the truth. It's a basic incentive, people always have, and always will want what's best for themselves and their families
Re: The middle East
there are many who believe that the US has used chemical weapons on more than one occasion in Iraq...
and surely there are none of us who don't believe that the US has stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons not open for inspection by UN inspection teams...
it's clearly a red line over which a nation must not be allowed to step unpunished...
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/200 ... 5/usa.iraq
and surely there are none of us who don't believe that the US has stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons not open for inspection by UN inspection teams...
it's clearly a red line over which a nation must not be allowed to step unpunished...
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/200 ... 5/usa.iraq
Re: The middle East
Depleted uranium was the weapon of choice in Iraq if I remember correctly.thebish wrote:there are many who believe that the US has used chemical weapons on more than one occasion in Iraq...
and surely there are none of us who don't believe that the US has stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons not open for inspection by UN inspection teams...
it's clearly a red line over which a nation must not be allowed to step unpunished...
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/200 ... 5/usa.iraq
Re: The middle East
and - if these claims are to be believed - napalm and white phosphorusHoboh wrote:Depleted uranium was the weapon of choice in Iraq if I remember correctly.thebish wrote:there are many who believe that the US has used chemical weapons on more than one occasion in Iraq...
and surely there are none of us who don't believe that the US has stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons not open for inspection by UN inspection teams...
it's clearly a red line over which a nation must not be allowed to step unpunished...
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/200 ... 5/usa.iraq
Re: The middle East
I know where your coming from bish it's the whole two faced aspect that really is chilling or put another way;thebish wrote:and - if these claims are to be believed - napalm and white phosphorusHoboh wrote:Depleted uranium was the weapon of choice in Iraq if I remember correctly.thebish wrote:there are many who believe that the US has used chemical weapons on more than one occasion in Iraq...
and surely there are none of us who don't believe that the US has stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons not open for inspection by UN inspection teams...
it's clearly a red line over which a nation must not be allowed to step unpunished...
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/200 ... 5/usa.iraq
When is a chemical weapon not a chemical weapon?
When it's used by the West!
I have no doubt that Russia used plenty of murky weapons in Chechnya but we never nor are likely to find out about them.
-
- Legend
- Posts: 8454
- Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 10:43 pm
- Location: Trotter Shop
Re: The middle East
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?
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?
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7192
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:31 pm
- Location: London
Re: The middle East
Will - I am significantly less clued-up here than you - the fantasy of international law has never been my thing.William the White wrote: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?
But is a UN resolution possible if Russia and China are allied to the bad guys?
Prufrock wrote: Like money hasn't always talked. You might not like it, or disagree, but it's the truth. It's a basic incentive, people always have, and always will want what's best for themselves and their families
- Abdoulaye's Twin
- Legend
- Posts: 9215
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:27 pm
- Location: Skye high
Re: The middle East
Question is, will he vote that way. Parliament is full of MPs that say one thing and do another.William the White wrote: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?
- Abdoulaye's Twin
- Legend
- Posts: 9215
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:27 pm
- Location: Skye high
Re: The middle East
Unlikely. Russia have a veto, meaning they can stop a resolution even if everyone else agrees to it. For Libya they abstained from the vote, which would be the best we could hope for in this case. Given their alliance with Syria it is unlikely they'll agree to anything, which may or may not be a good thing depending what Obama and his pals try to get through.mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:Will - I am significantly less clued-up here than you - the fantasy of international law has never been my thing.William the White wrote: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?
But is a UN resolution possible if Russia and China are allied to the bad guys?
- Bruce Rioja
- Immortal
- Posts: 38742
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
- Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.
Re: The middle East
This might be of interest to you then, William.William the White wrote: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?
http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/106 ... an_crisis/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
May the bridges I burn light your way
Re: The middle East
but clued-up enough to make a judgement as to who the "bad guys" are?mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:Will - I am significantly less clued-up here than you - the fantasy of international law has never been my thing.William the White wrote: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?
But is a UN resolution possible if Russia and China are allied to the bad guys?
- BWFC_Insane
- Immortal
- Posts: 36128
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm
Re: The middle East
He's away on a family holiday but still replying to work (assumption here) emails? I'm quite impressed by that.Bruce Rioja wrote:This might be of interest to you then, William.William the White wrote: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?
http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/106 ... an_crisis/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- Abdoulaye's Twin
- Legend
- Posts: 9215
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:27 pm
- Location: Skye high
Re: The middle East
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.BWFC_Insane wrote:He's away on a family holiday but still replying to work (assumption here) emails? I'm quite impressed by that.Bruce Rioja wrote:This might be of interest to you then, William.William the White wrote: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?
http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/106 ... an_crisis/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7192
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:31 pm
- Location: London
Re: The middle East
No, but a UN resolution would presume the existence of some bad guys, wouldn't it - I'm just talking hypothetically.thebish wrote:but clued-up enough to make a judgement as to who the "bad guys" are?mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:Will - I am significantly less clued-up here than you - the fantasy of international law has never been my thing.William the White wrote: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?
But is a UN resolution possible if Russia and China are allied to the bad guys?
Prufrock wrote: Like money hasn't always talked. You might not like it, or disagree, but it's the truth. It's a basic incentive, people always have, and always will want what's best for themselves and their families
Re: The middle East
yes - there are bad guys - both sides... Russia and China are no more allied to the bad guys than the UK or the US are...mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:No, but a UN resolution would presume the existence of some bad guys, wouldn't it - I'm just talking hypothetically.thebish wrote:but clued-up enough to make a judgement as to who the "bad guys" are?mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:Will - I am significantly less clued-up here than you - the fantasy of international law has never been my thing.William the White wrote: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?
But is a UN resolution possible if Russia and China are allied to the bad guys?
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7192
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:31 pm
- Location: London
Re: The middle East
I don't have a clue!thebish wrote:yes - there are bad guys - both sides... Russia and China are no more allied to the bad guys than the UK or the US are...mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:No, but a UN resolution would presume the existence of some bad guys, wouldn't it - I'm just talking hypothetically.thebish wrote:but clued-up enough to make a judgement as to who the "bad guys" are?mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:Will - I am significantly less clued-up here than you - the fantasy of international law has never been my thing.William the White wrote: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?
But is a UN resolution possible if Russia and China are allied to the bad guys?
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.
Prufrock wrote: Like money hasn't always talked. You might not like it, or disagree, but it's the truth. It's a basic incentive, people always have, and always will want what's best for themselves and their families
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 55 guests