Do you support the arming of Syrian 'rebels'?

[Gandalf]

I have no issue with arming the rebels but I don't want the US involved in it. Oh and Miles, White Phosphorus isn't considered a chemical weapon.

I don't buy into the notion that Israel and America can define chemical weaponry as they wish and certainly not from a country that has used nukes, napalm and white phosphorous on people in 2 out of 3 wars built on lies and the other on a defeated country.

You don't have to take Israel or the US's word on it. The Law of War stipulates how/when it can be used and it is not considered a chemical weapon in the same way say Sarin, Mustard Gas etc are. But hey don't let facts get in the way of your obsession.

It is not an obsession as it is a fact that your country goes after nations based upon lies and ignores others because it uses the same chemical murder methods. You have never really bothered with law of war when it concerns Nuremburg etc, but only when it suits your interests and justifies your prior agenda and world experiences. It is perfectly natural and I understand why you do it. At the least, you will admit that phosphorous is highly controversial and not used in nations that do routinely flog international law.

I've never really let facts get in my way as the facts keep on producing themselves. Britain, America and Israel are continuing the blueprint I have always said they would. This is just the latest. I am not a prophet or even that smart, but I am against it and believe you, me and most our respective populaces are against the downward spiral too.

It is a downward spiral and I am sensing with the Americans that feel strongly they feel it is lost. Those are the Americans I can relate to, but they think it is done too. They are smart, educated and are sold out. There is nothing and only war to back up the military sector. Then will come the next economic crash and further slavery.

You need war to shield the collapse and the markets are due a horrid drop.

[VictorCharlie]

Again Miles you are confused. Where you cannot produce a binding legal document that stipulates when war is legal or illegal I can produce the Law of Landwarfare that stipulates how the US conducts war. I get an annual 4 hour block of instruction on it. This is my business and unlike you I know exactly what I'm talking about. If you want to talk about Syria then lets do that but if you are just going to continue with tangential rants about how the US is the international bogey man then I'll just post some more in YB's tits thread.

[Gandalf]

Yes, and your government has also used nuclear bombs, napalm and phosporous. It doesn't matter what your government tells you is okay as it is clear that your government doesn't care about what is okay. Your government tortures, renditions and lies to invade other countries and that is the sector that you have signed up for. Now how any of that can provide a legal framework for anything is insane. I am am sure Hitler had a legal team telling him he was well within his rights etc.

Law is irrelevant as compared to what is moral. Most people would argue that the war in Iraq was wrong and on that basis alone, it doesn't matter about legality. Most would agree on phosphorous too. A country like America talking about chemicals and getting involved in another countries civil war is a joke and not a funny one.

America is the bogeyman and it doesn't take me to make it that way. I am a marginal person, but practically every English and American person I have read is condemning England and America and at the end of the day you are too. We just disagree on phosphorous which any chemist would tell you has all the hallmarks of a chemical weapon. Legalese doesn't hide basic science.

[VictorCharlie]

Yes, and your government has also used nuclear bombs, napalm and phosporous. It doesn't matter what your government tells you is okay as it is clear that your government doesn't care about what is okay. Your government tortures, renditions and lies to invade other countries and that is the sector that you have signed up for. Now how any of that can provide a legal framework for anything is insane. I am am sure Hitler had a legal team telling him he was well within his rights etc.

Law is irrelevant as compared to what is moral. Most people would argue that the war in Iraq was wrong and on that basis alone, it doesn't matter about legality. Most would agree on phosphorous too. A country like America talking about chemicals and getting involved in another countries civil war is a joke and not a funny one.

America is the bogeyman and it doesn't take me to make it that way. I am a marginal person, but practically every English and American person I have read is condemning England and America and at the end of the day you are too. We just disagree on phosphorous which any chemist would tell you has all the hallmarks of a chemical weapon. Legalese doesn't hide basic science.

Despite your 2/3 of non-sequiter and hyperbole if you don't see that there is a fundamental difference in the purpose and capability of WP compared to nerve/blister agents then you are simply being willfully ignorant in order to validate your own world view. I do agree with one point though. Law is irrelevant compared to morality and war has nothing to do with morality. It is about killing and applying rules to how and when two groups of people decide to kill each other is pretty moronic.

[Gandalf]

Chemical weapons that kill 150 or ordinary weapons that kill 50,000? I don't really see the need to distinguish in the way that William Hague does. White phosphorous is not an ordinary weapon when used to kill civilians, though America and Israel would perhaps like it to be. Regardless, Israel did use it. Syria's chemical weapons are still largely in the realm of propaganda than anything tenable.

As for Greenbeanz, I am not trying to score points. I am posting a political thread on a boxing forum, I am expressing my honest point of view. I don't believe that the rebels should be armed. They have eaten a dead soldiers intestines, does that sound like the Robin Hood posse that will eventually want to be warm and cosy with Middle England? It's NONE of our business and we are falling into the same old traps.

If we are to be supporting rebels then I ask for consistency, support the Palestinians and the Bahraini's too. Otherwise, you are a hypocrite nation with a proven track record of telling porkies. We practially ignore countries that DO have nukes and a proven track record of invading its neighbors.Oh, but we like that. We don't even just invade our neighbors we make up things and invade countries far, far away.

The agendas are obvious and people in Britain and America know the score. They are against arming the rebels as polls show. Most of the Middle East is against it too, but the will of the people is once again swept aside by the dictarorial war drum powers of Britain and America. Is the the majority of the world just trying to score points, because if we erase my views and those of Kirkland, we still have everyone here against arming the rebels and the majority of the people around the world too.

[El Kabong]

Yes, and your government has also used nuclear bombs, napalm and phosporous. It doesn't matter what your government tells you is okay as it is clear that your government doesn't care about what is okay. Your government tortures, renditions and lies to invade other countries and that is the sector that you have signed up for. Now how any of that can provide a legal framework for anything is insane. I am am sure Hitler had a legal team telling him he was well within his rights etc.

Law is irrelevant as compared to what is moral. Most people would argue that the war in Iraq was wrong and on that basis alone, it doesn't matter about legality. Most would agree on phosphorous too. A country like America talking about chemicals and getting involved in another countries civil war is a joke and not a funny one.

America is the bogeyman and it doesn't take me to make it that way. I am a marginal person, but practically every English and American person I have read is condemning England and America and at the end of the day you are too. We just disagree on phosphorous which any chemist would tell you has all the hallmarks of a chemical weapon. Legalese doesn't hide basic science.

Despite your 2/3 of non-sequiter and hyperbole if you don't see that there is a fundamental difference in the purpose and capability of WP compared to nerve/blister agents then you are simply being willfully ignorant in order to validate your own world view. I do agree with one point though. Law is irrelevant compared to morality and war has nothing to do with morality. It is about killing and applying rules to how and when two groups of people decide to kill each other is pretty moronic.

Thank you!

[El Kabong]

You know what's ironic?

At the same time that Obama is trying to make it harder for US citizens to buy and own guns he is going to supply Syrian "rebels" with weapons which will no doubt fall directly into the hands of terrorists


Fucking moron of a President

[El Kabong]

It is not an obsession as it is a fact that your country goes after nations based upon lies

.....like the ones told to us by England to return the Shah to power in Iran?

[El Kabong]

Anyway....BACK ON TOPIC...no I would not like to see the United States arm the Syrian rebels as they are no friends of ours and never will be.

[Gandalf]

It is not an obsession as it is a fact that your country goes after nations based upon lies

.....like the ones told to us by England to return the Shah to power in Iran?

I am not defending Britain, Lyle. You know I am always reliable in placing Britain, Israel and America of the past 40 years quite firmly together.

On the whole I think ALL of us agree that arming the rebels is a poor idea. We are wandering off into tangential arguments as is our will, but we do seem to be on the same page on this.

[El Kabong]

On the whole I think ALL of us agree that arming the rebels is a poor idea. We are wandering off into tangential arguments as is our will, but we do seem to be on the same page on this.

Good

[Beanz]

What is the point of a poll ? Are you looking for a mandate or something?

[Gandalf]

More legal process than the Nazi types offered by Hague. Give at least a few people a few real views.

[Beanz]

More legal process than the Nazi types offered by Hague. Give at least a few people a few real views.

What is is it with you and lazily bandying about labels like 'Nazi' ? does Hague subscribe to Nationalsozialismus ? Do his views incorporate biological racism ? Are you a proper socialist Miles ? What do you think one should do when a dictator routinely shuts down opposing voices and murders his own civilians en masse ? Turn away? Your view like Chomsky on all these situations is to do nothing and then take the moral high ground while evil people commit genocide. Nothing is that simple.

[Andre]

What is the point of a poll ? Are you looking for a mandate or something?

Gandalf the grey is always looking for a mandate.