Are you for or against intervening in Syria?

**brocktonblockbust** · 09-01-2013 01:30 PM

fuck all US lackeys and shills

**pacfan** · 10-12-2013 10:50 PM

...wonder what the votes will be if people took out the 'politics' from it...
I have no politics or ideological baggage behind my back so for me, any madman who murders his own people wholesale, go on and get him whereever he may be, and if anyones gonna do it for us, I say thank you...

The civilized world had no business letting the Ruanda genocide happen, right in front of its eyes...but who cares about a million or so poor black folks, right? tsk, tsk..

**Gandalf** · 08-28-2013 12:56 AM

Originally Posted by Greenbeanz

Originally Posted by Gandalf

It seems the chimes of war are out in force yet again. Personally, I have a hard time trusting anything said on our side. Even if Assad was mad enough to play into our hands by using chemical weapons, I still don't understand why these weapons are more important than white phosphorous used against Palestinians or the bombs which will be dropped by our own weapons or why 100,000 dead, was all about waiting for 'chemical' weapons. Furthermore, supporting the other side looks pretty much like supporting various factions of Al Qaeda and nobody in their right mind would support that.

I am 100% against getting involved as quite simply, we have no idea what we are playing with. All this evidence John Kerry is talking about is something that still isn't released to us, and in this day and age, we know the Americans will doctor anything to go to war.

Seriously Miles? Did you have a propagandist write this for you? It's full of spin and mis-direction. Unsurprisingly it fulfils your aganda. Even the phrasing of the poll is completely biased.

What is the question?

Should we support the Syrian rebels ?

or

Are you for or against intervening in Syria ?

You seem entirely comfortable using the death and poisoning of innocent people, many of them women and children, blinded, maimed, burnt and asphyxiated to make a silly political point about Palestine. So you are now picking and choosing which is the most fashionable rebel army to support ?

What do you suggest we do ? Cross the street ? leave the robbed and beaten Samaritan to die ? Interesting how you have aligned yourself with those of supposedly opposite views of late and revealed yourself as the right wing conservative you always were.
As a liberal I think supporting the armed overthrow of tyrannical rule is not something that should remain only the privilege of the west. And there you go and align yourselves with those who use the philosophy that formed their country like a dirty word.

There is no spin or misdirection. Once again we are being dictated that because a certain act has allegedly been commited, then that is the 'red line' and 'we will now sort you out'. Well, that is outrageous. Where is the actual proof that the Syrian government used chemical weapons? Why the immediate desire not to go the way of the UN? This is all following exactly the same blueprint as Iraq and we know how that is today. Britain is a country where everything is being cut, wages haven't increased since 2008, and yet we can afford to intervene in countries and by taking the side of Alqaeda and extremist muslim elements. We seemingly don't need a national debate, we certainly don't care what the people of Britain think, as Obama has pointed his finger and we must stand meekly at his side. It is fucking preposterous that things are evolving like this.

Over 100,000 civilians have died already in a bloody civil war and now because of the use of chemical weapons we must now act? It is a very valid point that Israel used phosphorous against the Palestinians. Where was the outrage and call for intervention then? I make the point because it as on obvious double standard. That is not spin, it is a comparison. Furthermore, the US itself has armed Egypt which slaughters its own people, it sells cluster bombs to Saudi Arabia, a regime with no parallel in the region for its oppression and brutality. Again, I make the point to show comparison. America and Britain are not arbiters of morality and to be taking the side of Al Qaeda after all this bullshit about 'war on terror' and the subsequent horror commited in the Middle East and subsequent dismantling of personal freedoms at home is an outrage.

People hate us because we keep on doing shitty things and of course they would like to blow us up. If they would just stop with the imperial games, then nobody would give two hoots about us. But the entire thing is a joke and we are problem.

**Gandalf** · 08-28-2013 01:13 AM

And just another comparison is the role of the United States itself. This is a country that has used nuclear bombs, covered Vietnam with napalm, assasinates people on foreign territory without due trial, makes up evidence and engages in wars of illicit aggression. Now they are trying to piece together the Geneva articles, but since when has America been bothered with international law? The hypocrisy is just beyond the pale. Again, where are the strikes against the US and the prosecutions for the White House war criminals and secret agents who allegedly even assasinated their own President (Kennedy).

Apparently the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria, if ignored by America, would be a 'threat to the United States'. Now can anybody make any sense of the rhetoric, bluster, or bullshit of these people? They are clearly not breathing the same air that the rest of us do.

**Gandalf** · 08-28-2013 01:50 AM

Also it is the rebels who have seemingly used Sarin nerve gas in the past. However, we are only seeing what we want to see in this issue. This has NOTHING to do with the use of chemical weapons. Obama and Cameron are prepared to go beyond the UN over chemical weapons, when the people they are supporting use chemical weapons. This is a civil war and look at us itching to use our big toys.

Syrian rebels used Sarin nerve gas, not Assad's regime: U.N. official - Washington Times

**mrbig1** · 08-28-2013 02:03 AM

If this where happening in Africa or Asia no one would say shit. Since the U.S. is a puppet of Israel there will be strikes of some kind.

**ykdadamaja** · 09-03-2013 02:36 PM

Originally Posted by Gandalf

It seems the chimes of war are out in force yet again. Personally, I have a hard time trusting anything said on our side. Even if Assad was mad enough to play into our hands by using chemical weapons, I still don't understand why these weapons are more important than white phosphorous used against Palestinians or the bombs which will be dropped by our own weapons or why 100,000 dead, was all about waiting for 'chemical' weapons. Furthermore, supporting the other side looks pretty much like supporting various factions of Al Qaeda and nobody in their right mind would support that.

I am 100% against getting involved as quite simply, we have no idea what we are playing with. All this evidence John Kerry is talking about is something that still isn't released to us, and in this day and age, we know the Americans will doctor anything to go to war.

I voted yes. But after looking at the question more carefully, I have to say that I do not support the rebels BUT I DO support the removal of Assad.

I think a mini-intervention that takes CIA and special marines forces to just topple and decapitate the regime would do fine now.

Let's face it: Syria doesn't have a government. Nothing is working properly. It will be prolonged with casualties for innocent people in and in the neighbour countries of Syria.

It's clear that Assad can't finish off the rebels and it is also clear that the rebels can't finish off Assad.

One swift swoop can end, at least, one side of the belligerents- which is what I certainly want.

But I think it is clear that Assad is the one who has to go.

The red line for me and any sane thinking person was the chemical attacks and WMD's. It's 2013 man, you can't be doing that!!!