Syria vote Labour demands evidence

Psychobilly freakout · Aug 29, 2013

Prime Minister David Cameron risks losing a vote on Syria today after the Labour opposition refused to back him, demanding tighter conditions on any military action.

All politicians are hypocrites.........

Maybe they could use the same evidence that Labour presented for Iraq....

Hate them all

Albion Dan · Aug 29, 2013

Psychobilly freakout said:
Prime Minister David Cameron risks losing a vote on Syria today after the Labour opposition refused to back him, demanding tighter conditions on any military action.

All politicians are hypocrites.........

Maybe they could use the same evidence that Labour presented for Iraq....

Hate them all

So because Labour were at fault in Iraq and the Tories blindly supported Blairs war crime he opposition party should just go along and repeat flawed history?

Good on them. There is zero convincing evidence as to which side used chemical weapons and Al Queda are the other side here. I find it unvelievable that any members of the general public believe any middle eastern war propaganda after events during the last decade.

Simster · Aug 29, 2013

It is precisely because Labour got it so badly wrong with Iraq that they won't blindly support an attack this time. And to be honest, if the Tories had been the ones hoodwinked into supporting the US in Iraq and were in opposition now, I'd expect them to do much the same thing.

What is wrong with that? Going into Syria is an absurd idea even with the evidence Assad was responsible for that chemical weapon attack.

Psychobilly freakout · Aug 29, 2013

Albion Dan said:
So because Labour were at fault in Iraq and the Tories blindly supported Blairs war crime he opposition party should just go along and repeat flawed history?

Good on them. There is zero convincing evidence as to which side used chemical weapons and Al Queda are the other side here. I find it unvelievable that any members of the general public believe any middle eastern war propaganda after events during the last decade.

Yeah good on them my arse it is a vote for us policy, they dont give two hoots about the people of Syria no more than the Tories.

As I said I hate them all, stick up for a party that got us involved in Iraq and beyond, all is forgiven....

Sheep....

bah, bah, bah

Napper · Aug 29, 2013

Iraq is all the better for it today though. Syria hasn't the mass murders that hussain had carried out. Yes atrocities in Syria but not to that scale.

GreersElbow · Aug 29, 2013

It doesn't matter if he wins or loses. There's no constitutional law to state that the executive must have the permission of either house for war, unlike the U.S who's Senate in theory should be the one to vote on the declaration of war (but has not since world war 2). We don't enjoy checks and balances like the U.S does. The executive here has too much power with nothing to balance it.

The repercussions of intervention are what worry me. Russia has been very vocal in support of Assad we could risk a confrontation with them in some capacity.

1) Unlikely, but possible - Military. I wouldn't be surprised if Russia did involve send troops to act as "Peacekeepers", which could escalate to skirmishes with NATO troops. Russia in the past decade has spent billions upgrading and improving their military, their invasion of Georgia was simply a show of strength.
2) Economically - very likely. Russia supplies Europe with a lot of gas, whilst Algeria supplies the main bulk, prices will inevitably rise and damage our economy and even cause rationing of the gas supply, we are simply not self-sufficient enough to use our own.
3) Proxy war - The cold war had no shots fired between U.S and the USSR, however the two supported different military groups in other wars to try and undermine each other.

Russia has economic and political interests in Syria. They buy a lot of their weapons, they also act as their voice in the Middle East seeing as the Russians haven't been so close to Iran but they still could turn to Iran for friendship. I wouldn't be surprised if Russia acted more aggressively to protect their interests.

I sincerely hope the Saudis' convince the Russians to sign the new oil deal to ensure Russia stays out of the conflict, as this would create some stability but removes the risk of Russian intervention.

Albion Dan · Aug 29, 2013

Napper said:
Iraq is all the better for it today though.

About a million dead innocent Iraqis might not agree with you on that score.

Superphil · Aug 29, 2013

Let the French or Germans do something about it this time.

If Labour manage to stop the ConDem government going into yet another war where our armed forces will be forced to kill civilians and we have no hope of ever winning, then I will vote for them for the very first time in my life at the next election.

Not to mention the speniding of billions of pounds that this country cannot afford. Sort this country out first, when it is free of corruption, homelessness, poverty and prejudice, then we can go and help others, and with a proven track record.

Napper · Aug 29, 2013

Albion Dan said:
About a million dead innocent Iraqis might not agree with you on that score.

Lot less than Sadam would of killed over the same period

The Large One · Aug 29, 2013

Superphil said:
Let the French or Germans do something about it this time.

If Labour manage to stop the ConDem government going into yet another war where our armed forces will be forced to kill civilians and we have no hope of ever winning, then I will vote for them for the very first time in my life at the next election.

Not to mention the speniding of billions of pounds that this country cannot afford. Sort this country out first, when it is free of corruption, homelessness, poverty and prejudice, then we can go and help others, and with a proven track record.

Listening to the debates, plenty of Tories wanting to vote against it.

They are, however, having the whip applied. (Leave it.)

GreersElbow · Aug 29, 2013

The Large One said:
Listening to the debates, plenty of Tories wanting to vote against it.

They are, however, having the whip applied. (Leave it.)

I would fully expect Tories to rebel and vote against the whip. This could save them their seat in the next general election, the campaigns are starting to get planned now as we speak. Also it'd be common sense.

No British involvement: No more blood on already bloodied hands.

Tory Boy · Aug 29, 2013

The UK would contribute less than 1% of the weapons that will be used.

So all you tree hugging, happy to let folks be gassed, people can say what you like about us getting involved, because it wont matter one little bit.

Others are going to act against those that gas civilians.

TB

Meade's Ball · Aug 29, 2013

A number of Tory MPs are less than convinced by military action right now, so it's not Labour pulling the rug from under this "heroic act" partisanly. All the parties are terrified of an Iraq repeat and all the expense and blood spilt and the illegality of the assault so there's no harm in waiting a few more days for the UN report to get hold of something a little more evidential than they have. Whatever comes back, i would think some action would be necessary. The UN with China and Russia on the scene won't pass a motion, but America can't be seen to recognise a horrendous misjustice, which it bloody well is if chemical warfare is used by the state against its own people, and do nothing about it. It would be a potential sign of weakness identified by Iran and the US want to avoid that. They'd have to hope that a few missiles in key military spots to say DON'T DO THAT AGAIN would not provoke an enormous reaction across the region and make for surefire lasting war.

Napper · Aug 29, 2013

Tory Boy said:
The UK would contribute less than 1% of the weapons that will be used.

So all you tree hugging, happy to let folks be gassed, people can say what you like about us getting involved, because it wont matter one little bit.

Others are going to act against those that gas civilians.

TB

Evidence on who did the gassing ? Or you being fed the information from the square box in your lounge ?

Ernest · Aug 29, 2013

I don't think Cameron was bothered about Syria till his missus kicked off about it, a lot more atrocities in the world that simply get ignored including plenty closer to home like Zimbabwe

Superphil · Aug 29, 2013

Tory Boy said:
The UK would contribute less than 1% of the weapons that will be used.

So all you tree hugging, happy to let folks be gassed, people can say what you like about us getting involved, because it wont matter one little bit.

Others are going to act against those that gas civilians.

TB

We can't afford it, our own country is on its knees, let the Germans do it, the French, the Dutch, the Scandanvians, hell, why not the Swiss, they're minted? We will never win the war, our own troops will be killed, and our own troops will kill innocent Syrians.

Apart from anything else, no-one yet knows who launched the gas, if we side with the rebels, we are siding with a group that has already expelled Christians and Jews to Turkey, and if you believe that Assad launched the gas, do you also believe other reports that say the rebels have also executed Civilians, Women, Children, for being sided with Assad, as well as Jews and Christians, for being Jews and Christians?

Westdene Seagull · Aug 29, 2013

Superphil said:
Let the French or Germans do something about it this time.

If Labour manage to stop the ConDem government going into yet another war where our armed forces will be forced to kill civilians and we have no hope of ever winning, then I will vote for them for the very first time in my life at the next election.

Not to mention the speniding of billions of pounds that this country cannot afford. Sort this country out first, when it is free of corruption, homelessness, poverty and prejudice, then we can go and help others, and with a proven track record.

Personally I don't see it as black and white as that. I'm very uncomfortable with the West sitting back and allowing the use of chemical weapons ( regardless of who used them ). We should be making it clear it's not acceptable. Likewise, if I was an innocent Syrian citizen I'd be asking why the rest of the world isn't helping me.

Psychobilly freakout · Aug 29, 2013

Here's an idea why not let Turkey sort it out they want to be a major force in Europe what better way than sort poop out, and its right on their doorstep they should know the country, they must have invaded before at some point in history......

pork pie · Aug 29, 2013

This has nothing to do with us, just like the other wars our Governments have got us involved in since The Falklands Conflict.

We no longer have an empire, and should no longer send our youth to fight foreign wars - whatever is happening there should be of no concern to us. If we get involved, we will get a backlash from the arab nations because they do not want us to interfere in their regional disputes.

We simply cannot win with these people, because they do not trust the west's intentions. Frankly, neither do most of us on here.

If we were told that we were going to war to guarantee our fuel supplies or something like that, it would be a lot more honest, and given our need for foreign fuel, something worth fighting for.

Tory Boy · Aug 29, 2013

Napper said:
Evidence on who did the gassing ? Or you being fed the information from the square box in your lounge ?

The issue to me isn't who did the gassing, just that whoever did needs sorting.

But what I see from the tree hugging brigade is that nothing should be done.

Deluded idiots.

TB

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Syria vote Labour demands evidence

HellBilly

Banned

"the man's an arse"

HellBilly

Well-known member

New member

Banned

Dismember

Well-known member

Who's Next?

New member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Stupid IDIOT

Dismember

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch

HellBilly

New member

Active member

Share this page