Middle East landscape rapidly changing

[seafoid]

Dixie- that is not a proposal. Come on, surely you have some suggestion or is it just a case of empty vessels making most noise here. Seafood your proposal is fine and noble but it is medium term at best and chemical weapons are being used NOW. What would you do NOW. I assume you would do nothing and let Assad do what he wants.

Your second question is just conspiracy theory bull. Who else but Assad or his allies would gas his opponents. Say Israel and I'll start to cry.

The rebels are losing the war.
Israel wants a war with Iran.
Assad is Shia like most Iranians
If Assad wins the war Iran will be strengthened.
Israel does not want this.
It's not rocket science.

So support Assad is your opinion?

Assad gassed thousands of people, killing several hundred of them. To do noting is to send the message that you can do as you wish in Syria, the international community will baulk at challenging a weakened rouge leader with not 10% the military might of the major nations.

Several years ago we were told that civilians were being massacred and starved in Gaza and that to do nothing was to sign their death warrants. Today civilians are being massacred in Syria but the same men who rode to the defence of the Palestinians are saying we should do nothing (holding a "peace conference is doing nothing, see the league of nations for pointless bureaucracy wilting in the face of tyranny). I despair.

"Evil prospers when good men do nothing." John Philpot Curran; an Irishman.

Prove that he gassed them.

The Yanks want to bomb Syria to get at Iran. There is nothing noble about this.
Holding a peace conference isn't  worse than nothing.
What did the last 8 Yank attacks in the region achieve ?

"Evil prospers when war profiteering corporations have big profit margins"

How is Libya doing post Gadaffi? There's a civil war between the warlords. But it's not in the news. It doesn't fit with the Western narrative.

But it's great for the arms business.

[Itchy]

Well said Trileacman. If Israel fired chemical weapons into Gaza we'd hear a different reaction on here.

Seafood has me confused. First he wrote this

The rebels are losing the war.
Israel wants a war with Iran.
Assad is Shia like most Iranians
If Assad wins the war Iran will be strengthened.
Israel does not want this.
It's not rocket science.

Then he wrote...

Israel didn't do it....

Is the fact you can't blame Israel short circuiting your brain? You take the opposite position to Israel as default without thinking about the situation yourself.

Itchy

This may be beyond your ability to comprehend

Israel and KSA and the Yanks and the Gulf dictators want to defang Iran.
Iran supports Assad and Hezbollah. They are all Shia.
KSA and the Gulf dictators are Sunni. Look it up.

Israel can't attack Iran without Hezbollah and Assad being taken out first.
Assad is winning the war in Syria.

If this continues Israel won't be able to attack Iran.
The Yanks want to remove Assad. So does Israel .

It's all about Iran.

Israel didn't do it but one of Israel's allies may have to have a casus belli.

Where did you read this fantasy story Seafood, the Jim Corr chronicle. You hate Israel and you see them in everything. I expect you believe they blew up the twin towers, London and they probably shot the pope too. Its impossible to take u serious such is your blind hate.

The simple question I put to you is how would you propose to stop Assad gassing his own people. You seem to favour doing nothing at all (for fear Israel would benefit), I'm sure the innocent Syrian people would be grateful for your ridiculous lessons on middle eastern politics. Its a good job you had no say during ww2 or every Jew would have been wiped out due to inaction.

[Count 10]

The simple question I put to you is how would you propose to stop Assad gassing his own people. You seem to favour doing nothing at all (for fear Israel would benefit), I'm sure the innocent Syrian people would be grateful for your ridiculous lessons on middle eastern politics. Its a good job you had no say during ww2 or every Jew would have been wiped out due to inaction.

What gets me is the hypocrisy of the American position....100,000 people have been killed before the gas attack .....so they don't count The whole region hate each other...ie The Saudis hate the Iraqis, the Iranians, the Jordanians etc etc and like for like....then throw into the mix Sunni, Shiite and Wahabi...it makes for any excuse to kill each other.
Turning a blind eye may not be a popular notion...but it may prove to be the only way.   

[Itchy]

Turning a blind eye (ie doing nothing) is the only option that is not an option as you can imagine what Assad will do then. It'll be massacres and mass graves. That's not an option.

[Arthur_Friend]

Itchy, do you have some inside knowledge that the UN weapons inspectors are unaware of? After all, they have had to travel to Syria to try to ascertain what happened yet you know for certain that it was the Syrian Armed forces. How can that be?

[muppet]

Turning a blind eye (ie doing nothing) is the only option that is not an option as you can imagine what Assad will do then. It'll be massacres and mass graves. That's not an option.

Warfare dressed up as whatever you are having today, is still the lowest common denominator. My murders are justified but yours are not.

Almost every war since WWII has been a proxy war of some sort for someone. Everything that happened in Africa, the Middle East and the Far East had its strings pulled by other major players.

This is another proxy war. How do these rebels get so well armed all the time?

Ordinary Syrians are not considered anywhere by any side.

The rest of us just has to worry about which hook is put out this time. Chemical Warfare? WMDs?? Communism???

[trileacman]

Seafoid

1: You haven't answered my question. Support Assad to spite the Isreali's? Is that your position then?

2: To any reasonable person the balance of evidence suggests that Assad committed the gas attack. He has the rockets, he has the gas, he prevented the inspectors from visiting the site for several days and most of all he had the motive to do it. Do you suggest that the rebels acquired the gas, the weaponry to fire it and then proceeded to gas their own people?

What is your suggestion? all I see is hot air about Iran, Iran, Iran. Carefully detail your own evidence that Assad did not gas his enemies.
And leave out the part that says this is all to do with Iran, I've already got that bit.

[Count 10]

Turning a blind eye (ie doing nothing) is the only option that is not an option as you can imagine what Assad will do then. It'll be massacres and mass graves. That's not an option.

100,000 have died while we all turned a blind eye, so that option is very much in play and may be the only way out....let them sort it out themselves.

[trileacman]

What gets me is the hypocrisy of the American position....100,000 people have been killed before the gas attack .....so they don't count

Intervening before now would set the precedent that the world powers should weigh in on every domestic struggle that causes loss of life. It wasn't appropriate to escalate the situation in it's early days. The gassing of a civilian population represents a line in the sand though. You can't continue to sit on your hands and do nothing. The first 100,000 casualties were not ignored but Iraq/Afghan has taught a lesson not rush into military intervention.

Not intervening now would set the precedent that gassing 1,000 - 1,400 people (mostly civilians, including a high proportion of women and children) is a nonpunishable tactic in quelling civil unprising.

[trileacman]

Turning a blind eye (ie doing nothing) is the only option that is not an option as you can imagine what Assad will do then. It'll be massacres and mass graves. That's not an option.

100,000 have died while we all turned a blind eye, so that option is very much in play and may be the only way out....let them sort it out themselves.

Sickening. Because 100,000 have died it's okay to let it reach 200,000? "Sure f**k them, they're 10,000 miles away and nothing but a bunch of inbred, muslim savages."

[seafoid]

Turning a blind eye (ie doing nothing) is the only option that is not an option as you can imagine what Assad will do then. It'll be massacres and mass graves. That's not an option.

100,000 have died while we all turned a blind eye, so that option is very much in play and may be the only way out....let them sort it out themselves.

Sickening. Because 100,000 have died it's okay to let it reach 200,000? "Sure f**k them, they're 10,000 miles away and nothing but a bunch of inbred, muslim savages."

Obama is going to ask Congress for the go-ahead
I don't think his people anticipated the level of public opposition to this war of choice.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/middle-east-live/2013/aug/31/syria-usforeignpolicy

"The president said he had been advised against consulting Congress:

"I'm confident in the case our government has made without waiting for UN inspectors. I'm comfortable going forward without the approval of a United Nations Security Council that, so far, has been completely paralysed and unwilling to hold Assad accountable.

"As a consequence, many people have advised against taking this decision to Congress and undoubtedly they were impacted by what we saw happen in the United Kingdom this week when the Parliament of our closest ally failed to pass a resolution with a similar goal, even as the Prime Minister supported taking action.

"Yet, while I believe I have the authority to carry out this action without specific congressional authorisation I know that the country will be stronger if we take this course and our actions will be even more effective."

[Itchy]

If the west does nothing Assad has the all clear to say fire 100 gas rockets at a rebel held town or city and kill 10's of thousands in one hit. What would the west do then? Tell him to work away. Right now doing nothing is not an option.

[Count 10]

If the west does nothing Assad has the all clear to say fire 100 gas rockets at a rebel held town or city and kill 10's of thousands in one hit. What would the west do then? Tell him to work away. Right now doing nothing is not an option.

So he's ok to kill another 100,000 just so long as it's not gas
There is no easy solution to this, and as I said before America has backed itself into a position where it's a no-win situation.
Cruise missile strikes may stop further gas attacks, but the killing will continue.

[seafoid]

Seafoid

1: You haven't answered my question. Support Assad to spite the Isreali's? Is that your position then?

2: To any reasonable person the balance of evidence suggests that Assad committed the gas attack. He has the rockets, he has the gas, he prevented the inspectors from visiting the site for several days and most of all he had the motive to do it. Do you suggest that the rebels acquired the gas, the weaponry to fire it and then proceeded to gas their own people?

What is your suggestion? all I see is hot air about Iran, Iran, Iran. Carefully detail your own evidence that Assad did not gas his enemies.
And leave out the part that says this is all to do with Iran, I've already got that bit.

1. As Muppet said above it's a proxy war.
Who is funding the jihadis?
And why?
Libya is a total mess. Run by warlords . Why would Syria be any different.

2 No proof. Even if he did the world needs legislation on the use of all nuclear and poison weapons.
I think this war was planned a long time before last week and wouldn't be surprised if the gas was a false flag attack.
The Yanks don't care about the people in Syria either.
Total hypocrisy over chemical weapons. 2 million agent orange victims in Vietnam..
A lot of the rebels are foreign jihadis who are looting Syria so why would they care about Syrians?

Iran Iran Iran - just watch as the situation develops over the next few years .
   

[Itchy]

Seafood still refusing to answer the question.