Meanwhile, In Syria

[MX7]

Mermaid said:

Can Israel do any wrong in your eyes?

It's nothing to do with Israel, it's about your obssession with Israel.

How can Syria be similar to the Isralei conflict when Israel and Palestine coudn't have a civil war if they tried.

It's like comparing apples to a JCB digger. Do you say "It's like a Golf" every time you see a car?

If you want to talk about Israel, go and find a thread about it. I'm sure your post history is full of them.

[MX7]

Mermaid said:

MX7 said:

Mermaid said:

Yes - It is sad. Do you think we would have intervened if there was some oil in Syria.

Yes - And what was the West's reaction, please remind me?

Morocco - Really? On behalf of whom?

Christ. I'm embarrassed for you.

& the answer is?

The answer to who Morocco is speaking on behalf of?

" The draft, introduced by Morocco, reiterates the aims of an Arab League plan for Assad to hand over power to a vice president and allow the formation of a national unity government."

The Arab League. Have you read nothing about it?

Mermaid said:

More important, since you know middle east so well, why is there is little or no violence in Allepo, Latakia & some of the big towns/cities?

That's your problem. Any devience from complete uniformity, and you're completly lost. Why don't you tell me why it's not right across Syria?

[chim]

MX7 said:

chim said:

Well, enlighten us, just what force does the UN bring to bare. There function, though noble in its mandate is completly useless. They are hamstrung by politics and are unable to reach any usefull consensus on any issue of importance and corruption is widespread.

They are far from perfect, but they are all we have, and if we ignore them, we have no universal condemnation of despots.

chim said:

If the Americans have anything to gain by intervening (strategic or mineral) they will, if not they will just make noise. The Russians and the chineses are of the opinion that it's none of the worlds business what individual countries do and more often than not veto all and any form of intervention.

Yet the US only played a small and slightly reluctant part in Libya, and have since fully withdrawn. That doesn't really follow your theory.

As for the Russians, they are simply looking after their interests. Did you think that the Russians were following a "Live and Let Live" philosphy? They have a naval base in Syria. Syria is a customer of their equipment. They have more of a vested interest than most of the UN.

chim said:

There are far more needy areas in the world requiring intervention than Syria and the UN sits back and does nothing but belly rumble and argue.

Where else is a government shelling it's own citizens at the moment?

chim said:

So as I said, best to leave them to sort it out, they will one way or another and no doubt the incumbent government will be no better than the one that has been flung out. Intervening will do nothing but cost more lives and will just be seen as the west interfering in things that are nothing to do with them. Guess what, they will be right, its fk all to do with us.

Did you see what the resolution was about? It wasn't about interveintion. It was a a call for peace drafted by the Arab League. Where did you see any mention of interveintion?

And as it being nothing to do with us, I would agree if the Arab League wern't requesting assistance. Morroco proposed the resolution, and two other Muslim countries, Azerbaijan and Pakistan, supported it, and now Tunisia have withdrawn recognition of Syria. It's nowhere near as simple as us sticking our nose in.

Ok. answers to your answers . The UN is used more often than not for political gain, what the smaller countries say matters not a jot, it always comes down to the Americans, Chinnese and Russians, if they fail to agree its poinless, if the americans really want it (Iraq) they manipulate or ignore what the opposers have to say. The russians don't even bother and just wade in with the tanks if they are pissed off and the Chinnese go back to "its no body else's business so fk off" there are plenty of inter group forums between the major players that could be used to call down despots.

The only reason the yanks got involved at all in Libya is because the UK and France flung the toys out of the pram and had a strop, the Yanks where not interested and could not get back out quick enough. Bugger all to do with the UN.

I am very dubious about the syria reporting on the BBC and iothers at the moment, it seems top me these "citizens" are bloody well armed and seem to be occupying large areas of the city in question. This is a fight between Goverment forces and well armed rebels. There are no babies and old ladies peacfully protesting in the town square and getting shelled.

The Russians and the Chinese are well aware of the consequences of signing that resolution, it would quickly lead to next steps, and you are right, the Russians have intrests in the counrty and are protecting them. Let me ask you this, what happend in Bahrain, did you see the Americans screaming for intervention and the removal of the Royal Family, did you see mandates being pushed through the UN. No, did'ent think so, the yanks have a base there.

Yip, those good old joined up Arab nations, that lot could not agree on the colour of ste. If they have a problem with the next door neighbour being to noisy I would suggest that they might want to sort it out for themselfs for once.

[chim]

dandarez said:

Is the UN is a waste of time?
You figure it out.

The UN has continually voted (for the last 19, maybe it's 20 'years', I've lost count?) overwhelmingly, urging the United States to lift its long-standing blockade/economic embargo against Cuba.

The last vote it was 187 'in favour' to lift the embargos, 2 against and 3 abstentions, sort of reflecting the world's disapproval of America's continuing effort to isolate Havana.
Any change there?

Waste of time?

Thanks for making my point stand out so clearly, could not agree with you statment more. Here we have the perfect example of just how useless and how much of a talking shop the UN is. 20 long fking years of voting for sanctions to be lifted on Cuba, almost all in agreement.

Yip, thats worked well then.

Oh wait, maybe not. Last time I looked they where still up the creek and sanctions still in place. They always will be as well until such times as the Americans feel they have had thier pound of flesh.

So tell me then, just how exactly is this a good example of how effective the UN are, this must be the ultimate example of just how fking useless they are.

[MX7]

chim said:

Let me ask you this, what happend in Bahrain, did you see the Americans screaming for intervention and the removal of the Royal Family, did you see mandates being pushed through the UN. No, did'ent think so, the yanks have a base there.

No one is calling for intervention at the moment. That isn't what this resolution was about. Why can't you understand that?

Apart from that, it's a very different situation to Syria. As I remember it, things were looking like they might get out of hand, and then Saudi went in to calm it down, which appears to have worked. 60 people died, compared to 5,000+ in Syria. If things has escalated in a similar manner to Syria, it would be different, but it's daft to try and compare them when they are such vastly different events.

[chim]

MX7 said:

No one is calling for intervention at the moment. That isn't what this resolution was about. Why can't you understand that?

Apart from that, it's a very different situation to Syria. As I remember it, things were looking like they might get out of hand, and then Saudi went in to calm it down, which appears to have worked. 60 people died, compared to 5,000+ in Syria. If things has escalated in a similar manner to Syria, it would be different, but it's daft to try and compare them when they are such vastly different events.

I can understand that, no problem at all. So tell me this, if the UN had thier vote, do you really think they would stop at sending a strong letter telling Assad that he was bad boy. The Russians and the chineses have effectively stated thatbtheybare not prepared to intervene, Russia due to intrests and china due to dis-interest .

You though are missing my point which is simple, intervening serves no purpose, it's nothing to do with us, it's not our problem, we are not the worlds police. All western intervention would achieve would be another load of British body bags, Huge amounts of money and perhaps a regime change that we would need to police for years to come with constant conflict.

There is NO point. Do you seriously think that regime change will sort out all of the problems in Syria, do you really think there will be fair elections, do you really think that even if the elections where fair that the other sides would not shout foul and keep on throwing bricks.

[bobbylondonuk]

A security council resolution would have resulted in that particular resolution being used as the base for further action later on. The ruskies and chinks know the game very well and stopped the yanks and brits from building a foundation for the future to start the intervention business.

From what I can see on the british news channels...it seems that there are a few adjacent neighbourhoods in one particular province that are in chaos. The rest of the country is not shown on the media. So I am of the impression that this small area is being highlighted to show that the entire country is against Assad.


When are we going to understand that a few young arabs who are tech savvy, speak english and are vociferous do not represent the entire society which is more tribal, sectarian and sceptical of each other? Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan should have taught us something....but nooooo we are the moral defenders of the people of the world!!!

The funny thing is that we come from a land where people call you a wker for driving around in a nice car! To coin a Yank phrase...go figure!

[MX7]

chim said:

I can understand that, no problem at all. So tell me this, if the UN had thier vote, do you really think they would stop at sending a strong letter telling Assad that he was bad boy.

I don't know. I can't predict the future. Is that why you oppose it? Mystic Meg has had a word with you?

chim said:

You though are missing my point which is simple, intervening serves no purpose

THERE IS NO TALK OF A INTERVENTION. We are beling requested by Arab and Muslim nations to put pressure on Syria to stop attacking their own people.

Why you think it's appropiate to condone a despot?

chim said:

it's nothing to do with us, it's not our problem, we are not the worlds police.

THERE IS NO TALK OF A INTERVENTION.

chim said:

All western intervention would achieve would be another load of British body bags, Huge amounts of money and perhaps a regime change that we would need to police for years to come with constant conflict.

THERE IS NO TALK OF A INTERVENTION.

chim said:

There is NO point. Do you seriously think that regime change will sort out all of the problems in Syria, do you really think there will be fair elections, do you really think that even if the elections where fair that the other sides would not shout foul and keep on throwing bricks.

I don't know. I'm not blessed with the ability to see into the future. I do know that some countries that had uprisings are faring better than others, but which way it would go in Syria I have no idea,

I'd appreciate the lottery numbers for next weekend if you've got the time.

Thanks.

bobbylondonuk said:

A security council resolution would have resulted in that particular resolution being used as the base for further action later on.

Another one. You lot are so gifted. Thanks for letting me know.

[chim]

MX7 said:

Some stuff.

Are you really that politically gullible, do you really have such a low understanding of middle eastern politics. Trust me here it does not take mystic meg to work out the result of these action, it only takes a modicum of intelligence. Perhaps you should apply for some.

[MX7]

chim said:

Are you really that politically gullible, do you really have such a low understanding of middle eastern politics. Trust me here it does not take mystic meg to work out the result of these action, it only takes a modicum of intelligence. Perhaps you should apply for some.

Ok. I'll stick to talking about stuff we actually know about, and you carry on making st up.

[bobbylondonuk]

MX7 said:

Another one. You lot are so gifted. Thanks for letting me know.

You are welcome.

[chim]

MX7 said:

chim said:

Are you really that politically gullible, do you really have such a low understanding of middle eastern politics. Trust me here it does not take mystic meg to work out the result of these action, it only takes a modicum of intelligence. Perhaps you should apply for some.

Ok. I'll stick to talking about stuff we actually know about, and you carry on making st up.

Ok MX7, enlighten us, just what exactly do you see as the outcome if the UN got the mandate. Do you believe a strongly worded letter would do the trick and old Asssad would say sorry and immediately resign.

[MX7]

chim said:

Ok MX7, enlighten us, just what exactly do you see as the outcome if the UN got the mandate. Do you believe a strongly worded letter would do the trick and old Asssad would say sorry and immediately resign.

It's the first step of the due process. I've got no idea what the outcome would be as I can't predict the future.

Why would you condone Assad by refusing to support it? You are not committing yourself to anything else, as I understand it, apart from telling Assad that he should either stop or step down. You don't want him to stop?

[Mermaid]

MX7 said:

Mermaid said:

Can Israel do any wrong in your eyes?

It's nothing to do with Israel, it's about your obssession with Israel.

How can Syria be similar to the Isralei conflict when Israel and Palestine coudn't have a civil war if they tried.

If you want to talk about Israel, go and find a thread about it. I'm sure your post history is full of them.

You are so funny.

Have you been to Israel or Syria or Palestine (West Bank/Gaza)? I have to been to all and enjoy my visits.

[chim]

MX7 said:

It's the first step of the due process. I've got no idea what the outcome would be as I can't predict the future.

Why would you condone Assad by refusing to support it? You are not committing yourself to anything else, as I understand it, apart from telling Assad that he should either stop or step down. You don't want him to stop?

You are obviously living in cloud cuckoo land and have no idea of international politics, not one of these countries would cast a vote before carefully examining the outcome of that action and preparing the next stage.

As I said before, you are very gullible if you believe otherwise.

Please feel free to live on in your little idealistic bubble, most of of us though are stuck in the real world.

[MX7]

chim said:

You are obviously living in cloud cuckoo land and have no idea of international politics, not one of these countries would cast a vote before carefully examining the outcome of that action and preparing the next stage.

As I said before, you are very gullible if you believe otherwise.

Please feel free to live on in your little idealistic bubble, most of of us though are stuck in the real world.

I'm bound to appear foolish compared to someone who can predict the future like yourself. There's no shame in that.

[Mermaid]

chim said:

You are obviously living in cloud cuckoo land and have no idea of international politics, not one of these countries would cast a vote before carefully examining the outcome of that action and preparing the next stage.
.

Soviets/Chinese don't want another regime change, and really this is the line in the sand. A new cold war that ensures there is no widescale war?

[Mermaid]

MX7 said:

I'm bound to appear foolish compared to someone who can predict the future like yourself. There's no shame in that.

Seriously, do you believe most Syrians want to overthrow Assad? Or do most support Assad?

[chim]

MX7 said:

I'm bound to appear foolish compared to someone who can predict the future like yourself. There's no shame in that.

Have you ever actually heard of planning, political planning is a very advanced science, no predicting the future called for.. In fact the US and every other major power has teams of these planners that advise them on the probable outcomes of almost every major political move. They then base there moves on the likly outcomes advised by the planners.

You just keep thinkingthat they just vote with thier hearts though.

[dandarez]

chim said:

dandarez said:

Is the UN is a waste of time?
You figure it out.

The UN has continually voted (for the last 19, maybe it's 20 'years', I've lost count?) overwhelmingly, urging the United States to lift its long-standing blockade/economic embargo against Cuba.

The last vote it was 187 'in favour' to lift the embargos, 2 against and 3 abstentions, sort of reflecting the world's disapproval of America's continuing effort to isolate Havana.
Any change there?

Waste of time?

Thanks for making my point stand out so clearly, could not agree with you statment more. Here we have the perfect example of just how useless and how much of a talking shop the UN is. 20 long fking years of voting for sanctions to be lifted on Cuba, almost all in agreement.

Yip, thats worked well then.

Oh wait, maybe not. Last time I looked they where still up the creek and sanctions still in place. They always will be as well until such times as the Americans feel they have had thier pound of flesh.

So tell me then, just how exactly is this a good example of how effective the UN are, this must be the ultimate example of just how fking useless they are.

Getting away from Syria a mo - very difficult with all the media attention - it's just like all that attention on Libya (which you will note has now totally disappeared off the media radar).

That US 'pound of flesh' you mention re Cuba may never happen. In fact, the US nightmare scenario opposite might ensue.

We get the reporting from the BBC, Sky etc that 'they' want us to get, there's a lot they don't want us to receive.
The beeb knows, but it's not for us. Instead, pull at viewers heartstrings with 'women and children are being slaughtered', followed by the lines like 'we can't substantiate this, but...' and 'helicopter gunships we're told are firing on the protesters(?) but we have no evidence or sightings of them'.

Well, don't bloody surmise then!!!

Back to Cuba - what 'will' happen if they do strike gold (oil!)
If you don't know (cos Sky etc don't feel you need to know!) they're about to discover how much oil is off the coast of Cuba - the most conservative estimate would make Cuba a net oil exporter. A large find would provide untold riches.

It is one of the US-based anti-Castro lobby's worst nightmares, and it could be about to happen sooner than later.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-1573...