Meanwhile, In Syria

[chim]

MX7 said:

chim said:

Sick of all this st, lots of liberal hearts pouring out and condemning the Russians and Chinese for the Veto. Personally I agree with them, its all one sided and condemns Assad. Seems to me both sides are flinging bricks though and it has bugger all to do with us anyway. Let them get on with it and stop fking interfering with the "save the babies" line.

Do you understand the function of the UN?

Sure do, it's there to keep a load of overpaid bureaucrats in a job with stupid expenses, they get to argue all day about not very much and then spend at least 2 months writing a letter that states they are not pleased, so please, it would be nice if you could maybe stop being quite so naughty.

In short form they are a waste of space.

Please feel free to point out any other function that they serve other than keeping a large proportion of the hospitality trade in business.

[james_tigerwoods]

chim said:

Sure do, it's there to keep a load of overpaid bureaucrats in a job with stupid expenses, they get to argue all day about not very much and then spend at least 2 months writing a letter that states they are not pleased, so please, it would be nice if you could maybe stop being quite so naughty.

In short form they are a waste of space.

Please feel free to point out any other function that they serve other than keeping a large proportion of the hospitality trade in business.

Sounds like the EU...

[MX7]

james_tigerwoods said:

I'm not looking for a confrontation here or have a hypocritical stance so I take exception to your post there.

Why? There's no similarity between Syria and Palestine. Syria is approaching a full scale civil war, Palestine isn't. Why would Palestine require the same level of urgency as Syria?

james_tigerwoods said:

My question was one of parallels - the Arab League are in Syria to try to sort things out, with the UN also talking about it. What I am merely trying to understand is that given the level and length of conflict in Israel and Palestine, why has there been no outside international mediation in the same way that there is in Syria.

I think the Arab League withdrew because of fears for their saftey, but either way you're missing the point that there has been a shed load of international mediation between Israel and Palestine, probably more that any other conflict in the history of man.

I don't know if you're being serious.

[MX7]

chim said:

Sure do, it's there to keep a load of overpaid bureaucrats in a job with stupid expenses, they get to argue all day about not very much and then spend at least 2 months writing a letter that states they are not pleased, so please, it would be nice if you could maybe stop being quite so naughty.

In short form they are a waste of space.

Please feel free to point out any other function that they serve other than keeping a large proportion of the hospitality trade in business.

Oh. Sorry I thought you might have something to contribute.

[james_tigerwoods]

With all the mediation, I genuinely don't quite get why there hasnt been an escalation or resolution. I am fully aware that there is a difference, of course, I just didn't feel the need for a new thread on it.

It just seems that there is a lack of genuine support from the ARAB world for Palestine - that's my point but if it detracts from this thread just ignore it - I am not looking for an argument over a question rattling around my head.

[chim]

MX7 said:

Oh. Sorry I thought you might have something to contribute.

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.

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.

The UN is a waste of time, much as I would love the worlds governments to actually be concerned with what is fair and just it will not happen any time soon. This has been and still is witnessed over and over again. 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.

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.

[Mermaid]

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.

The UN is a waste of time, much as I would love the worlds governments to actually be concerned with what is fair and just it will not happen any time soon. This has been and still is witnessed over and over again. 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.

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.

That makes sense to me. Civil strife is civil strife - there are so many countries the West has not bothered to interfere with, but the middle east seems to be of particular interest. And there has been military involvement with 2 so far - Iraq & Libya.

[Mermaid]

james_tigerwoods said:

With all the mediation, I genuinely don't quite get why there hasnt been an escalation or resolution. I am fully aware that there is a difference, of course, I just didn't feel the need for a new thread on it.

It just seems that there is a lack of genuine support from the ARAB world for Palestine - that's my point but if it detracts from this thread just ignore it - I am not looking for an argument over a question rattling around my head.

Interesting this - if we armed the rebels (the Palestinians) like we did the Libyans and no doubt do the Syrians, would we have a quicker resolution. Would there be more meaningful negotiations with them, as we are about to do with the despised Taliban. Questions, questions MX7 may have answers to.

[Mermaid]

MX7 said:

Why? There's no similarity between Syria and Palestine. Syria is approaching a full scale civil war, Palestine isn't. Why would Palestine require the same level of urgency as Syria?

I have many friends in Israel, like I am sure you have too. Many want an equitable solution, based on need rather than greed.

Arm the Palestinians to the teeth and you will have the same situation given time, then you will have the same urgency. The Palestinians need a powerful sponsor (like Israel has). - that they don't is a matter of shame for the falafel eating Arabs you described earlier.

Syria has suffered many deaths, so did most of the "west" in their civil wars. Collateral damage that the Palestinians should also be willing to accept, but IMO are not.

Peace to all (eventually)

[Mermaid]

MX7 said:

Do you understand the scale of death in Syria? Are you familiar with the Hama massacre in '82? They are on completly different levels, and we have been requested by Morroco to intervein.

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?

[bobbylondonuk]

Mermaid said:

MX7 said:

Why? There's no similarity between Syria and Palestine. Syria is approaching a full scale civil war, Palestine isn't. Why would Palestine require the same level of urgency as Syria?

I have many friends in Israel, like I am sure you have too. Many want an equitable solution, based on need rather than greed.

Arm the Palestinians to the teeth and you will have the same situation given time, then you will have the same urgency. The Palestinians need a powerful sponsor (like Israel has). - that they don't is a matter of shame for the falafel eating Arabs you described earlier.

Syria has suffered many deaths, so did most of the "west" in their civil wars. Collateral damage that the Palestinians should also be willing to accept, but IMO are not.

Peace to all (eventually)

The palestinians did have the GCC countries giving them crazy money to fight israel..about 20 yrs ago. Then Kuwait happened and all the palestinians sided with Saddam and even had the balls to say that kuwait was occupied for them!!! I have first hand experience of how palestinians were treated before by kuwait...they were pushed up the ranks in civil service, given loads of freebies etc. after Desert storm .....all the GCC monarchies basically took a back seat and turned away. And israel had so much more of a headache when palestinians had the money to fight them.

Just like Libya and Iraq...as a few of us on here predicted..if we get involved in syria..it will turn into a clusterfk. Only this time..it will hurt Israel more if syria is destabilised!!! The ruskies and the chinese are correct...let them deal with their own problems. The people or insurgents are fighting the government based on their faith in the west to come around with their democracy propoganda. Assad has a lot of support from educated, middle income people.

[MX7]

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.

[MX7]

Mermaid said:

Interesting this - if we armed the rebels (the Palestinians) like we did the Libyans and no doubt do the Syrians, would we have a quicker resolution. Would there be more meaningful negotiations with them, as we are about to do with the despised Taliban. Questions, questions MX7 may have answers to.

There is no comparison between Libya, Syria and Palestine.

[MX7]

Mermaid said:

I have many friends in Israel, like I am sure you have too. Many want an equitable solution, based on need rather than greed.

Arm the Palestinians to the teeth and you will have the same situation given time, then you will have the same urgency. The Palestinians need a powerful sponsor (like Israel has). - that they don't is a matter of shame for the falafel eating Arabs you described earlier.

Syria has suffered many deaths, so did most of the "west" in their civil wars. Collateral damage that the Palestinians should also be willing to accept, but IMO are not.

Peace to all (eventually)

You come across as completly fking clueless.

[MX7]

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.

[Mermaid]

MX7 said:

Mermaid said:

Interesting this - if we armed the rebels (the Palestinians) like we did the Libyans and no doubt do the Syrians, would we have a quicker resolution. Would there be more meaningful negotiations with them, as we are about to do with the despised Taliban. Questions, questions MX7 may have answers to.

There is no comparison between Libya, Syria and Palestine.

So what is the difference, please?

[Mermaid]

MX7 said:

Mermaid said:

I have many friends in Israel, like I am sure you have too. Many want an equitable solution, based on need rather than greed.

Arm the Palestinians to the teeth and you will have the same situation given time, then you will have the same urgency. The Palestinians need a powerful sponsor (like Israel has). - that they don't is a matter of shame for the falafel eating Arabs you described earlier.

Syria has suffered many deaths, so did most of the "west" in their civil wars. Collateral damage that the Palestinians should also be willing to accept, but IMO are not.

Peace to all (eventually)

You come across as completly fking clueless.

Thank you

Can Israel do any wrong in your eyes? Has it flouted any UN (of which you speak so highly) resolutions?

[Mermaid]

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?

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?

[dandarez]

chim said:

MX7 said:

Oh. Sorry I thought you might have something to contribute.

The UN is a waste of time, much as I would love the worlds governments to actually be concerned with what is fair and just it will not happen any time soon. This has been and still is witnessed over and over again. 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.

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.

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?

[jayb289]

everytime they show a new video, all i see is a bunch of destroyed buildings and hear gunfire. im not saying its all made up but we keep hearing about peaceful civilians protesting as if they are standing there with placards and the syrian army just turns up and mows them down. im sure there are people firing at the syrian army, how they retaliate can be questioned but the media needs to stop acting like these protesters are out their waving white flags. if the whole city of liverpool tried to bring down the government and some of them stay in the crowd and fire rockets and machine guns at the army/police i can assure their will be videos like the ones we see on tv so often. matter of fact, there would be people on ph saying go in those communities and trample them, any means necessary.