Pilchard Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 I think Cameron is a dickhead. I didn't vote for Lord Snooty and his mates, and I don't think I ever would. But I've got nothing but praise for him about the way he dealt with his defeat last night. Proper leadership, and as someone else has said, a victory for democracy. And it may be proof that at least a few people learnt from "Iraq". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 I'd be a lot happier with our system if more things were voted down against the will of the PM of whatever colour. It would show a freedom and independence of thought that is usually sadly lacking. Perhaps we need a system without whips where MP's of any hue can have a free vote without sanction on everything, thus allowing more opinion and more thought and more debate. It could even mean we get to find out what sort of chap we voted for, rather than what sort of chap we sent to follow orders. Perfectly happy for a party in power to lose a vote, if it happened more often I'd have more faith in politicians. On the specifics of Syria it has clearly reached and passed a horrible tipping point where it is now hell. There is no western action that will stop it imo and as far as Assad is concerned, if he disappeared this afternoon leaving just a Dear John letter and the keys to the chemical cupboard, the others would continue fighting to see which shade of murdering nutter gets to own the wreckage. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 On the specifics of Syria it has clearly reached and passed a horrible tipping point where it is now hell. There is no western action that will stop it imo and as far as Assad is concerned, if he disappeared this afternoon leaving just a Dear John letter and the keys to the chemical cupboard, the others would continue fighting to see which shade of murdering nutter gets to own the wreckage. That is as good a summary as anything I've read in the press over the last 6 months, and exactly why getting involved is completely futile gesture politics. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
veloman Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 According to The Daily Mail, the loathsome Michael Gove "raged at the Tory rebels" and shouted that they were a 'disgrace'; it reports that Gove is an advocate of military action. And this is one of the individuals touted to replace Cameron. God help us if that happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 The arab/muslim countries really need to step up here. They are pathetic excuses for goverments and if a diplomatic solution is to be the way forward then it needs to come fast. If you want to see how the Syrian people are suffering you just have to youtube it and you can see the hell they are living in. No joke I saw a video where the military were raping a torturing a woman in front of her family and telling her to say 'Assad is you god'. They were raping her with rats. Horrific. This happens every day and will only get worse. Inaction is not needed but the good people in this world need to do something. I am totally against western intervention - it is no good for anyone. Especially air strikes. You cannot save a people by bombing them. Very tough situation for the Uk and I think Cameron showed good leadership. As much as I detest the guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KennyPowers Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 It's such a mess. Whilst military action should probably be taken (unless you believe the Assad regime I suppose) there aren't any guarantees that action on any scale will lead to a better short-term or long-term future for Syria. The UN will, as ever, sit there with their hands tied, express outrage and pass a few resolutions that achieve nothing. Let's hope US and France take some action and it works out but yes it could blow up in their faces dramatically and create more unrest than it solves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 So it turns out that two ministers missed the vote despite being in the building. Justine Greening, development secretary, and Mark Simmonds, minister for Africa. It seems they were in a small room discussing Uganda or something. Sounds a right cock-up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted August 30, 2013 Moderator Share Posted August 30, 2013 I've been reading a lot of people slating Cameron over this Syria debate but I quite liked the way he handled it to be honest. I'm not a Tory or anything, but I think he handled it well. A war crime was committed, he thought we should go in with USA to "help" out, he took it to parliament and they decided against it. A lot of people have been saying this is a "defeat" for Cameron, whereas it just seems like the right thing to do IMO. I don't think it paints him in a particularity good or bad light. I think that is pretty much how I see it as well. I admit I've not followed things all that closely but it appears to me like the believed action needed to be taken based on an alleged war crime, followed a democratic process seeking support from our elected representatives and didn't get it. I may be a little naïve here or not fully in possession of all the facts but I'm struggling to see what there is to be critical of Cameron here unless you don't think the vote should have been called in the first place. I would also add that I think our involvement in past conflicts and the process followed to justify our involvement is entirely relevant to any discussion on the subject of Syria and judgement of Cameron's actions. I don't vote Conservative, I never have but I don't really see this as being a party political issue or at least it shouldn't be. It is a moral issue and a legal issue, party politics shouldn't come into it. I think there's criticism that he wanted to take us to war, yet there is no clear evidence as to exactly who it is we should be attacking. I mean was it Assad and his army who did the chemicals? or was it the AL'Qaida and muslim brotherhood in a double bluff? We don't know. He doesn't know. nevrr mind that we don't know, just go bomb someone, anyone eh? That'll learn 'em! Then there's the issue of all the killing and that, which has been going on over there for what 2 years? We don't seem to give a damn when the killing is by guns, bombs, tanks, bulldozers, knives, ropes and the like. Then he gets all sobby and cross as soon as persons unknown get the mustard out. And as has also been said, all sorts of naughty men did bad things over the past however long, and we haven't decided to go and bomb them. Yes the act of going through a debate and vote was the right course to take, yes he was pushed into it, and yes most of parliament and many MPs looked the better for it and for their contributions. Just as a side issue on the Iraq thing. The Tories then were like bloodthirsty cheerleaders egging on Mr Tony to go harder and faster. Yes they were instrumental in the thing then, because if they'd have used their noggins, like Robin Cook did., they could have stopped it. But they egged it on. That said TC Blair ws the most guilty. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 The arab/muslim countries really need to step up here. They are pathetic excuses for goverments and if a diplomatic solution is to be the way forward then it needs to come fast. The Arab Governments are up to their necks in it already, funding the absolute worst of the opposition like those who were videoed eating hearts, decapitating priests, murdering prisoners and shooting children for "disrespecting" the faith. Short of sending their armies in to fight, Saudi, Qatar, Jordan et al are about as involved as its possible to be, using Syria to fight the real regional struggle between the Saudi's and Tehran. Diplomacy isn't on their agenda because they are not interested in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 Then there's the issue of all the killing and that, which has been going on over there for what 2 years? We don't seem to give a damn when the killing is by guns, bombs, tanks, bulldozers, knives, ropes and the like. Then he gets all sobby and cross as soon as persons unknown get the mustard out. And as has also been said, all sorts of naughty men did bad things over the past however long, and we haven't decided to go and bomb them. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electric Avenue Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 Disturbing rumours around Coldplay putting some sort of record together for the people of Syria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 Disturbing rumours around Coldplay putting some sort of record together for the people of Syria. As in "Pack it in Assad or we'll write more songs?" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 I've been reading a lot of people slating Cameron over this Syria debate but I quite liked the way he handled it to be honest. I'm not a Tory or anything, but I think he handled it well. A war crime was committed, he thought we should go in with USA to "help" out, he took it to parliament and they decided against it. A lot of people have been saying this is a "defeat" for Cameron, whereas it just seems like the right thing to do IMO. I don't think it paints him in a particularity good or bad light. I think that is pretty much how I see it as well. I admit I've not followed things all that closely but it appears to me like the believed action needed to be taken based on an alleged war crime, followed a democratic process seeking support from our elected representatives and didn't get it. I may be a little naïve here or not fully in possession of all the facts but I'm struggling to see what there is to be critical of Cameron here unless you don't think the vote should have been called in the first place. I would also add that I think our involvement in past conflicts and the process followed to justify our involvement is entirely relevant to any discussion on the subject of Syria and judgement of Cameron's actions. I don't vote Conservative, I never have but I don't really see this as being a party political issue or at least it shouldn't be. It is a moral issue and a legal issue, party politics shouldn't come into it. As a Tory I have no problem with the way the vote went in parliament, it's the democratic process in action. Afterall we are sometimes called the mother of democracy and to see that demonstrated so publicly will hopefully restore some belief in the parliamentary process. My only worry is that I hope the vote last night was not a retrospective in hindsight vote on iraq and people trying to put right a past wrong. Syria is a mess, it's a civil war yes but a mess that could impact the region and wider. The use of Chemical weapons (by whoever) is a crime and needs justice and should never happen again. I am not saying I would have voted for or against last night I am saying that I hope people have voted on this issue and not on Iraq or on scoring a cheap political point. I further hope there can be an agreement on how we help the people of Syria, because that is the important thing in this and now the vote by us has taken place I'd like to see a focus by all parties on how we can stop the loss of life and the use of these weapons. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 Agree Richard. Personally I cant see how military action can solve anything but action needs to be taken. Innocent people are suffering in the most horrific ways every day until something happens. On chemical weapons - am I right in believing that the Israeli army used white phosphorous on Palestinian people? Also what about the drone strikes in Pakistan by the US. Not chemical but still pretty indiscriminate when it comes to killing. Should we take military action against these two? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 Thank you France. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 Agree Richard. Personally I cant see how military action can solve anything but action needs to be taken. Innocent people are suffering in the most horrific ways every day until something happens. On chemical weapons - am I right in believing that the Israeli army used white phosphorous on Palestinian people? Also what about the drone strikes in Pakistan by the US. Not chemical but still pretty indiscriminate when it comes to killing. Should we take military action against these two? Yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omariqy Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 Didnt we and the US also use depleted uranium in Fallujah? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 On chemical weapons - am I right in believing that the Israeli army used white phosphorous on Palestinian people? Yes. Some stuff here on Israeli WMDs. Israel is widely believed to possess weapons of mass destruction, and to be one of four nuclear-armed countries not recognized as a Nuclear Weapons State by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).[1] The US Congress Office of Technology Assessment has recorded Israel as a country generally reported as having undeclared chemical warfare capabilities, and an offensive biological warfare program.[2] Officially Israel neither confirms nor denies possessing nuclear weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 Didnt we and the US also use depleted uranium in Fallujah? Yes, certainly the US did. Not sure about us. Babies are still being born deformed because of the lingering after-effects. I can't post the links, because the pictures are quite horrific and the mods would have to remove them, but you can find plenty on this if you look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 Didnt we and the US also use depleted uranium in Fallujah? And White phosphorous Graphic images warning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts