swedish chef
At the Start
“I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”
― Albert Einstein
― Albert Einstein
Off To War ?
- Thread starter icebreaker
- Start date
His opinion is the same as many if not most people have around the world. There is absolutely nothing xenophobic about it. There is no obligation to get involved and many will believe that their forces are only for self defence only. That is not a bigoted or unusual opinion as you seem to suggest
And ultimately no one here should be lectured by a foreigner over whether we should be involved or not
And ultimately no one here should be lectured by a foreigner over whether we should be involved or not
swedish chef
At the Start
iqbal.latif
“We call on President Assad to end immediately the killing of civilians, withdraw the Syrian army from besieged towns and cities and step aside in order to make room for a peaceful transition for the sake of his country.”
The European parliament expressed dismay and its president, Martin Schulz, urged Moscow and Beijing to “take their international responsibilities seriously”. London-based rights group Amnesty International called the veto a “shockingly callous betrayal” of the Syrian people.
Moscow and Beijing have acted in a “completely irresponsible” way, the London-based human rights group added.
Thirteen countries voted for the resolution with only Russia and China voting against. Both countries, as permanent members of the Security Council, have a veto power.
The draft resolution, put forward by Morocco, had called for an immediate end to all violence. It did not impose any sanctions, nor did it authorize military action. Mohammed Loulichki, the U.N. ambassador of Morocco, the sole Arab member of the 15-nation council, voiced his “great regret and disappointment” at the veto and said the Arabs had no intention of abandoning their plan.
When free expression is denied humanity is denied. Human dignity is not a 'God bestowed right' it is an innate right to respect and receive ethical treatment. It is an offshoot of Enlightenment-era concepts of inherent, inalienable rights.
The developments in Damascus and New York now make it clear that the outcome of the Syrian civil war will be decided on the battlefield rather than at the Security Council; the rebel fighters in Syria remain relatively poorly armed, they are increasingly battle-hardened and their morale is being boosted by a growing number of defections from Assad’s regime, diplomats say.
Western and Arab powers Saturday reacted angrily to Russia and China’s veto of a Security Council resolution on the Syria crisis, but Moscow and Beijing insisted the text needed more work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Putin's 'Liver eaters' - The new Reputation!
The Putin-Bandar meeting was stormy, replete with warnings of a “dramatic turn” in Syria. Putin termed the Syrian opposition as Liver Eaters. Curse of **Hind bint 'Utbah' wife of Abu Sufyan ibn Harb and the mother of Muawiyah 1 haunts the faithful even today. Memories never leave a man!!
Mr Putin was unmoved by the Saudi offer of oil, though western pressure has escalated since then. “Our stance on Assad will never change. We believe that the Syrian regime is the best speaker on behalf of the Syrian people, and not those liver eaters,” he said, referring to footage showing a Jihadist rebel eating the heart and liver of a Syrian soldier.
Prince Bandar in turn warned that there can be “no escape from the military option” if Russia declines the olive branch.
**Hind an Arab woman who lived in the late 6th and early 7th centuries CE; she was the wife of Abu Sufyan ibn Harb, a powerful man of Mecca, in western Arabia. Both Abu Sufyan and Hind originally opposed the Islamic prophet Muhammad. She was the mother of Muawiyah I, the founder of the Umayyad dynasty, and of Ramlah bint Abi Sufyan, who was one of Muhammad's wives.
Incident of alleged battlefield cannibalism:
Hind is infamous in Islamic history for her exultation at the defeat of the Muslims at the Battle of Uhud when she ate the liver of Prophet's slain uncle Hamza ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib. Although she later converted to Islam, the founder of the Umayyad Caliphate Muawiyah I was thus later slandered to be an illegitimate son of a cannibal.
----------------------------------------------------------------
@Do you think Syria situation is similar to Serbia=Bosnia situation
No- It is not about similarity of geo politics of Bosnia and Syria. Iti s about the fact that friends of Assad claim that it is a nexus between Jews , Americans and Saudis to get Assad, it is all hogwash, Assad had killed women and children from 1982, his father did it, his uncle did it, and he does it with impunity.
This is the curse of the historical schism between Shiite and sunni Islam playing at its most ghastly. Allawites who consider 'Ali as Maula' a divinity and Brotherhood and Sunnis who have been rebelling against the Allawites since Assad take over.
It has been partially hijacked by Al-Qaida as AfPak region was, Al-Qaida like a orphaned vulture moves in any vacuum where livers have to be eaten, they want their share of bloodiness in any callous killing of the faithful.
@I find these so called FSA shouting allah hu akbar,a slogan of jehadis.These rebels are not like bosnians but supported by jehadi islamist.
No, you are not fully aware of the history of the region. Allah u Akbar is uttered as a hobby, a battle cry to subdue the infidels all over, when even Shoaib Akhtar bowled out Tendulkar, this is their habit to beat the infidels. Even the most refined of the faithful carry this heartfelt arrogance and tinkling of their tyrannical rule of over 1000 years, this is the culmination of the rage of impotence, when they don't get the infidels they tear each other apart, they have no respect for this life to get rewards of afterlife 72 houries.
Free Syrian Army (FSA) led by Salim Idris, he runs the southern front in Syria. southern strategy is a very reliable rebel group that opposes Al-Qaida, it has even a unit of Alawites. They are Syrians fighting for liberty. The rebel units are winning more and more territory at the expense of both Assad and al Qaeda, which has been using the war in Syria as an chance to expand its reach to establish what it hopes will be a Islamic emirate towards the goal of worldwide caliphate. The “southern strategy'' has crippled Assad regime, they have build-up rebel forces in and around Damascus, mainly in the towns of Barzeh, Jobar, and Qaboun. These towns are located in Eastern Ghouta district, the area that Assad gassed last week.
Message should be loud and clear: Use of WMDs is intolerable!! Today, tomorrow and forever and by anyone.
“We call on President Assad to end immediately the killing of civilians, withdraw the Syrian army from besieged towns and cities and step aside in order to make room for a peaceful transition for the sake of his country.”
The European parliament expressed dismay and its president, Martin Schulz, urged Moscow and Beijing to “take their international responsibilities seriously”. London-based rights group Amnesty International called the veto a “shockingly callous betrayal” of the Syrian people.
Moscow and Beijing have acted in a “completely irresponsible” way, the London-based human rights group added.
Thirteen countries voted for the resolution with only Russia and China voting against. Both countries, as permanent members of the Security Council, have a veto power.
The draft resolution, put forward by Morocco, had called for an immediate end to all violence. It did not impose any sanctions, nor did it authorize military action. Mohammed Loulichki, the U.N. ambassador of Morocco, the sole Arab member of the 15-nation council, voiced his “great regret and disappointment” at the veto and said the Arabs had no intention of abandoning their plan.
When free expression is denied humanity is denied. Human dignity is not a 'God bestowed right' it is an innate right to respect and receive ethical treatment. It is an offshoot of Enlightenment-era concepts of inherent, inalienable rights.
The developments in Damascus and New York now make it clear that the outcome of the Syrian civil war will be decided on the battlefield rather than at the Security Council; the rebel fighters in Syria remain relatively poorly armed, they are increasingly battle-hardened and their morale is being boosted by a growing number of defections from Assad’s regime, diplomats say.
Western and Arab powers Saturday reacted angrily to Russia and China’s veto of a Security Council resolution on the Syria crisis, but Moscow and Beijing insisted the text needed more work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Putin's 'Liver eaters' - The new Reputation!
The Putin-Bandar meeting was stormy, replete with warnings of a “dramatic turn” in Syria. Putin termed the Syrian opposition as Liver Eaters. Curse of **Hind bint 'Utbah' wife of Abu Sufyan ibn Harb and the mother of Muawiyah 1 haunts the faithful even today. Memories never leave a man!!
Mr Putin was unmoved by the Saudi offer of oil, though western pressure has escalated since then. “Our stance on Assad will never change. We believe that the Syrian regime is the best speaker on behalf of the Syrian people, and not those liver eaters,” he said, referring to footage showing a Jihadist rebel eating the heart and liver of a Syrian soldier.
Prince Bandar in turn warned that there can be “no escape from the military option” if Russia declines the olive branch.
**Hind an Arab woman who lived in the late 6th and early 7th centuries CE; she was the wife of Abu Sufyan ibn Harb, a powerful man of Mecca, in western Arabia. Both Abu Sufyan and Hind originally opposed the Islamic prophet Muhammad. She was the mother of Muawiyah I, the founder of the Umayyad dynasty, and of Ramlah bint Abi Sufyan, who was one of Muhammad's wives.
Incident of alleged battlefield cannibalism:
Hind is infamous in Islamic history for her exultation at the defeat of the Muslims at the Battle of Uhud when she ate the liver of Prophet's slain uncle Hamza ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib. Although she later converted to Islam, the founder of the Umayyad Caliphate Muawiyah I was thus later slandered to be an illegitimate son of a cannibal.
----------------------------------------------------------------
@Do you think Syria situation is similar to Serbia=Bosnia situation
No- It is not about similarity of geo politics of Bosnia and Syria. Iti s about the fact that friends of Assad claim that it is a nexus between Jews , Americans and Saudis to get Assad, it is all hogwash, Assad had killed women and children from 1982, his father did it, his uncle did it, and he does it with impunity.
This is the curse of the historical schism between Shiite and sunni Islam playing at its most ghastly. Allawites who consider 'Ali as Maula' a divinity and Brotherhood and Sunnis who have been rebelling against the Allawites since Assad take over.
It has been partially hijacked by Al-Qaida as AfPak region was, Al-Qaida like a orphaned vulture moves in any vacuum where livers have to be eaten, they want their share of bloodiness in any callous killing of the faithful.
@I find these so called FSA shouting allah hu akbar,a slogan of jehadis.These rebels are not like bosnians but supported by jehadi islamist.
No, you are not fully aware of the history of the region. Allah u Akbar is uttered as a hobby, a battle cry to subdue the infidels all over, when even Shoaib Akhtar bowled out Tendulkar, this is their habit to beat the infidels. Even the most refined of the faithful carry this heartfelt arrogance and tinkling of their tyrannical rule of over 1000 years, this is the culmination of the rage of impotence, when they don't get the infidels they tear each other apart, they have no respect for this life to get rewards of afterlife 72 houries.
Free Syrian Army (FSA) led by Salim Idris, he runs the southern front in Syria. southern strategy is a very reliable rebel group that opposes Al-Qaida, it has even a unit of Alawites. They are Syrians fighting for liberty. The rebel units are winning more and more territory at the expense of both Assad and al Qaeda, which has been using the war in Syria as an chance to expand its reach to establish what it hopes will be a Islamic emirate towards the goal of worldwide caliphate. The “southern strategy'' has crippled Assad regime, they have build-up rebel forces in and around Damascus, mainly in the towns of Barzeh, Jobar, and Qaboun. These towns are located in Eastern Ghouta district, the area that Assad gassed last week.
Message should be loud and clear: Use of WMDs is intolerable!! Today, tomorrow and forever and by anyone.
swedish chef
At the Start
No mate - he's a walking encyclopaedia of all middle eastern regions and always says you cannot understand the problems without understanding the history behind them. I find his articles on Newsvine enlightening, especially where it involves Islam. I also work for him.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2008/apr/11/merrilllynch.banking
http://iqballatif.newsvine.com/
http://iqballatif.newsvine.com/_new...and-forever-and-by-anyone#th3804366-c78622299
Last edited:
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
A blow to his authority and credibility for sure.
But a good day for parliamentary democracy on the other hand.
It is the hypocritical moral superiority of Cameron and Obama that I find sickening. There was no rush to condemnation or talk of a "red line crossed" when American forces were using depleted uranium shells in Fallujah; when Israel was dropping white phosphorus on Gaza in 2008; when the then American client Saddam Hussein was mustard-gassing tens of thousands or Iranians during the Iran/Iraq war in the 80's;
This is on top of the cluster bombs, Agent Orange and Napalm regularly used by the West since 1945.
Obama, the king of the ongoing drone attacks which cause much civilian casualties, has little moral ground to stand upon. Credit to the House of Commons for refusing to be an unquestioning supporter of his Syrian adventure.
But a good day for parliamentary democracy on the other hand.
It is the hypocritical moral superiority of Cameron and Obama that I find sickening. There was no rush to condemnation or talk of a "red line crossed" when American forces were using depleted uranium shells in Fallujah; when Israel was dropping white phosphorus on Gaza in 2008; when the then American client Saddam Hussein was mustard-gassing tens of thousands or Iranians during the Iran/Iraq war in the 80's;
This is on top of the cluster bombs, Agent Orange and Napalm regularly used by the West since 1945.
Obama, the king of the ongoing drone attacks which cause much civilian casualties, has little moral ground to stand upon. Credit to the House of Commons for refusing to be an unquestioning supporter of his Syrian adventure.
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
deleted.
Last edited:
They didn't in the end..
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
But Germany hasn't had a record over the past sixty years of attacking other countries on account of alleged human rights abuses ?
I'm not condemning any country for "having an opinion" -- just those particular countries who use ambiguous "chemical warfare" reasons as a pretext to attack other nations when those same countries have used similar chemical weapons themselves in the recent past.
simmo
Senior Jockey
Only they haven't.
Depleted Uranium is not a chemical weapon.
White Phosphorus is not a chemical weapon.
They use elements and chemical compounds to produce the effect that is desired, but so does every thing on the planet.
In fact - since the convention on chemical weapons agreement was signed, I can't think of a single use of chemical weapons as defined by the World (not the world according to Icebreaker) except Saddams use against the Kurds and here.
By anyone, western country concerned about human rights or otherwise.
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
This is factually incorrect.
Neither of the two materials quoted "use elements and chemical compounds". Both of them are elements.
White Phosphorus IS a chemical element.
Depleted Uranium IS a chemical element.
So we have two chemical elements -- not as part of some compound -- used as weapons. What else are they to be called but Chemical Weapons.
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
:lol:
simmo
Senior Jockey
Weapons.
They are not classified as Chemical Weapons by the Chemical Weapons Convention.
Nor are water pistols.
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
From http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4442988.stm
The Chemical Weapons Convention is monitored by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, based in The Hague. Its spokesman Peter Kaiser was asked if White Phosphorus was banned by the CWC and he had this to say:
"No it's not forbidden by the CWC if it is used within the context of a military application which does not require or does not intend to use the toxic properties of white phosphorus. White phosphorus is normally used to produce smoke, to camouflage movement.
"If that is the purpose for which the white phosphorus is used, then that is considered under the Convention legitimate use.
"If on the other hand the toxic properties of white phosphorus, the caustic properties, are specifically intended to be used as a weapon, that of course is prohibited, because the way the Convention is structured or the way it is in fact applied, any chemicals used against humans or animals that cause harm or death through the toxic properties of the chemical are considered chemical weapons."
The Chemical Weapons Convention is monitored by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, based in The Hague. Its spokesman Peter Kaiser was asked if White Phosphorus was banned by the CWC and he had this to say:
"No it's not forbidden by the CWC if it is used within the context of a military application which does not require or does not intend to use the toxic properties of white phosphorus. White phosphorus is normally used to produce smoke, to camouflage movement.
"If that is the purpose for which the white phosphorus is used, then that is considered under the Convention legitimate use.
"If on the other hand the toxic properties of white phosphorus, the caustic properties, are specifically intended to be used as a weapon, that of course is prohibited, because the way the Convention is structured or the way it is in fact applied, any chemicals used against humans or animals that cause harm or death through the toxic properties of the chemical are considered chemical weapons."
simmo
Senior Jockey
did you read the rest of the article or just the bit you liked?
Sheikh
At the Start
I usually refrain from commenting here as the usual fascist nut job will reliably descend upon you with dribbling venom when you don't concur. However ,I feel compelled, listening to the Yanks is sickening. There is no doubt that Assad , no sorry, Assads father should have been removed from power many years ago and I'm looking forward to seeing his head roll.....but the hypocrisy of the U.S.A lecturing the World on morality when they bankroll and defend Israel ( white phosphorous , ethnic cleansing etc ) is truly puke inducing..
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
What I have read, or not read, is of no consequence. What I have done is quote the part pertinent to this debate and a clear rebuttal of your claim that White Phosphorus is not considered to be as a chemical weapon under the Chemical Weapons Convention
Last edited:
simmo
Senior Jockey
but ignored the part which leaves the question unanswered and does not proivde a rebuttal.
i.e. - you chose the bit you like.
Best people don't post when they have no idea what ethnic cleansing is but then again certain posters have to get the jews into the debate somehow don't they. Just as before.
What is very indicative of certain bigoted mindsets is that its always about amercians and jews. Any comment about russia and irans backing for assad ? No. Do the same idiots scream about china backing sudan ? No. Where was their indignation at sri lankas ethnic cleansing oif 25000 citizens ?
Shall we go on?
And its the most thick headed whataboutery argument. Yes usa didn't go into rwanda too so that means they have no right to blah blah
5 year old stuff
What is very indicative of certain bigoted mindsets is that its always about amercians and jews. Any comment about russia and irans backing for assad ? No. Do the same idiots scream about china backing sudan ? No. Where was their indignation at sri lankas ethnic cleansing oif 25000 citizens ?
Shall we go on?
And its the most thick headed whataboutery argument. Yes usa didn't go into rwanda too so that means they have no right to blah blah
5 year old stuff
Last edited:
White phosphorous can be used n battle fields but not over "developed areas". So ...
Lets face it, you know as well as anyone that whilst it was entirely wrong that this was used by Israel, there wasn't one directly attributed death (as far as I can recall) and the intention was nothing like the same.
Also if you want to play the very tiresome "hypocrisy" argument on a consistent basis then quite frankly there would be no intervention from any state with resources to resolve any crisis anywhere. That would suit some who see every action as "meddling" and "imperialism" of course but then they would consider the liberation of the concentration camps in the same light too
Last edited:
Colin Phillips
At the Start
Programme on the box tomorrow you might enjoy, Clive, Simon Schama "History of the Jews" BBC1 9.00 pm.
Clive, you come across as bordering on mental, which you are not.
Sheikh's point is perfectly valid and correct, and because he doesn't choose to list others who have used chemical weapons/similar (lets not let semantics determine this) it doesn't make his point any weaker. If you want to refer to his point, refer to what he said, not what he didn't say.
One thing - he never mentioned jews - you did. You need to let your obsession with this and the Guardian and the left go.
Sheikh's point is perfectly valid and correct, and because he doesn't choose to list others who have used chemical weapons/similar (lets not let semantics determine this) it doesn't make his point any weaker. If you want to refer to his point, refer to what he said, not what he didn't say.
One thing - he never mentioned jews - you did. You need to let your obsession with this and the Guardian and the left go.