The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged

[rfgqqabc]

I guess I thought the UN Charter was enshrined in law, I might be wrong. Still a big shout for the regime to do this, they will be terrified if they hit anything Russian.

At what point do you draw a line in the sand? When they use chemical weapons another once, twice on civilians and children?

If they do nothing it gives the Russians and Assad a green light to do it again.

You don’t think Assad will think about the consequences before doing it again? Wouldn’t this potentially save lives in future?

Why did we draw the line here though? They have continued to use chemical weapons after previous retaliation attacks. Incredibly ineffective.

[kukushkin88]

I guess I thought the UN Charter was enshrined in law, I might be wrong. Still a big shout for the regime to do this, they will be terrified if they hit anything Russian.

At what point do you draw a line in the sand? When they use chemical weapons another once, twice on civilians and children?

If they do nothing it gives the Russians and Assad a green light to do it again.

You don’t think Assad will think about the consequences before doing it again? Wouldn’t this potentially save lives in future?
[/quote


It's tragic and it's a difficult decision certainly but a minority government (henceforth the regime) who lost power last year in an election and then bought power back by giving money to fanatical religious extremists, has then attacked a sovereign nation that is allied to Russia without consulting parliament. That's a big deal, Woodsey and Mantis probably still think Corbyn is the news. :-)

The same thing happened last year when it was less clear what a failing disgrace their own government was, she did nothing then.

This was a serious quote fail, sorry chaps.

[kukushkin88]

I guess I thought the UN Charter was enshrined in law, I might be wrong. Still a big shout for the regime to do this, they will be terrified if they hit anything Russian.

At what point do you draw a line in the sand? When they use chemical weapons another once, twice on civilians and children?

If they do nothing it gives the Russians and Assad a green light to do it again.

You don’t think Assad will think about the consequences before doing it again? Wouldn’t this potentially save lives in future?

I meant to apologise for not answering more directly before, two weeks back. I'll try now. Chemical attacks are emotive but he will kill his enemies by a variety of means. Chemical weapons are a small part of the mass murder in Syria.

We all agree that it's tragic when children are killed but let's keep perspective, the so called 'austerity' in the UK kills children as well.

[Woodsey]

I guess I thought the UN Charter was enshrined in law, I might be wrong. Still a big shout for the regime to do this, they will be terrified if they hit anything Russian.

At what point do you draw a line in the sand? When they use chemical weapons another once, twice on civilians and children?

If they do nothing it gives the Russians and Assad a green light to do it again.

You don’t think Assad will think about the consequences before doing it again? Wouldn’t this potentially save lives in future?

I meant to apologise for not answering more directly before, two weeks back. I'll try now. Chemical attacks are emotive but he will kill his enemies by a variety of means. Chemical weapons are a small part of the mass murder in Syria.

We all agree that it's tragic when children are killed but let's keep perspective, the so called 'austerity' in the UK kills children as well.

I’ve got no idea how you can even compare a war that’s killed hundreds of thousands with austerity, sounds like you are just desperate to score political points.

[nirvana]

I don't think you can say that attacks like these are ineffective unless you set a very high bar for measuring effectiveness. The rhetoric prior to the attacks makes me not want them to happen (Trump and Macron especially) but I can't say it bothers me overly - on balance, I think it's more likely that it makes Russia/Syria think twice about their actions rather than serve to escalate things. I guess you pay your money and take your choice on this one.

Not really sure why we go mental based on Chemical weapon use but seem indifferent to the many other ways people are being slaughtered in Syria.

[Woodsey]

I don't think you can say that attacks like these are ineffective unless you set a very high bar for measuring effectiveness. The rhetoric prior to the attacks makes me not want them to happen (Trump and Macron especially) but I can't say it bothers me overly - on balance, I think it's more likely that it makes Russia/Syria think twice about their actions rather than serve to escalate things. I guess you pay your money and take your choice on this one.

Not really sure why we go mental based on Chemical weapon use but seem indifferent to the many other ways people are being slaughtered in Syria.

I wonder that also......

[kukushkin88]

I don't think you can say that attacks like these are ineffective unless you set a very high bar for measuring effectiveness. The rhetoric prior to the attacks makes me not want them to happen (Trump and Macron especially) but I can't say it bothers me overly - on balance, I think it's more likely that it makes Russia/Syria think twice about their actions rather than serve to escalate things. I guess you pay your money and take your choice on this one.

Not really sure why we go mental based on Chemical weapon use but seem indifferent to the many other ways people are being slaughtered in Syria.

I wonder that also......

I think it's because it makes political capital.

[kukushkin88]

I guess I thought the UN Charter was enshrined in law, I might be wrong. Still a big shout for the regime to do this, they will be terrified if they hit anything Russian.

At what point do you draw a line in the sand? When they use chemical weapons another once, twice on civilians and children?

If they do nothing it gives the Russians and Assad a green light to do it again.

You don’t think Assad will think about the consequences before doing it again? Wouldn’t this potentially save lives in future?

I meant to apologise for not answering more directly before, two weeks back. I'll try now. Chemical attacks are emotive but he will kill his enemies by a variety of means. Chemical weapons are a small part of the mass murder in Syria.

We all agree that it's tragic when children are killed but let's keep perspective, the so called 'austerity' in the UK kills children as well.

I’ve got no idea how you can even compare a war that’s killed hundreds of thousands with austerity, sounds like you are just desperate to score political points.

So, Syrian civil war estimated deaths 450,000, austerity estimated deaths, 120,000. They are comparable numbers, one of our countries isn't at war, until today.

[rfgqqabc]

I don't think you can say that attacks like these are ineffective unless you set a very high bar for measuring effectiveness. The rhetoric prior to the attacks makes me not want them to happen (Trump and Macron especially) but I can't say it bothers me overly - on balance, I think it's more likely that it makes Russia/Syria think twice about their actions rather than serve to escalate things. I guess you pay your money and take your choice on this one.

Not really sure why we go mental based on Chemical weapon use but seem indifferent to the many other ways people are being slaughtered in Syria.

I guess the attacks last year stopped Assad for 9 months. But 9 months isn't that long if the goal is to stop something.

[Woodsey]

I guess I thought the UN Charter was enshrined in law, I might be wrong. Still a big shout for the regime to do this, they will be terrified if they hit anything Russian.

At what point do you draw a line in the sand? When they use chemical weapons another once, twice on civilians and children?

If they do nothing it gives the Russians and Assad a green light to do it again.

You don’t think Assad will think about the consequences before doing it again? Wouldn’t this potentially save lives in future?

I meant to apologise for not answering more directly before, two weeks back. I'll try now. Chemical attacks are emotive but he will kill his enemies by a variety of means. Chemical weapons are a small part of the mass murder in Syria.

We all agree that it's tragic when children are killed but let's keep perspective, the so called 'austerity' in the UK kills children as well.

I’ve got no idea how you can even compare a war that’s killed hundreds of thousands with austerity, sounds like you are just desperate to score political points.

So, Syrian civil war estimated deaths 450,000, austerity estimated deaths, 120,000. They are comparable numbers, one of our countries isn't at war, until today.

Ok Dr Googlestein, maybe you should read the other research out there questioning those numbers and what the range of possible causes may be rather than just posting numbers that suit you from google. You never know it might help you have a more rounded opinion on stuff like this rather than trying to make a ludicrous comparison of a disastrous war with govt spending. Also the jury is also out whether labour would have done a better done given the terrible financial position labour left the Tories to deal with.

[kukushkin88]

I guess I thought the UN Charter was enshrined in law, I might be wrong. Still a big shout for the regime to do this, they will be terrified if they hit anything Russian.

At what point do you draw a line in the sand? When they use chemical weapons another once, twice on civilians and children?

If they do nothing it gives the Russians and Assad a green light to do it again.

You don’t think Assad will think about the consequences before doing it again? Wouldn’t this potentially save lives in future?

I meant to apologise for not answering more directly before, two weeks back. I'll try now. Chemical attacks are emotive but he will kill his enemies by a variety of means. Chemical weapons are a small part of the mass murder in Syria.

We all agree that it's tragic when children are killed but let's keep perspective, the so called 'austerity' in the UK kills children as well.

I’ve got no idea how you can even compare a war that’s killed hundreds of thousands with austerity, sounds like you are just desperate to score political points.

So, Syrian civil war estimated deaths 450,000, austerity estimated deaths, 120,000. They are comparable numbers, one of our countries isn't at war, until today.

Ok Dr Googlestein, maybe you should read the other research out there questioning those numbers and what the range of possible causes may be rather than just posting numbers that suit you from google. You never know it might help you have a more rounded opinion on stuff like this rather than trying to compare a ludicrous comparison of disastrous war with govt spending. The jury is also out whether labour would have done a better done given the terrible financial position labour left the Tories to deal with.

So New Labour caused a global financial crisis? Are you serious? I can never tell. It's almost like the infamous jokey note left in the treasury caused so much confusion in the new government they were looking around for money and couldn't find any.

The regime since May took over has, lost power, bought power from religious nutters and worked continually against the interests of its own people to assist the wealthy. Your pension did a little worse under New Labour because they didn't want to run the NHS in to the ground. Are you really saying that running the NHS in to the ground so your pension grows a bit is good? Austerity killed more people than chemical weapons, just so people with plenty could have a little more.

[RickBFA]

I guess I thought the UN Charter was enshrined in law, I might be wrong. Still a big shout for the regime to do this, they will be terrified if they hit anything Russian.

At what point do you draw a line in the sand? When they use chemical weapons another once, twice on civilians and children?

If they do nothing it gives the Russians and Assad a green light to do it again.

You don’t think Assad will think about the consequences before doing it again? Wouldn’t this potentially save lives in future?

I meant to apologise for not answering more directly before, two weeks back. I'll try now. Chemical attacks are emotive but he will kill his enemies by a variety of means. Chemical weapons are a small part of the mass murder in Syria.

We all agree that it's tragic when children are killed but let's keep perspective, the so called 'austerity' in the UK kills children as well.

I’ve got no idea how you can even compare a war that’s killed hundreds of thousands with austerity, sounds like you are just desperate to score political points.

So, Syrian civil war estimated deaths 450,000, austerity estimated deaths, 120,000. They are comparable numbers, one of our countries isn't at war, until today.

Ok Dr Googlestein, maybe you should read the other research out there questioning those numbers and what the range of possible causes may be rather than just posting numbers that suit you from google. You never know it might help you have a more rounded opinion on stuff like this rather than trying to compare a ludicrous comparison of disastrous war with govt spending. The jury is also out whether labour would have done a better done given the terrible financial position labour left the Tories to deal with.

So New Labour caused a global financial crisis? Are you serious? I can never tell. It's almost like the infamous jokey note left in the treasury caused so much confusion in the new government they were looking around for money and couldn't find any.

The regime since May took over has, lost power, bought power from religious nutters and worked continually against the interests of its own people to assist the wealthy. Your pension did a little worse under New Labour because they didn't want to run the NHS in to the ground. Are you really saying that running the NHS in to the ground so your pension grows a bit is good? Austerity killed more people than chemical weapons, just so people with plenty could have a little more.

I’m trying to find the right words here.

It is just a crazy view to compare deliberate chemical warfare to a legitimate economic policy in a democracy.

It’s difficult to take you seriously when you post in this manner.

[kukushkin88]

It's complicated for sure. Look at what Cameron inherited and what Assad inherited. They both fucked up big. A country in civil war is brutal and that's tragic, our country didn't need to be. Children in the UK with malnutrition suffer pretty hard as well, even compared with chemical attack victims. I guess I don't mind how seriously you take me but it's good if any additional people are aware how terrible our government is.

[kukushkin88]

To be clear, the two things are entirely separate, they have a government that kills its own people, we have a government that kills its own people. Interesting you mention democracy, they bought the DUP. How democratic do you think that is?

[RickBFA]

I’d stop posting before you make a bigger fool of yourself than you already are.

It’s bang out of order to compare legitimate economic policy to chemical warfare.

You are posting emotional, ridiculous nonsense. Your desire to find any angle to attack the Tories is just pathetic, but this is the worst effort from you by a long way.

You come across as a bitter and twisted clown.