• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

Should the UK join the US in an attack on Syria?

Should the UK join the US in an attack on Syria? NOT Boots on the ground.

  • On reflection - yes. CW are vile and their use cannot go unpunished.

    Votes: 67 35.1%
  • On reflection - no. None of our business, not in our AOR.

    Votes: 124 64.9%

  • Total voters
    191
  • Poll closed .
I thought we were going to get caught eventually, we should never have infected those Skripals and attempting to cover it up by the helicopter bombing of Douma. We’d have gotten away with it if it wasn’t for those pesky Russians.
You shouldn't say things like that. There are certain pillocks who post on here who will believe it.
 
Do we trust Robert Fisk ?
Some do, some don't. He thinks its 'rubble dust' and the OPCW FFM will say whether he's talking out of his Arrse or not.
 
You know who he works for but you appear to think that it's a massive revelation- that's why you've repeated the same thing 3/4 times since Fisk's story came out..
Did you ever think that Two-Beards (and dad) took him on knowing that he wasn't going to be another Kay 'Smug' Burley?
The other owner is a Saudi Saudi investor buys significant stake in the Independent
The others in that phot all used to work for the man till recent times though.
 
Pigeon shouting?
You know who he works for but you appear to think that it's a massive revelation- that's why you've repeated the same thing 3/4 times since Fisk's story came out..
Did you ever think that Two-Beards (and dad) took him on knowing that he wasn't going to be another Kay 'Smug' Burley?
The other owner is a Saudi Saudi investor buys significant stake in the Independent
The others in that phot all used to work for the man till recent times though.
I don’t believe any of them are part of OPCW, let alone the OPCW FFM still trying to get access over a week later to Douma. When they are, let me know.
 
If you disagree with the author then propose your counter-argumants
Here Are All the Reasons Striking Syria Was a Bad Idea
The air and missile strikes that the United States and its British and French allies launched against Syrian government targets are reprehensible for so many reasons.
First, Washington’s action is a flagrant violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Second, there is not even certainty that Bashar al-Assad’s government was the guilty party for the chemical attack
Third, by degrading the Syrian government’s military assets with the latest attacks, the West risks enabling the largely Islamist rebel coalition to snatch victory
Fourth, the airstrikes needlessly create new tensions in Washington’s already abrasive relationship with Russia.
Worst of all is the sanctimonious hypocrisy of the Western powers regarding their justifications for the air strikes.
The United States has never had a problem supporting rogue states, brutal tyrants and murderous dictators. Washington’s alliances with such regimes, including the Shah of Iran, Nicaragua’s Somoza family, a succession of genocidal generals in Guatemala, Zaire’s Mobutu Sese Seko, Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and the Saudi royal family (among others) provide ample evidence of chronic moral insensitivity.
The Saudis and their allies have used the weapons sold to them by the United States and other Western governments to slaughter innocent Yemeni civilians by the thousands, including cluster munitions
 
If you disagree with the author then propose your counter-argumants
Here Are All the Reasons Striking Syria Was a Bad Idea
Do you agree with everything the Cato Institute stands for? No? Okay..........
Cato Institute - Wikipedia

1. Dunno. Is he a constitutional lawyer?
2. OPCW FFM on the ground, still can't get on the site nearly two weeks later. No mechanism to apportion blame anyway as Russia vetoed it four times.
3. How can degrading something he (says he) doesn't have affect his 'winning' the seven year civil war?
4. What happened a year ago?
5. Sure. Tell me about the four confirmed uses of CW by the now vetoed JIM?
6. Pot DE Kettle ZBZ 5 K
7. When has KSA used CW?

What's your thoughts on this? Timeline of Syrian Chemical Weapons Activity, 2012-2018 | Arms Control Association
 
How Trump's favorite, FOX, is being able to remain sceptical is a surprising eventuality.
Everyone is aware of the fact that Trump has FOX on as his news-option and takes notice of what they say.
Donald Trump is treating Fox News like it’s state TV.

'...What questions should we be asking, what questions should we be allowed to ask without beiing attacked as foreign agents?....' Sound familiar?


FOX again.
Watch from ...'If the presidents of the UK and France' @ 04:45 when they say that bombing Syria would be a good deflection from James Comey's book.
They know he watches the prog avidly.
Watch Geraldo's face after she asks the question that he avoids answering.

 
Do some reasearch before posting.

Even though 'The Overton Window' (*research*) has moved a lot since 2001 does the American president have the legal right to order a military strike on another country without the consent of Congress?
The simple answer is no, as Congress is charged with officially declaring war under the US Constitution.

Trump is in breach of US law too:
To be legal, the strike would have to be authorized either by some act of Congress or by the president’s own powers under Article II of the Constitution. And neither of those conditions appears to have been met.

We’re now in a situation in which consecutive presidents are unconstitutionally engaging in acts of war without congressional approval, and it continues because Congress lacks the institutional will to do its job.
Congress is acquiescing because they’re satisfied with the practical results. But from a separation of powers perspective, that’s very dangerous. Congress has a vital role to play in the operation of the American government, and it’s not playing it.
Was Trump’s Syria bombing illegal?

Ditto for these two monkeys.
'Emmanuel Macron and Theresa May were put in the crosshairs by their own parliaments Monday for failing to secure a UN mandate – or even a parliamentary debate – before ordering missile strikes against Syria. '
Macron, May get earful from MPs after Syria strikes bypass French, British Parliaments

Will anything happen to these three monkeys? No
Will they do it again? Yes
 
@Goldbricker, I know it's SOP but it's also bad form just to ignore conflicting yet accurate information that you find inconvenient and BC it without a recourse as 'why' you think it's dumb.
You are just like @Bench who also employs the same tactic..
No (intelligent) posts just BCs with no counter-arguments provided.
Are you and he Russian bots or something?
I couldn't care about ratings as you may tell by looking at my stats but you're being ignorant and are still just shooting the messenger eather than addressing the message at hand.
So why do you think that Trump acted within the Constitution?
Provide links to corroborate your thought process and determinations- they usually help.
 
Do some reasearch before posting.

Even though 'The Overton Window' (*research*) has moved a lot since 2001 does the American president have the legal right to order a military strike on another country without the consent of Congress?
The simple answer is no, as Congress is charged with officially declaring war under the US Constitution.

Trump is in breach of US law too:
To be legal, the strike would have to be authorized either by some act of Congress or by the president’s own powers under Article II of the Constitution. And neither of those conditions appears to have been met.

We’re now in a situation in which consecutive presidents are unconstitutionally engaging in acts of war without congressional approval, and it continues because Congress lacks the institutional will to do its job.
Congress is acquiescing because they’re satisfied with the practical results. But from a separation of powers perspective, that’s very dangerous. Congress has a vital role to play in the operation of the American government, and it’s not playing it.
Was Trump’s Syria bombing illegal?

Ditto for these two monkeys.
'Emmanuel Macron and Theresa May were put in the crosshairs by their own parliaments Monday for failing to secure a UN mandate – or even a parliamentary debate – before ordering missile strikes against Syria. '
Macron, May get earful from MPs after Syria strikes bypass French, British Parliaments

Will anything happen to these three monkeys? No
Will they do it again? Yes
Surely all of those legal challenges to the President’s authority should be taken note of. Where are they?
 
@Goldbricker, I know it's SOP but it's also bad form just to ignore conflicting yet accurate information that you find inconvenient and BC it without a recourse as 'why' you think it's dumb.
You are just like @Bench who also employs the same tactic..
No (intelligent) posts just BCs with no counter-arguments provided.
Are you and he Russian bots or something?
I couldn't care about ratings as you may tell by looking at my stats but you're being ignorant and are still just shooting the messenger eather than addressing the message at hand.
So why do you think that Trump acted within the Constitution?
Provide links to corroborate your thought process and determinations- they usually help.
You don’t care about ratings by mentioning them? Nice. How’s that going?
 

Top