Syria: will the West attack?
- This topic has 366 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
This situation is extremely worrying. It could very quickly flare up into a major conflict. Perhaps some kind of statement should be prepared by the Media committee. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/russia-vows-to-shoot-down-us-rockets-with-its-lethal-anti-aircraft-missiles-deadly-s-400-ring-of-steel-protects-assad-as-moscow-accuses-trump-of-trying-to-cover-up-faked-gas-attack/ar-AAvL96I?ocid=spartandhp
A LibDem puts the case against bombing Syria:https://www.libdemvoice.org/taking-action-against-syria-is-not-liberal-interventionism-57182.htmlMeanwhile some Labour MPs, including its Deputy Leader no less, are clamouring for Syria to be bombed:https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/labours-tom-watson-backs-missile-12859462
An opinion poll says most people in Britain are against it:https://www.thecanary.co/global/world-news/2018/04/12/breaking-theresa-mays-plan-to-bomb-syria-just-hit-some-serious-turbulence/
Quote:By almost two to one, British people oppose bombing Syria, according to a survey by YouGov released on 12 April.But when has that made much difference to a government bent on war?Footnote: even the Ludwig von Mises Institute is against it:https://mises.org/wire/against-war-syria
ALB wrote:An opinion poll says most people in Britain are against it:https://www.thecanary.co/global/world-news/2018/04/12/breaking-theresa-mays-plan-to-bomb-syria-just-hit-some-serious-turbulence/Quote:By almost two to one, British people oppose bombing Syria, according to a survey by YouGov released on 12 April.But when has that made much difference to a government bent on war?Footnote: even the Ludwig von Mises Institute is against it:https://mises.org/wire/against-war-syria
In the USA is 36%http://news.gallup.com/poll/164282/support-syria-action-lower-past-conflicts.aspxBefore the invasion of Iraq millions of peoples went to the street to protest and it did not make any difference, and the anti-war movement died
ALB wrote:An opinion poll says most people in Britain are against it:https://www.thecanary.co/global/world-news/2018/04/12/breaking-theresa-mays-plan-to-bomb-syria-just-hit-some-serious-turbulence/Quote:By almost two to one, British people oppose bombing Syria, according to a survey by YouGov released on 12 April.But when has that made much difference to a government bent on war?Footnote: even the Ludwig von Mises Institute is against it:https://mises.org/wire/against-war-syria
Many leftist groups are supporting Russia as the liberator of the Syrian peoiples. They have not learned their own lessons from prior wars among capitalists powers. The correct stand is not to take side with any capitalist power, rulers or leaders, but as always they are raising the flag of anti-imperialism and national liberation
Marcos wrote:ALB wrote:An opinion poll says most people in Britain are against it:https://www.thecanary.co/global/world-news/2018/04/12/breaking-theresa-mays-plan-to-bomb-syria-just-hit-some-serious-turbulence/Quote:By almost two to one, British people oppose bombing Syria, according to a survey by YouGov released on 12 April.But when has that made much difference to a government bent on war?Footnote: even the Ludwig von Mises Institute is against it:https://mises.org/wire/against-war-syria
In the USA is 36%http://news.gallup.com/poll/164282/support-syria-action-lower-past-conflicts.aspx
That poll was conducted in September 2013.
gnome wrote:Marcos wrote:ALB wrote:An opinion poll says most people in Britain are against it:https://www.thecanary.co/global/world-news/2018/04/12/breaking-theresa-mays-plan-to-bomb-syria-just-hit-some-serious-turbulence/Quote:By almost two to one, British people oppose bombing Syria, according to a survey by YouGov released on 12 April.But when has that made much difference to a government bent on war?Footnote: even the Ludwig von Mises Institute is against it:https://mises.org/wire/against-war-syria
In the USA is 36%http://news.gallup.com/poll/164282/support-syria-action-lower-past-conflicts.aspx
That poll was conducted in September 2013.
You are right I posted the wrong one, it should have been this one:http://news.gallup.com/poll/208334/support-syria-strikes-rates-low-historical-context.aspx
Interesting take on the situation by a former Sea Lord:http://talkradio.co.uk/news/former-naval-chief-syria-chemical-attack-could-be-propaganda-18041325517After Russia's cock and bull stories about the Salisbury incident now it's NATO's turn to come up with one about the Douma incident:https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/12/syria-attack-experts-check-signs-nerve-agentSecret agents smuggling bodies through enemy lines and over the border to be examined by doctors in Jordan. They'll have to do better than that in their bid to show that a nerve gas as well as chlorine was involved.
Bakground information:https://in.reuters.com/article/mideast-crisis-syria-chemicalweapons/factbox-chemical-weapons-inspectors-how-do-they-work-idINKBN1HK17A?rpc=401&Let's see what they come up with.
ALB wrote:After Russia's cock and bull stories about the Salisbury incident….Quote:Allegations over chemical and biological weapons have a troubling history. Both accuser and accused have misled in the past.In the ‘80s, for instance, President Reagan’s administration repeatedly accused the Soviet Union of supplying Vietnam with a biological weapon called Yellow Rain. But the scientific analysis proved to be staggeringly wrong: the mysterious substance was, in fact, just bee excrement.And, of course, the intelligence about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction in 2003 also turned out to be wrong.So, with the Salisbury incident, investigators will need to ensure the evidence is watertight.https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/long-read-does-the-uks-case-against-russia-stack-up
The point I was making was that both sides are claiming to have "proof" or "irrefutable data" as to what happened which are directly contradictory. We can't make a judgement as who is right unless they produce the evidence for it to be examined:https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/04/13/after-france-claims-proof-chemical-attack-was-assad-russia-says-irrefutable-data
ALB wrote:The point I was making was that both sides are claiming to have "proof" or "irrefutable data" as to what happened which are directly contradictory. We can't make a judgement as who is right unless they produce the evidence for it to be examined:https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/04/13/after-france-claims-proof-chemical-attack-was-assad-russia-says-irrefutable-dataI agree but singling out "Russia's cock and bull stories" implied acceptance of the British state's version of 'proof' as to what happened, a dubious position echoed by this month's Socialist Standard.http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2018/no-1364-april-2018/pathfinders-capitalism%E2%80%99s-bond-villains
No it doesn't. It just means that one of the Russian suggestions — that it was Porton Down what done it — seemed a bit of a cock and bull story. This doesn't mean that the British state's explanation — that it was the Russian government what done it — is true. The government itself originally suggested an alternative — that it was some rogue element that got the stuff from the old Soviet Union.Meanwhie the Russian government has produced some evidence for its claim about what happened in Douma:
Quote:Konashenkov released statements by medics from Douma's hospital, who said a group of people toting video cameras entered the hospital, shouting that its patients were struck with chemical weapons, dousing them with water and causing panic. The medics, however, said none of the patients had any symptoms of chemical poisoning, according to the satements. (http://abc7ny.com/politics/russia-claims-syira-chemical-attack-was-staged-by-uk/3337376/)This would only be evidence only that the videos were staged but not that the British Secret Services were behind it. But no doubt the OPCW will see the statements and interview the doctors and hospital staff who made them and come to some conclusion about them.
gnome wrote:ALB wrote:The point I was making was that both sides are claiming to have "proof" or "irrefutable data" as to what happened which are directly contradictory. We can't make a judgement as who is right unless they produce the evidence for it to be examined:https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/04/13/after-france-claims-proof-chemical-attack-was-assad-russia-says-irrefutable-dataI agree but singling out "Russia's cock and bull stories" implied acceptance of the British state's version of 'proof' as to what happened, a dubious position echoed by this month's Socialist Standard.http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2018/no-1364-april-2018/pathfinders-capitalism%E2%80%99s-bond-villains
That is just another CIA staged incident. They are experts in that type of situation, How many times have they denied their own criminal actions in different parts of the world? They denied the use of Orange in Vietnam, they have done so many criminal acts in Latin America that an Encylopedia would be needed to write everything down, and they have denied them,The USA ruling class is losing its hegemony around the globe and they will do anything to stay on top, but they can no longer kick butts like they were able to do after WWII, it is an empire in retreat, and it is practically de-industrialized and bankruptHis mercenaries and terrorists were defeated in Syria, and they have been defeated in Afganistan like they were defeated in Vietnam, and some small countries are defying them and rejecting their economic pressures. Gangsterism is not working any longerChina is moving up in the scale in technology and they can not stop that, and China is expanding their tentacles in many countries around the world, they are doing what the Soviet Union was not able to do, and Russia is doing certain events that they were not able to do during the times of the Soviet Union like doing military exercises in the Caribbean region in conjunction with others countries
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.