Procrastination on Syria
 

Well, seems like the world is still content to sit on their arses as Assad continues to murder his people.

Confirmation now that civilians and children are being deliberately targetted. This tagged onto the reports that children are being kidnapped; interrogated; tortured and having their throats cut and testicles chopped off...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18221461

Sick sick times.

On a bedroom floor dozens of little children lie dead, their arms and legs strewn over one another. Many of their eyes are still open, bearing a look of shock and fright. They are all covered with blood and obviously suffered terrible deaths.

A girl, who is perhaps seven years old, wearing a headscarf and pink diamante belt, lies face to face in death with a much younger boy.

Another little boy in a yellow jumper lies with his arms stretched out, almost cradling the head of the girl next to him. Blood covers both their faces and soaks their hair.

Trouble is he has now backed himself up against a wall, he has nowhere to run, so has to now play the hand he has... justice one hopes will catch up to him and his cronies, and when they are brought to justice, what happens, nothing compared to what they have carried out to keep themselves in power, myself I would drop them off in the centre of the town the kids came from, justice would truly be served. Words fail me how people can do this to each other.

Sadly the truth is the world would never have even bothered with the likes of Libya either if it wasn't for a three lettered word... OIL

His cronies including our former PM Bliar too!!

Murder of innocents/children is, officially at least, as abhorrent to Muslims as it is to the rest of us. They object violently to us involving ourselves in their affairs, as we object to interference in ours. Without oil and not being a major breeding ground for terrorists, Syria has no legitimate interest to us. Morally without doubt, but not under International Law. Read the ICJ terms. The most we can do is try to get them kicked out of the UN, which will fail by Veto.

Assad's dad killed even more 20 odd years ago; we did nothing. Goodbye moral high ground.

Invading Iraq blew The West's legitimacy*, probably for the next 30 years, Thanks George and Tony.

It also killed between 100,000 and 1,000,000 civilians. Our own Lancet puts the war and knock-on violence civilian deaths at over 600,000. Assad has killed around 15,000 by most estimates. "We didn't mean to" doesn't justify 40 times as many violent deaths by us being 'OK'.

The other Arab / Muslim nations have easily enough Armed Forces to depose Assad. They choose not to. End of.

Sorry to be blunt. I don't like it any more than you, but that's the size of it.


* The UN Secretary General said it was illegal in Sep 2004.

Not to mention Fallujah (when the yanks went ape), numerous forays into Gaza (IDF), and Janin (while the world was distracted by the WTC same day) - oh, and just who is doing these acts becomes even more disgusting when the possibility of proxy groups is considered (eg MEK trained by Mossad in Iran).
It's a dirty business - we should not rush headlong in the direction we are being pointed without getting the whole picture - oh that we had a good intelligence service that was acting purely in the interests of the British people.

Just bear in mind that if the West does anything and the UK decides to conduct a NEO, President Assad and his wife are eligible for extraction by UK forces thanks to his wife being a British citizen of Syrian origin.

Funny old game this international politics isn't it.

In light if recent events could we not just withdraw her citizenship? Or put a warrant out for her arrest if she re enters the UK?

William Hague will make a strongly worded speech ( removing his baseball cap first)

During the run up and early days of the Libyan business last year, Gadaffi and his mob were formally accused by the ICJ. Why in the light of evidence has this not yet been proposed by any of our huffing and puffing politicians. Something inexcusable seems to be preventing anyone in the West from even suggesting this should happen.:ugh:

Removing Assad and stabilising Syria would certainly be a cause I'd be more than willing to sign back up for. I know life is not as simple as this. But in my relatively short time on this planet I have seen the international community fail too many ordinary people, too often.

Bosnia was a cluster for the first 5 years.
Rwanda wasn't even entertained.
Sierra Leone only became palatable once we cut deals for diamond mining.
Somalia was, politically at least, a half-hearted attempt.

It seems Syria will be added to that list also. It makes me feel physically ill when I contemplate the suffering of these children and their families; suffering which we seem powerless or unwilling to bring to an end.

That'll really get Assad worried..........

If we attempt military action (wiser heads should prevent this happening) will we get any credit or gratitude from the suffering peoples once regime change has happened? I thought not. It could well be a case of 'out of the frying pan and into the fire'. Who will be running the show and calling the shots? Any money on the Muslim Brotherhood?

I'd like to know just what everyone thinks we (the British Military) could actually do?

We are completely fixed by Afghanistan not to mention the ridiculous commitment to a certain over-hyped sports day coming up imminently. The cupboard is absolutely empty folks and we would probably get our arses kicked anyhow.

Believe me, unfortunately I know.

As appauling and horrific the situation most certainly is, the terrible truth is that all assets are severely stretched to say the least. The sad fact is, we are in no condition to get involved in yet another Middle Eastern conflict.

Despite the shortfalls of personell and equipment I have no doubt that if asked to go, the boys and girls would step up to the plate and serve with the courage and distinction that we have all come to expect of them.

But would it serve the greater good, or just make the situation even worse? (and yes, unfortunately, it could get alot worse).

Why doesn't Saudi sort it out with all that lovely military hardware we've supplied them? Or is it already being used in Bahrain??..

Of course, Uncle Sam can't get involved because the Israelis actually support Assad. Its a funny old world.

Probably because it may require some effort. Or I guess they could get their expats to do it for them :E

Really? I'm not even sure without checking that they have managed to establish diplomatic relations between the 2 countries.

If memory serves, the Israelis launched their strike against the nascent Syrian nuclear capability in about 2008ish and before that, in the Lebanon - Israeli war, Syria threatened to get involved in support of Hezbollah. Plus, Syria is probably Iran's only realy ally in the region, so all in all, hardly a recipe for a beautiful friendship.

You might find that Israel would be prepared to accept a small number of genuine refugees in a controlled manner - far better that than struggling to cope with an influx of all sorts across the borders. But I hardly think that managing a situation equates to supporting them.

I am afraid I agree 100% with Fox3. Also, I don't suppose too large a section of our citizens give a flying ---- as long as the price of petrol doesn't go up any more and the telly keeps working.

Procrastination?
 

More like inability.

Without US involvement, anything but the most basic military involvement is simply not possible. The US, of the Obama or Romney flavour, is highly unlikely to get involved in any "nation building" or "regime change" ever again. To understand the reasons why you only need to read some of the hysterical posts on this thread.

Put simply, if you wish to make to make an omelette, you have to break eggs. The prevailing voices all wish to eat the omelette, but scream at the prospect of eggs being broken. They scream at the chefs for breaking civilian eggs, when you cannot differentiate between military and civilian eggs. Scream at the cost of the eggs. Scream that the chef has been motivated by payments from JP Morgan, Oil Companies, revenge the threat to the chef's father and other such unsubstantiated nonsense. Can you be surprised when the chef says, "make your own fecking omelette"?

Perhaps, Russia and China will demonstrate how to effect "regime change" without the death of civilians. I look forward to that.

Pontifex is right about gas and TV's. Apposite for a Roman pseudonym to be commenting on Bread and Circuses.:ok:
Whilst delayed at Miami Airport in March 2003, I had time to note that day's 'Miami Herald' had twice the column inches on the effect on the price of gas of the Invasion of Iraq as it did on the war itself.


Every society gets the democracy it deserves.

daedpan
<<Why doesn't Saudi sort it out with all that lovely military hardware we've supplied them? Or is it already being used in Bahrain??..>>
Good point - what's going on in Bahrain is real bad - but the main media doesn't make so much of it like it does for Syria.

Russians quite bluntly out it that there is no evidence that the women and children shot in the head were done so by Syrian armed forces, not like irregualars aided and supplied with personnel from Sunni govts would cause mayhem..................oh wait there was Iraq wasn't there where Saudi's supplied them.

Procrastination?

Why the assumption that "somebody, [perhaps us, or U.S. or whatever], should do something".

Yes it is dreadful but surely its an Arab problem ......... any outside intervention is resented for ever.

I think Hague is doing exactly the right thing, by attempting to lean on Russia. Any suggestion that we should do more risks lives, treasure and would create further enmity.

I hope the regime is toppled but would have little expectation for their successors to be much better. That's the way of the Arab world.

And sod the moral high ground, more like shifting sands.

melchett - sorry, 'support' may have been too strong a word. They have been somewhat circumspect in supporting opposition movements in neighbouring countries. It seems they prefer to have hard men in power in these countries to keep their populations in check and stick to the various peace deals.

It always amazes me why all these Muslim radicals don't leap on a plane and fly off to the likes of Syria to fight the real oppressors of their kin, rather than continuing to rage against the West. Is there such a thing as a champagne fundamentalist?

Fox3. The phrase "bread and circusses" has repeatedly crossed my mind in the past few weeks but in relation to the Olympic circus and the euro debacle.

I don't believe they will get social security in Syria...

Bit like martyrdom, if it was so good and the Virgins so inviting, how comes their leadership are not champing at the bit to go first.

As much as what is occuring in Syria is shocking to say the least, maybe some of them, especially the women see what happened in Eygpt and
decided that maybe it wasn't so bad under the old regime.

Women in general seem to be better off under the old regimes.
After all, how can Radical Muslim's claim that passing laws
about sex with dead wives being legal really improves the situation ??????

Arab Spring turns into Spring nightmare.

Not sure who had the guns in this latest item to catch international attention, but NPR (Public Broadcasting in the USA) cited UN observers as attributing the massacre to "rogue militia" rather than regular forces.

Not that it matters all that much, but someone on the ground seems to be able to parse "sides" in this matter.

'Hard men' who do what we want. Hmmm.....

It's not just a case of not wanting to be 'involved'. The local hard men are actually better at it than we are. Western Government thinking appears to be...

Worst case - No government. Tribal Areas as a terrorist base. Somali piracy, etc

Middle worst - we kill 600,000 civilians in 24 months; Iraq.

Best Worst - Saddam kills 600,000 in 24 years. But 500,000 of those were volunteers in a war we supported. There were Iraqis going through Valley at the same time as me.

But do we approve of the Pakistanis imposing Government on Tribal Areas that basically don't want it? Self-Determination is just about the fundamental principal of international politics; or should we hand the Falklands back?

I have no quick answers, but current thinking seems to make Best Worst progress steadily to Worst.

Ultimately, we need to be a bit more honest. Then we can start asking our politicians to do the same.

Fox, is there any reason that the Pashtun should not get their own homeland, as the Bosniacs and Croations did with massive international assistance?
How about the Kurds? I note that some years back some Jewish folk got together and made one, also with considerable international assistance. How about the Slovenes? They get to have their own homeland. Why not the Basques, who'd maybe like some self determination? Why not the Pashtun?

Who makes these decisions?

I believe we should be told.

Trouble is, you just can't rely on the 'good old' BBC any more.........

Torygraph: Syrian army 'using children as human shields'

Syrian troops are using children as young as nine-years-old as human shields, forcing them to ride on top of government tanks to deter opposition attacks, the UN has stated.

:suspect::suspect:

It just proves again that the UN has double standards,
showing great concern about Syria and Syrian children
but not quite as much concern or action over African
war lords and children abducted to fight.

Yes, double standards indeed, but at least they're being even handed by doing absolutely nothing worthwhile about either situation.

And they visited the country NOT but relied on a few claims...............funny how this was also claimed in Libya.

500N, I think I've seen more than one comminuque from the UN about Child Soldiers since the 90's ... not all stories, and not all utterances, can cover all topics.

Security Council Tightens Sanctions Regime on Somalia, Eritrea, Extending Mandate of Monitoring Group for 12 Months

One example.

See also UNSC resolution 1261 of the year 1999, seen here in .pdf format.
http://www.undemocracy.com/S-RES-1261(1999).pdf

If you be interested, you can also look into UNSCR 1314.

That said, Courtney seems to be right about what is and can be done about that state of affairs: beyond a harshly worded letter, mostly BFA.

Quite. Truly appalling, but quite.

Human shields - Geneva conventions.

It appears the UN believes it is far more important for governments to sign up for things than it is for governments to stick to them.

Euro - expenditure rules

etc.

When was the last time a government actually got chucked out of something for breaking the conditions?

The UN is going the way of the League of Nations, and we all know where that lead.

Lonewolf - I don't have the answers, but I'm reaching the point where I'm going to declare my own homeland.

Fox3

Agree to an extent "It appears the UN believes it is far more important for governments to sign up for things than it is for governments to stick to them."


One thing they do seem to push Gov'ts to stick to and implement is working against civilian ownership of guns as part of the trade in small arms push.

Totalitarian regimes pushed to restrict civilian gun ownership...

might as well push children to eat ice cream on hot days.