General Chat

Thanks RolloTheRed - a lot of good points in that post - the next few days should be quite interesting.

For me Syria is not a far off place to be found with the help of Wiki and Google. It is - or was - a place full of friendly people and such wonderful places as the Suq in Aleppo and Krak des Chevaliers . The secret police were not a problem for the visitor unless you wanted them to be. I don't know where all this hate comes from except the evil regime which people have tired of.

I posted a while back that Russian military security was so bad that they have resorted to using physical messaging that cannot be hacked... Syria of course uses Russian systems.

Now it appears that Israeli military intelligence perched on its eyrie of the Golan Heights from where it can easily pick up Damascus signals has communications evidence of calls between Assad's brother ( head of WMD wepaons ) and Syrian top brass. The US is planning to release this to the UN.

The problem with further delay is that Assad will be moving and hiding stuff.

Contrary to what Newsnight says it is not that dangerous to hit the WMD where they are 'cos (a) the stuff is only dangerous once mixed and (b) even when mixed it fades quickly and only those fairly close ( i.e. Syrian soldeirs ) would be affected. One antidote is water which is usually scarce at this time of the year in the middle east.

It is against international law to hold stocks of any nerve gas including sarin - invented by the same I G Farben who supplied ZyklonB to Auschwitz and now bee unfriendly stuff to farmers. It is amazing that few of those retired generals, has been pundits and the like who the media are dragging in have said a word against Syria's WMD beyond "it is regretful". You don't say.

OTOH waiting a few days for the UN survey team to make their report would seem to be good politics.

Like it or no it is Obama's call not Brave Dave.

My guess is that on balance Obama won't wait but he just might ... next Monday, Labor Day, is a big big public holiday in the US. The average Joe won't care two hoots about fizzbangs in Syria and it would be a good day to bury bad news.

If and when the US does hit Assad's regime they for sure won't be setting out to knock it over. Just enough to force it to the negotiating table with new men at the top.

The last thing Obama wants is to sting the regime into trying and failing to attack Israel. Israel would do what it has always wanted to do and would vaporise the place. So far the spectre of one of their chief enemies burying itself has gone down quite well in Tel Aviv tempered by worries about what comes next.

The trouble is Assad knows who are the waverers and if they are not yet under arrest they soon will be. Adra, the prison of the muhabarrat ( secret police ) is no fun at all.

At least in the debate in the Commons we we will see what a bunch of ill informed self righteous phonies we have on all sides of the House most of whom care not a whit about the issues but only narrow political advantage and especially their own career.

Few though have the abilities to gyrate as well as Clegg who fought the last election on a platform against the Iraq war and now is close to whipping his party into supporting Brave Dave.

On the issue of Syria - There appears to be some foxes amongst the chickens in regards to the proposal to launch missile attacks on Syria.

The UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon wants time for the UN Weapon Inspectors, who are currently in Damascus at the site of the chemical attack, to complete their investigations and report on their findings.

There are also some reports saying that senior Labour figures appears to have altered their position and they now want this as well.

In addition some sources in the UN are saying that any attack on Syria, not authorised by a mandate from the UN Security Council, would be illegal, to try and overcome that the UK is to put a resolution to the UN Security Council - authorising all necessary measures to protect civilians in Syria - but this will probably not get passed.

It appears that ten years after the start of the Iraq War, the reason for going to war has come back to haunt a few politicians, the reason given initially for the Iraq War, was that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, an allegation which UN Weapon Inspectors were unable to verify.

The UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is reported as saying that the UN weapons inspectors will probably need at least another four days to complete their investigations.

That leaves the question, will the US, the UK, France and others, who want to launch missile attacks on Syria - be prepared to wait for the weapons inspectors to complete their investigations?

And they made us repay every single penny - last payment December 2006.

"The truth is that the UK has well and truly been tucked up in bed with the USA for a very long time, successive Prime Ministers love cuddling up to US Presidents, this allows them to play to the gallery’ at home as being a major player in world affairs, and they cherish that image."

Well of course the UK has an extremely close relationship with the USA - we would have been well and truly up the creek without a paddle but for their support 1940 - 1946.

The intelligence co-operation of the two countries is extremely close as is weapons acquisition - the UK operates a lot of stuff that is not available to any other "foreign" power. Overall the UK gains a whole lot from this relationship. Does France win friends with its crusty attitude to just about anybody ?

Blood is thicker than water as W S Churchill well knew.

"A scorpion wished to cross a river but he could not swim.
He asked a passing frog for a lift.
No, said the frog, you will sting me and I shall die.
You can trust me said the scorpion as I would drown too.
So off they went.
Half way across the scorpion stung the frog.
Why did you do that said the frog with its dying breath.
I cannot help it it is in my nature said the scorpion as it drowned"

Negotiating with the likes of Assad is impossible.

Didn't DC say that he would never enter into
another war in the Middle East, or have I got
that wrong.

Emma

Some reports are saying that David Cameron will respect the will of Parliament, well if he does he will be one of the few in recent years to pay any attention to the will of Parliament. To help him win the vote he has imposed a three line whip on his party, this basically mean that all Conservative MP's have been told they must toe the party line, even if this means that this goes against their own beliefs and the views of their constituents.

It will be very interesting to follow the debate in the House of Commons tomorrow - although there is a possibility that this may be overtaken by events as missile strikes could be launched before the debate and vote take place.

All the hardware required to launch missile attacks on Syria is in place and all the plans for them are finalised, it is no longer a question of, will they attack - it is a question as to when will they attack.

One could be excused when looking at all the political posturing and promises about respecting the will of Parliament, as some sort of comedy, however it is not a comedy, if is a very grave and serious matter which may have possible unforeseen consequences for all who are involved in it.

The truth is that the UK has well and truly been tucked up in bed with the USA for a very long time, successive Prime Ministers love cuddling up to US Presidents, this allows them to play to the gallery’ at home as being a major player in world affairs, and they cherish that image.

When it comes to cooperating with the USA in dealing with conflicts the UK is usually not slow in coming forward, the only major conflict that I can recall where we did not assist was when Harold Wilson refused to send troops to support the Americans in Vietnam.

In my view the stage is set, the decisions to launch an attack have already been agreed, and whether or not the Prime Minister wins or loses the vote tomorrow, missile attacks will be launched on Syria within the next 72 hours.

I cannot see what Ireland has to do with the Syria imbroglio. As a person with deep Irish roots I find the suggestion that all Irishmen wish to support terrorists deeply offensive.

Tony Blair's remit does not extend to the Syrian civil war.
He is more or less out of a job anywhere as the latest Israeli / Palestinian talks are on the point of collapse without even starting.

The UK has never found it necessary to have a large standing army in the UK. Following the withdrawal from Germany and the ending of the Afghanistan campaign the downsizing of the army is entirely logical.

The RAF has plenty of hitting power and if you look at a map you will see that RAF Akrotiri is about 100 miles from Syria which makes up for no fixed wing aircraft carrier. Handy that. Warbirds are flying in right now. The modern navy has its really serious hitting power underneath the waves not waving flags in for far flung plenipotentiaries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astute-class_submarine#Weapons_and_systems

Nevertheless is American firepower that will decide the issues if Obama chooses to go that way - it is still far from certain.

"What's going on around me
Is barely making sense
I need some explanations fast
I see my present partner
In the imperfect tense
And I don't see how we can last
I feel I need a change of cast
Maybe I'm on nobody's side.

And when he gives me reasons
To justify each move
They're getting harder to believe
I know this can't continue
I've still a lot to prove
There must be more I could achieve
But I don't have the nerve to leave.

Everybody's playing the game
But nobody's rules are the same
Nobody's on nobody's side
Better learn to go it alone
Recognize you're out on your own
Nobody's on nobody's side.

The one I should not think of
Keeps rolling through my mind
And I don't want to let that go
No lovers ever faithful
No contract truly signed
There's nothing certain left to know
And how the cracks begin to show!

Never make a promise or plan
Take a little love where you can
Nobody's on nobody's side
Never stay too long in your bed
Never lose your heart, use your head
Nobody's on nobody's side.

Never take a stranger's advice
Never let a friend fool you twice
Nobody's on nobody's side
Never be the first to believe
Never be the last to deceive
Nobody's on nobody's side
And never leave a moment too soon
Never waste a hot afternoon
Nobody's on nobody's side
Never stay a minute too long
Don't forget the best will go wrong
Nobody's on nobody's side.

Better learn to go it alone
Recognize you're out on your own
Nobody's on nobody's side."

( Chess, 1978 )

Well I wonder -----

Where is our wonderful Peace Envoy for the Middle East - past few days he has been seen to be visiting very expensive yachts? He who claimed he brought peace to N. I.

What are we going to invade with? We have cut down on our servicemen/women making them redundant and as for our Royal Navy. I do not think we have sufficient military power to protect ourselves.

Maggie - have to agree that there were many US citizens who had Irish blood should it be 7 generations back or more fund raised.

However, around September 1973 I with OH was in Dirty Dick's Pub near to/in Petticoat Lane - it was a Sunday lunch time and I noticed a couple of men enter with wooden boxes on a long handle and people putting money in it - as they came nearer - I noticed IRA painted on the outside of the boxes.

I let rip and let the whole pub know that every penny they put into the boxes would go towards buying a bullet to kill our soldiers - there was a lot of shouting then and the two men were chased out of the pub.

The Republican Clubs etc had even then not been made illegal.

Rollo I did state that I was not saying I personally believed either way but apologies if that was not clear.
I am merely trying to give a different perspective, a different angle, rather than the one we are being fed. People need to think for themselves and make judgments based on as much available information and fact as possible.

Decisions should be based on fact and evidence and not on claims, theories or conjecture.

Errol you are a big boy too wise to accept the nonsense that Saddam Hussein ( who I have met ) did not have WMD. Here is what he did in the town of Halabja - a scruffy place but where some of my staff lived. Past tense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_poison_gas_attack

All the rest of the kit and caboodle was smuggled across the border into Syria even though the two countries were not especially friendly. He had plenty of time and warning.

So you now why know Syria is well armed with Sarin etc etc.

There is no point in waiting around for the results of a 90 min visit into the zone of death for reasons that have been clearly described elsewhere.

It always amazes me how our nice liberal peace loving journos, back benchers find no problem in leaving people in such places as Spain (1936) Cambodia ( Pol Pot ), Ruanda, Bosnia, Kurdistan and so on to their fate.

No man is an island,
Entire of itself,
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thy friend's
Or of thine own were:
Any man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in mankind,
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.

It is interesting to note that Joe Biden (US Vice President) has stated that the US is in no doubt that the Syrian regime (his words not mine) has used chemical weapons.

US Secretary of State John Kerry has also claimed that there has been "undeniable" use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government.

Bear in mind that this is being claimed BEFORE the UN inspection team have actually carried out their tests and observations to ascertain the use of chemical weapons and by whom.

Now, cast your minds back.
Do you remember us all being told convincingly that there were "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq only to find out subsequently that the actual "evidence" was somewhat flimsy to say the least?
That information was used to convince both the general public and parliament that there was no question about taking military action.

Grainy pictures, dubious video footage from unknown sources is not evidence.

Are we being duped again just to whip up support for an armed response?

Ask yourself this. Have you seen any actual evicence to prove conclusively that one side or another has used chemical weapons?

I am not saying I personally believe one way or the other but let us not lose sight of common sense before we are all whipped up into a frenzy and become a baying mob once again.

Rollo

You inform us, in a clear and lucid manner ... thank you


Why or why, do our brain clouds over so,
when you write about ..caches, servers, add on sets and tweaks ...

x

There is no world government and no international law in the sense that any sovereign state needs permission from the UN to wage war. It is against the UN charter to wage "aggressive war" though what this means is anybody's guess. It did not mean Argentina invading the Falkland Islands or Russia grabbing two chunks of Georgia by military force where it remains to this day. And so on.

In all countries with serious military clout it is the prerogative of the executive to decide on the use of military force, or not. The legislature has the right to approve military budgets, or not.

I very much doubt that Cameron will allow a binding vote to the Commons this week. He may not even allow a vote at all.

Allowing the legislature to take over executive decision making is something that most Select Committee chairs with no hope of a red box think a very good thing. It is a dreadful idea.

Ugly though it is Assad is within his rights to respond to armed insurrection with whatever force he can muster. He is within his rights to enlist help from Hezbollah, the Russians and the man in the moon.

What Assad cannot do is to use chemical weapons or even own them whether signed up or not. That has been so since the end of ww1 - even the Third Reich did not resort to chemical warfare despite its expertise with zyklon b.

Allowing Assad to get away with this would turn the current delicate balance of power which maintains some sort of peace in most of the planet upside down, it would result in chaos. In particular it would void the calculations which persuade Iran not to build a nuclear weapon. So it won't be tolerated by the White House.

Brave Dave and the Tory Little Englanders can go along for the ride or not. It barely batters, the UK is not an arbiter of world peace. That MPs can consider themselves decision makers on this is absurd. It is for sure not in the UK interest to attempt to block or abstain from a probable course of action by the USA against Assad's regime.

Assad will get a sharp lesson. It will not be designed to swing the civil war one way or the other.

Where we will be at the end of next week is anybody's guess. Tyrants tend to calm down after a good kicking whatever their threats beforehand. An effective stalemate forcing all parties to the negotiating table would suit Obama and Banki Moon just fine.

OTOH if Assad and Iranian proxies try and reply with force the spanking will just be applied again as needed until they do get the message.

One thing you can be sure of is that the oil and gas traders will take full advantage. If you live in the sticks and use heating oil or bulk propane now would be a good time to get your winter delivery.

Yes I saw that on Errol's post. I was thinking
about the phone calls that must be/or have taken
place, needless to say we will be the last to know.
As you say OFITG very worrying indeed.

Emma

Emma - The Speaker of the House of Commons has agreed to David Cameron's request to recall Parliament and there will be a debate and vote on Thursday this week, so trigger not pulled yet - all very worrying.

I haven't seen any news since this morning.
Wonder what has if anything been talked about
so far by the powers that be.

Emma

This whole situation is making nervous .....

I also wonder is the concern for "people". or "chemical weapons"

horrific

Well it looks like military action is imminent - the British parliament has been recalled.
As there are only a few days remaining of the summer recess anyway, it begs the question - why is parliament being recalled on Thursday?
I think we will see something happen very soon, a matter of days, because they were due back on Monday anyway.
Apparently there will be a parliamentary vote.

The other thing to perhaps consider is why is action being considered now?
Thousands upon thousands have been killed in Syria during the conflict. Over a million have been displaced.
But other countries did nothing.
Now, it is quite possible that chemical weapons have been used.
However, only a few hundred have been killed.
Ask yourself this - why did we turn a blind eye when many thousands were being brutally killed and yet are virtually going to a war footing and recalling parliament when a few hundred are killed and injured by chemical weapons?

Do the powers that be care about people being killed or are they more concerned about chemical weapons ending up in the wrong hands?

No worries - it was an excellent post.