General Chat

Hmm yes retaliating was the wrong word. Policing is better. Sorry didn't think that through. I think we should be wary of following America's lead.

But they wouldn't be retaliating would they?

They would be acting as the world police force - rightly or wrongly.

Cameron is returning from his holiday and there will be a meeting of the National Security Council.

Surely for something as momentous as retaliation they should recall parliament. :-S

Haig said he would look for a solution without the say-so of the UN.
As the PM is on holiday (his 4th this year) one presumes Haig hasn't discussed this with him.

Interestingly, if you google William Haig and Syria, he's had a lot to say over a few months.

Bit of a loose cannon to my mind. Strikes me he wants to do something 'momentous' he can be remembered for.

We are a small Country, up to our ears in debt, cutting our Armed Forces. Keep out of Syria unless part of the UN.

If we bomb Syria, who do we kill, the Goodies or the Baddies - But who knows who are the Goodies and who are the Baddies????

I wonder why Germany is pressing for the reurn of all its gold? Some claim that Germany is about to emerge as a key player in the Middle East.

(The Philadelphia Trumpet - February 2013).

I am not sure that we can call this a holocaust or not. Men (sic) of all countries, including Britain, have and will destroy their own people and countries.
They will also, as Britain has done on many occasions, destroy and obliterate other nations, other lives, other peoples.

Rollo your explanation and interpretation are very welcome.

But John, what are you basing your statement on...

"at the beginning of this crisis, the world was more or less united politically that Assad needed to be removed"

Just because an article in the Jerusalem Post is similar to an article in " i " does not make it correct or an accurate analysis and it is possibly a little naive to think that the Jerusalem Post has an accurate and unbiased take on things when Israel has such an interest in the situation and has, indeed, fired rockets into Syria.

Military intervention in the country could very easily destabilise the region even further and runs the risk of rapid escalation particularly as the various "players" each have their own, different agendas.

I posted "It is significant that China has not given any support to Assad."
That is true.

Sure China was resistant to the tougher UN resolutions. That is not because China is in favour of the Assad regime and its barbaric ways. China is not a homogenous country at all and it is nervous of any UN resolution which could be construed as a precedent for secession. So is Russia for different reasons and thus it often looks like Russia and China are acting together when they are not.

China is nervous about secession in Western China, Tibet and above all Taiwan. The island remains legally part of the Republic of China and trade and travel between the two is booming.

Since Tiananmen Square law and politics have moved on a whole lot in China. Though far from being a democracy government is increasingly both accountable and in accordance with the law, even if there is a long way to go. Rich and powerful people who have profited from corruption are beginning to find themselves in jail. Ordinary people can kick up a shindig without being hauled off to labour camps. These changes are happening because the regime accepts that they have to. A billion people cannot be controlled by force.

Aside from the principal of supporting the territorial integrity of Syria ( and all other countries) China has given no practical support or help towards Assad's regime at all. It supported an investigation of the chemical attack by the UN inspectors, Russia did not.

What the west has been hoping for is for the regime to collapse leading to peace negotiations. So far this has proven impossible largely due to support from Iran and its Hezbollah proxy and now Sarin gas attacks.

Milosovich and Ghaddafi crumbled when faced with NATO airpower and cruise missiles. There have already been high level defections from the Ba'ath government. The US may well be calculating that with their chemical capability and air defense taken out some of the regime may decide it is time to dump Assad and talk turkey at Geneva. The neat thing about such a strategy is that it would not materially change things "on the ground" and the US/Russia could still work together as brokers of something different to Ba'athism or an Al Queda caliphate.

Russia can still retrieve what is right now a losing hand.
Iran looks to be a loser whichever way the cake is sliced which will at least please the Jerusalem Times.

I too GG do not understand the politics of it all but I do know one thing the world cannot sit back and watch another holicost take place.

I was sickened at the children being hurt in all this ,what kind of a man destoys his own people and country.

A sick one ,give him what Gadaffi got I say :-|

I put this thread up because of how I felt about
what is happening in Syria. As I said I do not profess
to know the ins and outs of the situation there or for
that matter anywhere else in the world.
I was hoping for a debate on the subject from those
who are, and have found thus far very interesting and
Rollo may I say you have educated me in the politics
etc on this subject.
I do not mind a heated debate, we all have our take on
these things.

Emma

RolloTheRed found your post @ 10:07 very enlightening

Kay????:-). I thought at the beginning of this crisis, the world was more or less united politically that Assad needed to be removed and replaced by a peacekeeping force until elections had taken place to elect new leaders in Syria.

And now world seems to be more united than ever. Once again, America, Britain and France will have to lead any assault and it will drain those countries of precious resources at a time when many citizens are needing welfare, food banks etc. :-)

But they will have a considerable mandate to remove Assad if UN Inspectors find he has been using chemical weapons in Damascus. Whether military action will improve conditions for ordinary Syrians is doubtful, I agree. I still think the Russians could broker a deal with Obama and appear as the peacemaker! That will do Putin's reputation no harm in Russia.

Why does the USA and UK getting a piggy back think they can calm troubled waters in other countires,,,,Blair and Bush again?,........oh, of course the big daddies wont be going there will they. :-P

Havnt these countries always sorted themselves out without intervention from outsiders with grand ideas.

OFITG is right to say that the Russians are unlikely to be very pleased at any attack on Assad's military assets.

However de facto there is not much they can do about it especially if Frau Merkel has accepted a limited attack. The decisions will be made in Washington not Downing Street so what Brave Dave does or doesn't do is hardly relevant, ditto the back benches.

Turkey has already denied transit airspace for Russian munitions across its territory. It has forced several flights down and was quite prepared to destroy them.

Russian supplied anti aircraft defense systems have been thoroughly gamed by NATO and are as much use against US/UK front line attack as a wet rag. New improved kit has only been installed to a limited extent and is totally reliant on Russian manpower. It is vulnerable to Cruise strikes. Russian military security is so poor that they have resorted to handwritten messages conveyed by old fashioned means.

The base at Tartus could be taken out in under an hour. However unless it was used for (say) an attack on Cyprus then it will be left alone. Even Putin has a vague grasp on reality.

Russia has moved offensive missiles into its EU enclave in Kaliningrad along with a squadron of Fulcrum MIG jets. It is fond of "exercises" near the Baltic states but any sort of mischief here is wildly unlikely as the Russian economy is so tightly linked to that of Germany.

The only other lever Russia has is to cut the gas supply. It has done this before but a pretty futile response in mid-summer. Given that Russia has never been at risk of losing its base at Tartus Putin has played a pretty poor hand. Now the toothlessness of the Russian bear will be all too obvious.

Tehran may rant and rave but action not likely to go any further then inciting Hezbollah into more massacres and possibly missile attacks into Israel.

Most of the MPs who are demanding for parliament to be recalled barely know where Syria is. They are not interested in the issues only their own pet hobby horses. That is especially true of the Tory back bench.

One thing is for sure. China and the USA are drawing closer together and the ancient Russian nightmare of encirclement looms. As the modern shining example of fascism it has few friends.

On news this morning, Douglas Alexander is calling for a return of Parliament to discuss Syria. But doesn't sound likely to me - they do rather enjoy these breaks.

Cameron has said that he does not need unanimous UN backing to go in, and reserves the right to act decisively once these UN investigators have reported on situation vis a vis chemical weapons in Damascus suburbs.

Looks like a very worrying and rapid escalation this week. With all our MPs still sunning themselves. :-(

Lilybids - English is not my first language (unofficially) but I cannot see how John's contribution this morning is 'spiteful'.

Perhaps you would elucidate.

The Middle East is in many ways like a hand grenade and Syria is the firing pin waiting to be pulled, any attack on Syria would be akin to pulling the firing pin out of the grenade and the consequences of resulting explosion will be with us for many years to come. It could take us back to the politics of the dark days of the Cold War with Russia as they are a massive player in Syria, it will heighten the already highly inflame situation in the Middle East, and it will unleash a back lash from numerous extremist/terrorist groups.

It would be stupid and foolhardy to think that Russia influence will persuade Syria to seek a peaceful solution through discussions, maybe their influence will, on the other hand maybe it won't. Russia has spent a lot of time and invested a lot of money in fostering relations with Syria and in the process they have considerable interest in the country, among these are a naval base at Tartous and several large oil installations, and if the West think that Russia will not take steps to defend their interests, they must be living in cloud cuckoo land.

There are warships already in the Mediterranean and more are on their way, deadly missiles are already being primed and pointed towards Syria, our Prime Minister has the word "Fire" on the tip of his tongue, all this while our Parliament is on holiday and unable to have any say on the matter.

This must surely be wrong, Parliament must be recalled immediately and given the opportunity to not only debate the issue but vote on it, after all in an interview in June this year when asked about arming the rebels in Syria the Prime Minister David Cameron said - "I supported having a vote on the Iraq war, and as Prime Minister I made sure there was a vote on the action we took in Libya, I think Parliament should have a say about these things.

As much as I am horrified by the appalling atrocities that are happening in Syria, in my opinion, probably because I do not trust him, the Prime Minister should stop posturing on the world stage and request The Speaker to recall Parliament immediately.

It is a good discussion so why do you spoil it John with spiteful remarks

Wow!! What an excellent analysis, Rollo.

I knew a little about Russian investment and involvement. Weren't China also the "fly in the ointment" that stopped a quick removal of Assad and his regime when it all started? And you mention Tehran - what is stance of the Turks?

Bringing it down to my simplistic level, you make the point that 70% are Sunni and they have no political voice. Up till 1832 in UK, more than 70% were working class and they had no political voice. And in Wales and Scotland throughout much of my life, more than 70% must have been Labour or Liberal voters, yet they have never really had any political voice in Westminster - where Tories have held sway for the majority of those years.

It does hurt. If you were a Roman Catholic in the north of Ireland, it must have hurt. But during all of that hurt and many martyrdoms, the average family has just got on with our dull and fairly predictable lives. As long as we get plenty of soma (Aldous Huxley), we are happy. Enough in our pockets, enough to eat, a mobile phone, TV and computer. And we feel safe - I doubt most could be bothered. These sort of threads attract little response on Genes chat, and are often diverted by cheap points scoring against other posters.

And I do apologise if I get involved in that sometimes, because I really enjoy discussing topics properly and there are many others who also enjoy it.

Syria, before the current civil war, was not a backward third world country though by no means wealthy. The typical standard of living was similar to Greece. People of all races and religions rubbed along fairly well although in the countryside there was far less mixing of Sunni and Alawite. The Orthodox Christians mostly live in the major cities of western Syria. Before 1948 there were a lot of Jewish families and until recently at least some hung on.

The country had some of the finest city scapes in the middle east. Somehow UNESCO will have to find the funds to restore Aleppo at least, one of my favorite places.

Democracy is actually the answer to many evils and is not imposed by western liberals but a basic human need. However each country and culture needs a democracy shaped to its needs and that takes time. It is fascinating to watch democracy and the rule of law slowly and gradually take root in China. It is significant that China has not given any support to Assad.

The problems of Syria are very typical of the Islamic world as a whole. Islam DOES NOT see any separation between the state and religion, indeed it barely recognises the secular state at all. Instead what traditional Islam advocates is a unity of Islamic people governed by a Caliph ( Sunni ) or Ayatollah ( Shi'a). That is for instance what the Muslim Brotherhood wants. So do the Taliban with the added bonus of a very primitive interpretation of the Koran.

The main alternative to political Islam has been a kind of modernist nationalism epitomised by Nasser in Egypt and the Ba'ath ( renaissance ) party in Iraq and Syria. Unfortunately these modernists have shown little interest in democracy and are much closer to the fascism of Mussolini or Franco.

In Syria the Assad family established control of the Ba'ath party using means similar to those of the Mafiosi and rule with a rod of iron. The 1982 massacre in Hama showed that the regime has teeth. The present regime is totally dominated by the Alawites who are a Shi'ite sect. They have the backing of the Christians. At least 70% of the population are Sunni without any political voice.

Syria has benefited from a relatively small scale oil field in the east of the country and funds poured in by Russia which has established a major naval base on the Mediterranean coast. Farming is fairly efficient.

So far as one kept out of politics Syria was a good place for a tourist, lots to see and do, good cooking based on Lebanese and Turkish cuisine.

By denying the Sunni any voice over the last 70 years the Ba'ath party stoked up a volcano of resentment which exploded in 1982 and again in 2012. The best opportunity the west had to do anything was in the early days of the current uprising when a bit more support to the moderates and students who led the uprising could have paid off. The chance was let go for fear of upsetting the Russians.

So now we are where we are following an entirely predictable path and once more finding that the delicate diplomatic world of the UN or the legal niceties of not intervening in the chaos of civil wars has little resonance with real life, or rather death.

Instead of irritating the Russians missile strikes will enrage them. OTOH doing nothing will in the eyes of much of the world make the USA appear an old bedraggled eagle with blunt talons and few feathers.

The only way now to avoid the coming strikes is for Russia to back down on its support for Assad and force a conference. The country has a lot to gain from such a course. However Putin, a former top dog in the KGB, is intent on restoring the USSR and is unlikely to tango.

The almost certain coming strikes may well be justifiable and necessary. The downside is that far from forcing Assad into a more conciliatory attitude he is likely to lash out like an enraged bull. Russia can do little materially to assist as NATO controls the air space. So long as its naval base is left alone Russia will do little more than rant. Tehran is keeping its powder dry in case of any US attack on Nataz etc.

Hopefully we won't be reading about the Guns of September but I'd dig out your old tin hat.