US/UK attack Syria

[Mich the Tester]

So if there's such moral indignation about what Assad is alleged to have done to his own people (and he probably did), how about attacking North Korea?

[Paddy]

The sooner that we get rid of our dependance on oil then we can just leave the middle east to slink back into the stone age

Hardly the Stone Age Iran Manufacturing Aircraft, Ships, Farming equipment Military equipment, Euro 5 cat cars (own design), Buses (exported to EMEA, Micro Chips, LEDs, Imaging equipment in fact more variety than the UK (or at least Wales)

[amcdonald]

So if there's such moral indignation about what Assad is alleged to have done to his own people (and he probably did), how about attacking North Korea?

Because it's No 116 in the world rankings for oil production, notably Syria is producing more than 3000 times the amount of oil than North Korea

It maybe coincidence, but then financially invading Canada would make more sense. One of the worlds biggest oil producers and they could roll in tanks in a few days

[DodgyAgent]

So if there's such moral indignation about what Assad is alleged to have done to his own people (and he probably did), how about attacking North Korea?

Because if we setapplied rules in black and white the world would be an even more unpleasant place than it is now

[AtW]

<researches buying shares in UK fracking companies>

Better get ready for looney anti-fracking protestors targeting shareholders

[Mich the Tester]

Because if we setapplied rules in black and white the world would be an even more unpleasant place than it is now

Yes, and that's why I feel that going to war on the basis of moral indignation at Assad's actions is not a good idea. Moral indignation's very easy, but there needs to be a real threat from him including evidence that it was indeed Assad's forces who used the weapons, and I don't mean 'a taxi driver in Damascus says Assad could attack the west in 45 minutes', in the style of Tony B Liar. You could also make the case that there's a real threat from North Korea, given their missile shenanigans with South Korea and Japan, who seem to be capable of extraordinary levels of restraint.

[AtW]

Cameron is so inept he can't even start a quick war with axis of evil

[doodab]

Yes, and that's why I feel that going to war on the basis of moral indignation at Assad's actions is not a good idea. Moral indignation's very easy, but there needs to be a real threat from him including evidence that it was indeed Assad's forces who used the weapons, and I don't mean 'a taxi driver in Damascus says Assad could attack the west in 45 minutes', in the style of Tony B Liar. You could also make the case that there's a real threat from North Korea, given their missile shenanigans with South Korea and Japan, who seem to be capable of extraordinary levels of restraint.

Personally I think intervention should have occurred some time ago, and I think it should have been non partisan. The "wait and see while 100,000 people die" method and provocative picking of a winner seem misguided to me.

[NorthWestPerm2Contr]

You know what is most ironic about the upcoming war? The US, UK, France and Al Qaeda will all be on the same side - perhaps Al Qaeda could be the ground force the US need and provide them with some intelligence on which sites to hit?

It's sad how one minute our British soldier is killed by Al Qaeda and then the next minute we go on to fight a war on the same side as them....

Has the UK suddenly forgotten about 7/7 and the US about 9/11? Who are the most wanted people in the world again?

[AtW]

Al Qaeda will all be on the same side - perhaps Al Qaeda could be the ground force the US need and provide them with some intelligence on which sites to hit?

Perfect plan to gather all Al Qaeda for "consultations" in one place