US/UK attack Syria

[proggy]

you are a mad man

So you approve of chemical weapons being used on civilians? Would do you think should be done, more hand wringing and condemnation? It's time for action, all other means have failed.

[RedSauce]

It doesn't matter if it wasn't Assad, it is unacceptable that the weapon was used, so action needs to be taken. I do believe it was the government and all the evidence points to that so far. I hope we get an intervention like Libya.

so what type of action should be taken if it cannot be determined who was responsible?

[Mich the Tester]

I think it is spelt Assad.

If he didn't do it or condone (meant authorise) it why not let the UN in to check that he really didn't do it?

You poo poo other people reading what the media says and drawing their own conclusions that Assad did it but you are doing the exact same thing.

If he didn't do it he needs to prove he didn't do it.

Regardless it's a shocker of a tactic.

How would he prove he didn't do it?

[Mich the Tester]

So you approve of chemical weapons being used on civilians?

Wow, you've done it again. That's the most straw-ish straw man argument I've seen in a long time.

Idiot.

[cailin maith]

How would he prove he didn't do it?

With great difficulty undoubtedly, but a start would be to let the UN have the oppertunity to see what is happening.

[Mich the Tester]

With great difficulty undoubtedly, but a start would be to let the UN have the oppertunity to see what is happening.

That would help, yes.

[proggy]

Every time you return to this site you manage to say something so utterly stupid we're all left in suspense as to how you're going to meet your own standards next time around.

So if it was his wife or a top Army general who ordered it that's OK? What is your poin?t We all know you can call people stupid but you seem to be lacking in the thinking and making a point department, which is quite important when discussing something.

[Mich the Tester]

So if it was his wife or a top Army general who ordered it that's OK? What is your poin?t We all know you can call people stupid but you seem to be lacking in the thinking and making a point department, which is quite important when discussing something.

Proggy, do you get some auto-erotic thrill from being told you're a cretin?

It's not certain whether it's Assad and his chums or one of the other loony groups that have jumped on the Syrian opposition's bandwagon, and it makes a bloody big difference in terms of international law, the UN, US-UK-Russian relations, British and American law, relations in the middle east and so on and so forth.

[NorthWestPerm2Contr]

I think it is spelt Assad.

If he didn't do it or condone (meant authorise) it why not let the UN in to check that he really didn't do it?

You poo poo other people reading what the media says and drawing their own conclusions that Assad did it but you are doing the exact same thing.

If he didn't do it he needs to prove he didn't do it.

Regardless it's a shocker of a tactic.

Since when was the onus on a person to prove they did not do something as opposed to proving they actually did it. I am surprised you have been poisoned by the media to the extent you have forgotten "innocent until proven guilty". To you it seems to be "Guilty until proven innocent".

[NorthWestPerm2Contr]

So you approve of chemical weapons being used on civilians? Would do you think should be done, more hand wringing and condemnation? It's time for action, all other means have failed.

I'd be happy for the US/UK to go in and topple the Saudi government - the main sponsors of terrorism around the middle east and to me the likely providers of chemical weapons to the opposition.