Gutless. The stench of appeasement

[cojak]

What is interesting is the broad spectrum of reactions to an event like this. These reactions represent far more about the individuals making their opinions known than any objective contribution to the problem.

One fact emerges from this.

Children are being killed in droves indiscriminatly


Most of us dont really care because they are a world away, yet things would be very different if it was our own kids or kids in our country.
Most of us feel guilty and through a range of arguments we seek to justify this guilt by giving reasons not to intervene. These range from toadying to the Americans, its the Turks responsibility, look the other way incase we bite off more than we can chew,. So intent are you to make these excuses that you even resort to sneering and laughing in order to try and trivialise what is happening in Syria and pour ridicule on those who want to do something to stop the carnage.

Funnily enough amongst these emotional reactions all points have some level of legitimacy but what I find is disgusting is the way that you sneer at the people who have to make the hard decisions as to what to do. David Cameron and The American government are putting their heads above the parapet and trying to do something here and now.

And would sending missiles from sea or bombing a few empty buildings (the Syrians have peobably already moved their important stuff) fix this?

I'm pretty damn sure it wouldn't.

[Mich the Tester]

Here is a prime example of how we emotionally distance ourselves from facing up to the problem. We sidetrack the debate.

Arguably it's actually learning lessons from Iraq, but if it is 'sidetracking' then it's the result of what happened in Iraq, and it'll take a long time before any trust is restored. Personally I think that prosecutions of Blair and Bush, but that might not be realistic, so at least investigations that leave no stone unturned about what they did and said would be a start. Don't underestimate that damage that those men did to the public's belief in government in the UK and US. Of course, B Liar will try to protect himself under parliamentary privilege, so it would be a long drawn out affair, but I think it needs to start.

[cojak]

And not all of us are sneering.

I'll still vote for David Cameron but he should have given this more thought.

[Mich the Tester]

Funnily enough amongst these emotional reactions all points have some level of legitimacy but what I find is disgusting is the way that you sneer at the people who have to make the hard decisions as to what to do. David Cameron and The American government are putting their heads above the parapet and trying to do something here and now.

Who's sneering at them? I think and have said several times that I believe DC and Obama are decent men trying to take an almost impossible decision. Agreeing with them or disagreeing takes nothing away from that.

[mudskipper]

Most of us dont really care because they are a world away, yet things would be very different if it was our own kids or kids in our country.

It's a coping mechanism.

We don't have the capacity to care about each of the 1000s affected as individuals - it's too mind boggling to begin to comprehend. We can care about one or two individuals, but not 1000s. That's why the tear jerking stuff the Lenny Henry et al do for comic relief works - we get the story of a child in a village who we can care about and help rather than 1000000s of kids in 1000s of villages which we just block out.

[proggy]

I think this decision will is hindsight go down in history as one of the worst. It was purely based on difficult memories of of the Iraq decision and fear i.e. self interest rather than the actual reason for intervention. MP's will have to watch in horror and children burn and die in Syria. Sad day for Britain.

BBC News - Syria crisis: Incendiary bomb victims 'like the walking dead'

[Doggy Styles]

And would sending missiles from sea or bombing a few empty buildings (the Syrians have peobably already moved their important stuff) fix this?

I'm pretty damn sure it wouldn't.

This is the sort of thing to consider in a proper debate. Not the ridiculous anti-toadying, anti-US, anti-UK 'reasoning' scattered about this thread.

[Wanderer]

The analogy fails, since in this instance the intervening bloke in this case is a highly trained heavily armed brick-tulip house of a gentlemen. He is the "cop".
Yes, because the use of chemical weapons on its own people automatically legitimises any government.

Nope the intervening bloke in this case is the USA (and Britain hanging on their coattails trying to be "Great") wading into the brawl as a have a go hero without waiting for the cops (the UN). The other thing to remember is this is not our neighbour having a fight, it's a distant country with a culture which is quite different to ours.

To not intervene means, effectively, supporting a terrorist organisation (formerly known as the Syrian government) that is using chemical weapons.

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the rebels had got hold of some nerve gas and used it on their own people in order to provoke an international response.

Yep, the trouble is that there is no proof that it was the government that did this atrocity. Maybe the UK government could compile a dossier of evidence to prove that they used weapons of mass destruction? Maybe that will help convince sceptics like me.

However, there seems to be a bit of will for Assad to be deposed, so I guess this will be used to justify intervention.

Yes, we could bowl on in there under the presumption that WMD have been used and depose the government. Of course we don't have any plan for a replacement government but that doesn't matter. Once the Arab world experiences the "shock and awe" of our military prowess they will do the right thing, stop fighting amongst themselves and democratically elect a new government. This will will have a knock on effect on the whole Middle East region bringing peace and stability for many generations. The whole operation will take a few months and then we will be able to sit back and declare "Mission Accomplished" from the deck of one of our aircraft carriers. It will cost a bit of money, but we can just close down a few more hospitals to cover that quite nicely.

What could possibly go wrong?

[Mich the Tester]

I think this decision will is hindsight go down in history as one of the worst. It was purely based on difficult memories of of the Iraq decision and fear i.e. self interest rather than the actual reason for intervention. MP's will have to watch in horror and children burn and die in Syria. Sad day for Britain.

A decision to go to war could also have turned out be one of the worst. This is the direct result of the lies of Bush and Blair.

However, I'd prefer to see another vote after the UN's inspectors have finished their job and reported; can't help feeling this vote was a couple of days too early for some MP's.

[Doggy Styles]

Nope the intervening bloke in this case is the USA (and Britain hanging on their coattails trying to be "Great") wading into the brawl as a have a go hero without waiting for the cops (the UN).

Do you actually know what the 'Great' in Great Britain means? It doesn't sound like it.