Gutless. The stench of appeasement

[doodab]

Another interesting view on chemical weapons here.

The history of chemical weapons: The shadow of Ypres | The Economist

Particularly interesting that Churchill was in favour of their use and Hitler wasn't.

[MaryPoppins]

Ditto that - will make sure to donate there.

There are links to three separate sites. I'm wondering how to create some sort of CUK donation competition!

[NorthWestPerm2Contr]

There are links to three separate sites. I'm wondering how to create some sort of CUK donation competition!

I looked at the Save the Children site - Love the idea of a CUK donation competition. Perhaps everybody should give say 10% or 20% or their daily rate and then we can try and guess who it is!

[proggy]

They were hardly the first. Both sides were at it in WW1.

What seems bizarre to me is that it's considered acceptable that 100,000 people have been killed by bullets and bombs but when 0.1% of that number are gassed we're moved to moral outrage.

Can you not see the difference in causalities from battles in the civil war and dropping chemical weapons on civilians killing hundreds of children in one incident?

[d000hg]

Another interesting view on chemical weapons here.

The history of chemical weapons: The shadow of Ypres | The Economist

Particularly interesting that Churchill was in favour of their use and Hitler wasn't.

Except on Jews of course.

[DodgyAgent]

Its not bizarre at all. The Uk has one of the world's most effective propaganda regimes, orchestrated media, to shape the "opinions" of the cretinous majority.

It's called "The Daily Mail"

[sasguru]

Can you not see the difference in causalities from battles in the civil war and dropping chemical weapons on civilians killing hundreds of children in one incident?

Logically, according to you, Churchill was a war criminal for firebombing Hamburg, Cologne and Dresden then?
It's clear that there were few soldiers in German cities during the war.
Incendiary devices are just as awful as chemical weapons - I don't suppose a child would choose any one as being preferable to another

[Clippy]

Is that what it is about?

I thought it was about whether we wish to try and put a stop to the murder of innocent people with chemical weapons? No? I suppose it is just Syrian Oil they are after.

I hope all the self satisfied people who oppose intervention in Syria are comfortable with the thought that they do not wish to do anything about the killing.

What it's certainly not about, for the US, is some imaginary 'red-line' being crossed when chemical weapons are used.

It's about "...what is in the best interests of the United States".

...(the president) "believes that there are core interests at stake for the United States".

Source

[doodab]

...(the president) "believes that there are core interests at stake for the United States".

The Saudis want rid of Assad, as they wanted rid of Saddam. That is at least part of it.

[d000hg]

Logically, according to you, Churchill was a war criminal for firebombing Hamburg, Cologne and Dresden then?
It's clear that there were few soldiers in German cities during the war.
Incendiary devices are just as awful as chemical weapons - I don't suppose a child would choose any one as being preferable to another

Probably worse...