No good options on Syria I am afraid. However, strange as it may seem, this morning's events are somewhat re-assuring. Trump has shown himself to be neither a Russian stooge, nor likely to go wildly over the top and start WW3. In fact these are the actions of a conventional US President as others have noted. Still not much sign of a long-term solution emerging, which means more suffering for the Syrian people unfortunately.
Very sad that the Romanian National, Andrea Cristea, has died of her injuries in the Westminster attack. The family agreed to withdraw her life support today.
Oh that is sad. Her fiancé was planning to propose to her.
I realise this might not be the most appropriate time for pedantry, but surely he wasn't her fiancé in that case?
You're right: not the most appropriate time for pedantry.
I just feel for a man who has lost the woman he loves and in such an appalling way. Like the American couple on the last day of their holiday to celebrate their 25th wedding anniversary.
And last night a father in Syria weeping over his two babies.
Real lives shattered by evil. It breaks your heart
I seem to recall a recent & relatively widely held PB view that we should pragmatically support Assad/Putin in a crusade against the slavering fascists of Isis and the Wahhabites. I'm assuming this is now a deceased duck?
Yep, I was wondering that.
There are a number of topics on which i think pb.com community is very knowledgeable. Defense procurement failures, train journeys on holiday, F1, by-elections, polling etc... Middle East foreign policy isn't one of them.
Has anyone asked the vital question; What is the motivation for Assad using chemical weapons in a sparsely populated area where there were more children than male adults? It sounds like a propaganda exercise. I would think it reasonably easy to establish the facts beyond "it just seems very likely" which is Michael Farron's anwer to the question "Where's the proof?"
If this was a pre-warned one-off strike to minimise casualties and send a message that chemical weapons won't be tolerated then I can go along with it.
I am still mystified as to why Syria would do this right now. Assad (with Putin's support) has the situation under control and pretty much have the field to themselves and have a free hand to act. I can't see why they would set out to inflame world opinion at this point by using chemical weapons. It doesn't quite add up to me. (God perhaps I'm morphing into Plato and I'll be spending the rest of my life on conspiracy alt-right websites!)
@SebastianEPayne: Still nothing from Jeremy Corbyn on the Syria air strikes. Is it a lieu day?
Presumably Corbyn is trying to come up with a form of words that doesn't make him look like a complete asshat. The question now though is, what form of words could make him look less of an asshat than not making a statement of any sort for this length of time?
France and Germany issued a joint statement saying that Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president "bears full responsibility" for the precision strike which used sea-launched cruise missiles to destroy a Syrian airbase.
Has anyone asked the vital question; What is the motivation for Assad using chemical weapons in a sparsely populated area where there were more children than male adults? It sounds like a propaganda exercise. I would think it reasonably easy to establish the facts beyond "it just seems very likely" which is Michael Farron's anwer to the question "Where's the proof?"
Why would it be reasonably easy to establish the facts in a war zone? I'd have thought Syria is one of the hardest places in the world right now to work out what is really happening....
Has anyone asked the vital question; What is the motivation for Assad using chemical weapons in a sparsely populated area where there were more children than male adults? It sounds like a propaganda exercise. I would think it reasonably easy to establish the facts beyond "it just seems very likely" which is Michael Farron's anwer to the question "Where's the proof?"
If this was a pre-warned one-off strike to minimise casualties and send a message that chemical weapons won't be tolerated then I can go along with it.
I am still mystified as to why Syria would do this right now. Assad (with Putin's support) has the situation under control and pretty much have the field to themselves and have a free hand to act. I can't see why they would set out to inflame world opinion at this point by using chemical weapons. It doesn't quite add up to me. (God perhaps I'm morphing into Plato and I'll be spending the rest of my life on conspiracy alt-right websites!)
I may be over analysing this but as Assad has absolutely NO regard for the rebels, he may have executed this strike to test Trump's mettle, with or without Putin's connivance.
Russia's essentially irrelevant. The real issue's Iran.
Why? Because Russia does not have the power in Syria to enforce any agreement. Iran does (or at least a heck of a lot more power).
Russia's only relevant when it comes to its own small interests in Syria. Guarantee those and they'll be happy.
Iran's a very different matter.
Let me ask you a question: what's your solution for Syria?
Accept that Russia (and Iran as you mention) are the powerbrokers there. They will have the final say in who succeeds Assad and the US and Europe will have to accept it.
Be explicit in warning Saudi Arabia (who, after Assad, bear the largest amount of responsibility for the start of the war) that we will no longer tolerate their interference in other countries in the region. Now is the time to do this when Western reliability on Saudi oil is waning or even ending. Stop treating Saudi like a regional ally and start treating them like the problem.
Forget the territorial integrity of Syria. It is an artificial construct anyway. Allow the Kurds to break away and guarantee their existence as a separate state carved from Syria and Iraq on the condition they do not threaten the geographic integrity of Turkey. Turkey won't like it and may well pull out of NATO but at the moment they are as much of a liability as they are an asset.
I find it funny that you mention Iran once, and write a long paragraph on Saudi. Forget Saudi in this case: Iran's the player.
Your last paragraph has been my position since before the last vote. It'd cause large population movements, but there have been those anyway during the war. Splitting up Syria might be the least-worst option. There are obvious difficulties: for one, it has to be the choice of the population, and I'm unsure how you freely and fairly do that when the population has scattered.
I also said that if we did nothing the conflict would spread and destabilise the region. And it has.
Iran was not the driving force behind the revolt against Assad, Saudi Arabia was. This is as much a religious war between the Wahhabi Saudi's and the Alawite Syrian regime as it is anything else. Saudi has far more to answer for in this war than Iran.
Back to more mundane (or should that be fridane) matters...
Looking through the Surrey nominations, full slates for both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats - Labour are standing in all bar 6 or 7 divisions (the rural ones). Greens and UKIP standing roughly 60 candidates each. After that there are 30 or so Independents (including the sitting RA Councillors in Epsom and elsewhere).
A number of seats are five corner battles with Con, Lab, LD, UKIP and Green. I note no UKIP candidates in Guildford but well represented elsewhere.
Probably already been mentioned but I believe the first time the LDs have contested every seat in Cornwall. In the past, pro-LD Independents have not been opposed but not this time. The LDs need 18 or 19 gains to take overall control - I think that's a big ask. Of the 121 or so seats in Cornwall, 107 are held by the LDs, Conservatives and Independents so taking control isn't just about scooping up UKIP seats but taking Con and Ind seats as well.
Has anyone asked the vital question; What is the motivation for Assad using chemical weapons in a sparsely populated area where there were more children than male adults? It sounds like a propaganda exercise. I would think it reasonably easy to establish the facts beyond "it just seems very likely" which is Michael Farron's anwer to the question "Where's the proof?"
If this was a pre-warned one-off strike to minimise casualties and send a message that chemical weapons won't be tolerated then I can go along with it.
I am still mystified as to why Syria would do this right now. Assad (with Putin's support) has the situation under control and pretty much have the field to themselves and have a free hand to act. I can't see why they would set out to inflame world opinion at this point by using chemical weapons. It doesn't quite add up to me. (God perhaps I'm morphing into Plato and I'll be spending the rest of my life on conspiracy alt-right websites!)
I may be over analysing this but as Assad has absolutely NO regard for the rebels, he may have executed this strike to test Trump's mettle, with or without Putin's connivance.
That's a plausible expianation but as the west is pretty much letting Assad get on with it it was a huge and essentially unnecessary risk to take.
I seem to recall a recent & relatively widely held PB view that we should pragmatically support Assad/Putin in a crusade against the slavering fascists of Isis and the Wahhabites. I'm assuming this is now a deceased duck?
Yep, I was wondering that.
There are a number of topics on which i think pb.com community is very knowledgeable. Defense procurement failures, train journeys on holiday, F1, by-elections, polling etc... Middle East foreign policy isn't one of them.
There is, frankly, no good answer to the Middle East which has been a mess for most of the last and the previous century, if not longer.
The place itself is beautiful. The vegetation and wildlife are spectacular.
Not sure about any of the rest. I'm not at all convinced that having oil has done it any good either. Since starting again and populating the place with people who are not certifiable loons is not an option, not sure what can be done.
Francois Hollande, the out-going French president, said the strikes were exactly what France had wanted after the 2013 chemical weapons attack at Ghouta that killed at least 280 people, but were scotched by a vacillating Barack Obama and a 'no' vote in the British parliament.
The alt-right crowd are in for a tough few years i think... Reality is coming and they aren't going to like it.
Yet again, the alt-right and the far left are singing from the same hymn book.
I've been following Plato's twitter to see what the views are of Trump supporters so today was a good day to see how this was handled. There are links to other's comments every few minutes and over the last few days it has been focused on how the gas strike wasn't the Syrian regime; what is in it for them? However this soon moved on to - it didn't happen; its all faked.
Obviously the strike last night threw that view into turmoil. It evolved into Trump is playing a 'Chess game', out manoeuvring his opponents. Now they seem generally to be behind it, even though 24 hours ago it wasn't the Syrian Regime and then it didn't happen anyway.
Re Infowars - Did anyone listen to the R4 documentary on the Sandy Hook massacre conspiracy and how many of the parents are being treated by the conspiracy theorists now?
I seem to recall a recent & relatively widely held PB view that we should pragmatically support Assad/Putin in a crusade against the slavering fascists of Isis and the Wahhabites. I'm assuming this is now a deceased duck?
Yep, I was wondering that.
There are a number of topics on which i think pb.com community is very knowledgeable. Defense procurement failures, train journeys on holiday, F1, by-elections, polling etc... Middle East foreign policy isn't one of them.
There is, frankly, no good answer to the Middle East which has been a mess for most of the last and the previous century, if not longer.
The place itself is beautiful. The vegetation and wildlife are spectacular.
Not sure about any of the rest. I'm not at all convinced that having oil has done it any good either. Since starting again and populating the place with people who are not certifiable loons is not an option, not sure what can be done.
Yep i agree. If ever there were a topic to feel humble about... And accept outsiders might not fully understand... It's middle East foreign policy. I'm still confident the Iraq war was a bad idea, and feel the gulf war was a good one... But other than that.... Feel very uncertain.
I seem to recall a recent & relatively widely held PB view that we should pragmatically support Assad/Putin in a crusade against the slavering fascists of Isis and the Wahhabites. I'm assuming this is now a deceased duck?
Yep, I was wondering that.
There are a number of topics on which i think pb.com community is very knowledgeable. Defense procurement failures, train journeys on holiday, F1, by-elections, polling etc... Middle East foreign policy isn't one of them.
There is, frankly, no good answer to the Middle East which has been a mess for most of the last and the previous century, if not longer.
The place itself is beautiful. The vegetation and wildlife are spectacular.
Not sure about any of the rest. I'm not at all convinced that having oil has done it any good either. Since starting again and populating the place with people who are not certifiable loons is not an option, not sure what can be done.
Agree with this. However, generations of conflict can turn the most moderate into certifiable loons. Our own Reformation shows that.
I seem to recall a recent & relatively widely held PB view that we should pragmatically support Assad/Putin in a crusade against the slavering fascists of Isis and the Wahhabites. I'm assuming this is now a deceased duck?
Yep, I was wondering that.
There are a number of topics on which i think pb.com community is very knowledgeable. Defense procurement failures, train journeys on holiday, F1, by-elections, polling etc... Middle East foreign policy isn't one of them.
There is, frankly, no good answer to the Middle East which has been a mess for most of the last and the previous century, if not longer.
The place itself is beautiful. The vegetation and wildlife are spectacular.
Not sure about any of the rest. I'm not at all convinced that having oil has done it any good either. Since starting again and populating the place with people who are not certifiable loons is not an option, not sure what can be done.
What do you do when there are no good sides to support, just varying degrees of evil?
I seem to recall a recent & relatively widely held PB view that we should pragmatically support Assad/Putin in a crusade against the slavering fascists of Isis and the Wahhabites. I'm assuming this is now a deceased duck?
Yep, I was wondering that.
There are a number of topics on which i think pb.com community is very knowledgeable. Defense procurement failures, train journeys on holiday, F1, by-elections, polling etc... Middle East foreign policy isn't one of them.
There is, frankly, no good answer to the Middle East which has been a mess for most of the last and the previous century, if not longer.
The place itself is beautiful. The vegetation and wildlife are spectacular.
Not sure about any of the rest. I'm not at all convinced that having oil has done it any good either. Since starting again and populating the place with people who are not certifiable loons is not an option, not sure what can be done.
The middle east is a cesspit not because it is awash in the devil's excrement but because it is awash with a certain religion. And hosts the civil war raging within that religion.
The alt-right crowd are in for a tough few years i think... Reality is coming and they aren't going to like it.
Yet again, the alt-right and the far left are singing from the same hymn book.
I've been following Plato's twitter to see what the views are of Trump supporters so today was a good day to see how this was handled. There are links to other's comments every few minutes and over the last few days it has been focused on how the gas strike wasn't the Syrian regime; what is in it for them? However this soon moved on to - it didn't happen; its all faked.
Obviously the strike last night threw that view into turmoil. It evolved into Trump is playing a 'Chess game', out manoeuvring his opponents. Now they seem generally to be behind it, even though 24 hours ago it wasn't the Syrian Regime and then it didn't happen anyway.
Re Infowars - Did anyone listen to the R4 documentary on the Sandy Hook massacre conspiracy and how many of the parents are being treated by the conspiracy theorists now?
I didn't hear that one but a recent BBC TV programme on Turkey featured praise for Erdogan's generosity to the refugees fleeing Syria. The more cynical analysis went as follows ... he may hope that they never go home but become Turkish citizens and bolster his majority in future elections.
It made me think ... if Erdogan wants to become the strong man of a semi-Islamic republic and is planning to become both 'president' and 'prime minister', with a token 'parliament' giving him a permanent majority of 100, does NATO allow dictatorships? The EU doesn't.
I'm in support of the air strikes, the red line on chemical weaponry needs to be upheld.
I'm reserving judgement on any possible further escalation - except against ISIS... that task may well have been made more difficult with a possible Russia relation breakdown. But that is an unavoidable follow on.
Assad, although part of the problem - like McGuinness may well end up being part of the solution still.
Has anyone asked the vital question; What is the motivation for Assad using chemical weapons in a sparsely populated area where there were more children than male adults? It sounds like a propaganda exercise. I would think it reasonably easy to establish the facts beyond "it just seems very likely" which is Michael Farron's anwer to the question "Where's the proof?"
If this was a pre-warned one-off strike to minimise casualties and send a message that chemical weapons won't be tolerated then I can go along with it.
I am still mystified as to why Syria would do this right now. Assad (with Putin's support) has the situation under control and pretty much have the field to themselves and have a free hand to act. I can't see why they would set out to inflame world opinion at this point by using chemical weapons. It doesn't quite add up to me. (God perhaps I'm morphing into Plato and I'll be spending the rest of my life on conspiracy alt-right websites!)
I may be over analysing this but as Assad has absolutely NO regard for the rebels, he may have executed this strike to test Trump's mettle, with or without Putin's connivance.
That's a plausible expianation but as the west is pretty much letting Assad get on with it it was a huge and essentially unnecessary risk to take.
But if Trump had sat on his hands it would have coloured his presidency differently. As I said I may be over analysing this and it could have just been Assad being a mad dictator who thinks he can do anything he likes.
I seem to recall a recent & relatively widely held PB view that we should pragmatically support Assad/Putin in a crusade against the slavering fascists of Isis and the Wahhabites. I'm assuming this is now a deceased duck?
Yep, I was wondering that.
There are a number of topics on which i think pb.com community is very knowledgeable. Defense procurement failures, train journeys on holiday, F1, by-elections, polling etc... Middle East foreign policy isn't one of them.
There is, frankly, no good answer to the Middle East which has been a mess for most of the last and the previous century, if not longer.
The place itself is beautiful. The vegetation and wildlife are spectacular.
Not sure about any of the rest. I'm not at all convinced that having oil has done it any good either. Since starting again and populating the place with people who are not certifiable loons is not an option, not sure what can be done.
Having spent lots of time in the region I can confirm (if it ever needed saying) that the vast majority of people living there are not loons, certifiable or otherwise. At least no more than those living in Paris or Manchester or Hopewell, Virginia.
Even the fairly religious ones don't want to hurt their neighbours or fellow countrymen. There is a reason we call the extremists, extremist. It is because they are not the norm. Too many people seem to forget that when looking at the region from the outside, especially the vast majority whose nearest encounter is the duty free at Dubai or the beach at Sharm el Sheikh.
I didn't hear that one but a recent BBC TV programme on Turkey featured praise for Erdogan's generosity to the refugees fleeing Syria. The more cynical analysis went as follows ... he may hope that they never go home but become Turkish citizens and bolster his majority in future elections.
It made me think ... if Erdogan wants to become the strong man of a semi-Islamic republic and is planning to become both 'president' and 'prime minister', with a token 'parliament' giving him a permanent majority of 100, does NATO allow dictatorships? The EU doesn't.
On the NATO point, no. Portugal and Greece were both members of NATO while being under a dictator.
What will China (the protector of North Korea) do now? Trump has demonstrated he is prepared to use force, and he has threatened to act against North Korea.
I seem to recall a recent & relatively widely held PB view that we should pragmatically support Assad/Putin in a crusade against the slavering fascists of Isis and the Wahhabites. I'm assuming this is now a deceased duck?
Yep, I was wondering that.
There are a number of topics on which i think pb.com community is very knowledgeable. Defense procurement failures, train journeys on holiday, F1, by-elections, polling etc... Middle East foreign policy isn't one of them.
There is, frankly, no good answer to the Middle East which has been a mess for most of the last and the previous century, if not longer.
The place itself is beautiful. The vegetation and wildlife are spectacular.
Not sure about any of the rest. I'm not at all convinced that having oil has done it any good either. Since starting again and populating the place with people who are not certifiable loons is not an option, not sure what can be done.
Having spent lots of time in the region I can confirm (if it ever needed saying) that the vast majority of people living there are not loons, certifiable or otherwise. At least no more than those living in Paris or Manchester or Hopewell, Virginia.
Even the fairly religious ones don't want to hurt their neighbours or fellow countrymen. There is a reason we call the extremists, extremist. It is because they are not the norm. Too many people seem to forget that when looking at the region from the outside, especially the vast majority whose nearest encounter is the duty free at Dubai or the beach at Sharm el Sheikh.
Fair enough. Still, whether certifiable loons or not, they do seem pretty much incapable of living in peace with each other let alone with anyone else or of creating functional civilized polities which do not spend most of their time killing their own citizens or the citizens of other states.
So, frankly, I'd like to have to do as little as possible with the place until it grows up.
I realize that this is probably an ill-informed and cowardly view. I would love to travel throughout the region and explore the remains of the old Roman Empire but as I would like to live to an old age, God willing, I will have to direct my energies elsewhere for the moment.
I seem to recall a recent & relatively widely held PB view that we should pragmatically support Assad/Putin in a crusade against the slavering fascists of Isis and the Wahhabites. I'm assuming this is now a deceased duck?
Yep, I was wondering that.
There are a number of topics on which i think pb.com community is very knowledgeable. Defense procurement failures, train journeys on holiday, F1, by-elections, polling etc... Middle East foreign policy isn't one of them.
There is, frankly, no good answer to the Middle East which has been a mess for most of the last and the previous century, if not longer.
The place itself is beautiful. The vegetation and wildlife are spectacular.
Not sure about any of the rest. I'm not at all convinced that having oil has done it any good either. Since starting again and populating the place with people who are not certifiable loons is not an option, not sure what can be done.
The middle east is a cesspit not because it is awash in the devil's excrement but because it is awash with a certain religion. And hosts the civil war raging within that religion.
There is much in what you say, Mr. Patrick. There are certifiable loons in the ME and some evil people, but that is the same anywhere. However, there are a very large number of genuinely nice people. I never met an unpleasant Omani, for example, and a chum of mine who went on holiday to Iran reckons the ordinary folk there are the most gracious, generous and hospitable people on the planet.
On topic: Seems a sensible, well-judged and well-executed intervention by Trump. Warning the Russians (and therefore the Syrians) was sensible - we don'rt want to start an accidental world war, do we? And doing so - contrary to what Richard T and Southam said upthread - doesn't mean the attack was ineffective in military terms; this was 59 Tomahawks, that's a lot of oomph. Of course, with prior warning the Syrians will have been able to evacuate most of the target airport so casualites were limted (is that a bad thing?). But they will still have lost a significant chunk of miltary hardware, planes, and radar systems.
As I said at the time of Ed Miliband's disgraceful and cynical torpedoing of action in 2013, the outlawing of fatal chemical weapons has been an international red line for a hundred years, and thank heaven for that. Of course, there have been breaches of it from time to time, but overall it's one of the great successes of international agreement that chemical weapons have largely been kept out of the equation. It's a red line we should seek to maintain, in an imperfect world. Trump got this right.
As I said at the time of Ed Miliband's disgraceful and cynical torpedoing of action in 2013, the outlawing of fatal chemical weapons has been an international red line for a hundred years, and thank heaven for that. Of course, there have been breaches of it from time to time, but overall it's one of the great successes of international agreement that chemical weapons have largely been kept out of the equation. It's a red line we should seek to maintain; in an imperfect world. Trump got this right.
You may remember that in 2012 I was flirting with Labour but Ed Miliband's disgraceful game-playing over Syria in 2013 was the moment it became clear to me he was unfit to be Prime Minister.
@MichaelDugher: Stop criticising Corbyn's slow response: it takes time for Seamas to run the draft statement by the Kremlin, Stop the War + the Morning Star
I seem to recall a recent & relatively widely held PB view that we should pragmatically support Assad/Putin in a crusade against the slavering fascists of Isis and the Wahhabites. I'm assuming this is now a deceased duck?
Yep, I was wondering that.
There are a number of topics on which i think pb.com community is very knowledgeable. Defense procurement failures, train journeys on holiday, F1, by-elections, polling etc... Middle East foreign policy isn't one of them.
There is, frankly, no good answer to the Middle East which has been a mess for most of the last and the previous century, if not longer.
The place itself is beautiful. The vegetation and wildlife are spectacular.
Not sure about any of the rest. I'm not at all convinced that having oil has done it any good either. Since starting again and populating the place with people who are not certifiable loons is not an option, not sure what can be done.
The middle east is a cesspit not because it is awash in the devil's excrement but because it is awash with a certain religion. And hosts the civil war raging within that religion.
There is much in what you say, Mr. Patrick. There are certifiable loons in the ME and some evil people, but that is the same anywhere. However, there are a very large number of genuinely nice people. I never met an unpleasant Omani, for example, and a chum of mine who went on holiday to Iran reckons the ordinary folk there are the most gracious, generous and hospitable people on the planet.
Indeed. Most Muslims are lovely. Islam is not. They need a Reformation and for one side in the civil war to win.
I see the number of civilians killed by the US airstrike continues to rise - as reported by the Syrian authorities. Wonder how long it will be before there's more been 'killed' in this than by the Sarin attack!
As I said at the time of Ed Miliband's disgraceful and cynical torpedoing of action in 2013, the outlawing of fatal chemical weapons has been an international red line for a hundred years, and thank heaven for that. Of course, there have been breaches of it from time to time, but overall it's one of the great successes of international agreement that chemical weapons have largely been kept out of the equation. It's a red line we should seek to maintain, in an imperfect world. Trump got this right.
British MPs should be ashamed – they wasted four vital years when they voted not to bomb Syria the first time round The MPs who voted against air strikes in 2013 should take a look in the mirror. As George Osborne, the former Chancellor, told an emergency debate on the crisis in Aleppo last December: “We are deceiving ourselves in this Parliament if we believe that we have no responsibility for what has happened in Syria.
@KateEMcCann: Why does Labour split matter? Imagine the impact party would have as a strong united voice. Instead we're talking in-fighting. Again. #Syria
I seem to recall a recent & relatively widely held PB view that we should pragmatically support Assad/Putin in a crusade against the slavering fascists of Isis and the Wahhabites. I'm assuming this is now a deceased duck?
Yep, I was wondering that.
There are a number of topics on which i think pb.com community is very knowledgeable. Defense procurement failures, train journeys on holiday, F1, by-elections, polling etc... Middle East foreign policy isn't one of them.
There is, frankly, no good answer to the Middle East which has been a mess for most of the last and the previous century, if not longer.
The place itself is beautiful. The vegetation and wildlife are spectacular.
Not sure about any of the rest. I'm not at all convinced that having oil has done it any good either. Since starting again and populating the place with people who are not certifiable loons is not an option, not sure what can be done.
The middle east is a cesspit not because it is awash in the devil's excrement but because it is awash with a certain religion. And hosts the civil war raging within that religion.
There is much in what you say, Mr. Patrick. There are certifiable loons in the ME and some evil people, but that is the same anywhere. However, there are a very large number of genuinely nice people. I never met an unpleasant Omani, for example, and a chum of mine who went on holiday to Iran reckons the ordinary folk there are the most gracious, generous and hospitable people on the planet.
Iran is a curious mix of the humane and decent (genuine tolerance of Jews and Christians, excellent refugee camps, for example) and the really loopy. But then, they'd probably view us in the same light.
I seem to recall a recent & relatively widely held PB view that we should pragmatically support Assad/Putin in a crusade against the slavering fascists of Isis and the Wahhabites. I'm assuming this is now a deceased duck?
Yep, I was wondering that.
There are a number of topics on which i think pb.com community is very knowledgeable. Defense procurement failures, train journeys on holiday, F1, by-elections, polling etc... Middle East foreign policy isn't one of them.
There is, frankly, no good answer to the Middle East which has been a mess for most of the last and the previous century, if not longer.
The place itself is beautiful. The vegetation and wildlife are spectacular.
Not sure about any of the rest. I'm not at all convinced that having oil has done it any good either. Since starting again and populating the place with people who are not certifiable loons is not an option, not sure what can be done.
Having spent lots of time in the region I can confirm (if it ever needed saying) that the vast majority of people living there are not loons, certifiable or otherwise. At least no more than those living in Paris or Manchester or Hopewell, Virginia.
Even the fairly religious ones don't want to hurt their neighbours or fellow countrymen. There is a reason we call the extremists, extremist. It is because they are not the norm. Too many people seem to forget that when looking at the region from the outside, especially the vast majority whose nearest encounter is the duty free at Dubai or the beach at Sharm el Sheikh.
Fair enough. Still, whether certifiable loons or not, they do seem pretty much incapable of living in peace with each other let alone with anyone else or of creating functional civilized polities which do not spend most of their time killing their own citizens or the citizens of other states.
So, frankly, I'd like to have to do as little as possible with the place until it grows up.
I realize that this is probably an ill-informed and cowardly view. I would love to travel throughout the region and explore the remains of the old Roman Empire but as I would like to live to an old age, God willing, I will have to direct my energies elsewhere for the moment.
Once civil war becomes endemic, moderates are forced to choose sides with extremists, who they'd really prefer not to be in charge.
Comments
Still not much sign of a long-term solution emerging, which means more suffering for the Syrian people unfortunately.
http://www.vox.com/2017/4/6/15215376/alt-right-trump-syria
I just feel for a man who has lost the woman he loves and in such an appalling way. Like the American couple on the last day of their holiday to celebrate their 25th wedding anniversary.
And last night a father in Syria weeping over his two babies.
Real lives shattered by evil. It breaks your heart
The PLP attempting to box Corbyn in
https://twitter.com/eucopresident/status/850276318914560002
I am still mystified as to why Syria would do this right now. Assad (with Putin's support) has the situation under control and pretty much have the field to themselves and have a free hand to act. I can't see why they would set out to inflame world opinion at this point by using chemical weapons. It doesn't quite add up to me. (God perhaps I'm morphing into Plato and I'll be spending the rest of my life on conspiracy alt-right websites!)
Presumably Corbyn is trying to come up with a form of words that doesn't make him look like a complete asshat. The question now though is, what form of words could make him look less of an asshat than not making a statement of any sort for this length of time?
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/850283814748344321
If that stands, there may be no race at all.
https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/850276997028761600
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/07/us-air-strike-syria-world-reacted-donald-trumps-decision-intervene/
Ok, I just went to the scary visual place.
Looking through the Surrey nominations, full slates for both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats - Labour are standing in all bar 6 or 7 divisions (the rural ones). Greens and UKIP standing roughly 60 candidates each. After that there are 30 or so Independents (including the sitting RA Councillors in Epsom and elsewhere).
A number of seats are five corner battles with Con, Lab, LD, UKIP and Green. I note no UKIP candidates in Guildford but well represented elsewhere.
Probably already been mentioned but I believe the first time the LDs have contested every seat in Cornwall. In the past, pro-LD Independents have not been opposed but not this time. The LDs need 18 or 19 gains to take overall control - I think that's a big ask. Of the 121 or so seats in Cornwall, 107 are held by the LDs, Conservatives and Independents so taking control isn't just about scooping up UKIP seats but taking Con and Ind seats as well.
The place itself is beautiful. The vegetation and wildlife are spectacular.
Not sure about any of the rest. I'm not at all convinced that having oil has done it any good either. Since starting again and populating the place with people who are not certifiable loons is not an option, not sure what can be done.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/07/us-air-strike-syria-world-reacted-donald-trumps-decision-intervene/
Obviously the strike last night threw that view into turmoil. It evolved into Trump is playing a 'Chess game', out manoeuvring his opponents. Now they seem generally to be behind it, even though 24 hours ago it wasn't the Syrian Regime and then it didn't happen anyway.
Re Infowars - Did anyone listen to the R4 documentary on the Sandy Hook massacre conspiracy and how many of the parents are being treated by the conspiracy theorists now?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/06/cadburys-comes-home-dairy-milk-production-set-return-uk/
Something something something Hitler, Hitler something, Hitler, Hitler, something, Hitler, Hitler, Hitler, Hitler..
https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/trump-hails-eu-for-getting-their-act-together-in-face-of-brexit/
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/world/middleeast/syria-bashar-al-assad-russia-sarin-attack.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0
It made me think ... if Erdogan wants to become the strong man of a semi-Islamic republic and is planning to become both 'president' and 'prime minister', with a token 'parliament' giving him a permanent majority of 100, does NATO allow dictatorships? The EU doesn't.
I'm in support of the air strikes, the red line on chemical weaponry needs to be upheld.
I'm reserving judgement on any possible further escalation - except against ISIS... that task may well have been made more difficult with a possible Russia relation breakdown. But that is an unavoidable follow on.
Assad, although part of the problem - like McGuinness may well end up being part of the solution still.
Even the fairly religious ones don't want to hurt their neighbours or fellow countrymen. There is a reason we call the extremists, extremist. It is because they are not the norm. Too many people seem to forget that when looking at the region from the outside, especially the vast majority whose nearest encounter is the duty free at Dubai or the beach at Sharm el Sheikh.
http://press.labour.org.uk/post/159297164079/jeremy-corbyn-statement-on-us-air-strikes-on-a
https://twitter.com/EliotHiggins/status/850294724716056576
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4389690/Tiny-Scottish-woman-punches-taller-man-McDonald-s.html
(It's been fun)
His planes getting destroyed, or a Judge lead inquiry ?
Is China neutral over this strike? Just curious.
It also seems to have vetoed action against said weapons in the past though.
"Syria should be solved by peaceful means"...
Neutral in my opinion.
I appreciate China has bigger issues to handle on the world stage. Like sorting out the smog so the Grand Prix can go ahead.
So, frankly, I'd like to have to do as little as possible with the place until it grows up.
I realize that this is probably an ill-informed and cowardly view. I would love to travel throughout the region and explore the remains of the old Roman Empire but as I would like to live to an old age, God willing, I will have to direct my energies elsewhere for the moment.
Why are we paying Short Money to this Opposition?
As I said at the time of Ed Miliband's disgraceful and cynical torpedoing of action in 2013, the outlawing of fatal chemical weapons has been an international red line for a hundred years, and thank heaven for that. Of course, there have been breaches of it from time to time, but overall it's one of the great successes of international agreement that chemical weapons have largely been kept out of the equation. It's a red line we should seek to maintain, in an imperfect world. Trump got this right.
The MPs who voted against air strikes in 2013 should take a look in the mirror. As George Osborne, the former Chancellor, told an emergency debate on the crisis in Aleppo last December: “We are deceiving ourselves in this Parliament if we believe that we have no responsibility for what has happened in Syria.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-airstrikes-donald-trump-putin-labour-ashamed-chemical-war-assad-weapons-a7671846.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/07/us/trump-far-alt-right-syria.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur
Egregious splitting of infinitive.