You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.
The UK Not Intervening in Syria.
Posted:
The UK Not Intervening in Syria.Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 06, 201211Year Member
Posts: 6,360
Reputation Power: 374
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 06, 201211Year Member
Posts: 6,360
Reputation Power: 374
I might be the only one who is genuinely annoyed by this, but the fact that the UK Is one of the main members of the UN, who have explicitly stated that Chemical weapons use is intolerable, and are staying out of it is an insult to everyone.
It isn't even clear whether Assad used Chemical weaponry or if it was a set up by the rebels to get international attention and military intervention and the UK has already backed out.
If it turns out that Assad did use Chemical weapons, the UK might as well not be in the UN.
This is the opposite of being a sensationalist patriot, why command something if we're not going to enforce it?
We look like a bunch of scared kittens who won't follow through on any laws we lay down.
I don't even want to think about the future implications of this decision because the UK has just advertised to the entire world that it's fine to use Chemical weapons if you make the circumstances look a bit murky.
If you don't understand why I'm so angry about this, then do some research into what different types of chemical weapons do to a person's body, look at some pictures.
It's a disgrace that the UK has pulled out without even knowing who the bad guy is.
It isn't even clear whether Assad used Chemical weaponry or if it was a set up by the rebels to get international attention and military intervention and the UK has already backed out.
If it turns out that Assad did use Chemical weapons, the UK might as well not be in the UN.
This is the opposite of being a sensationalist patriot, why command something if we're not going to enforce it?
We look like a bunch of scared kittens who won't follow through on any laws we lay down.
I don't even want to think about the future implications of this decision because the UK has just advertised to the entire world that it's fine to use Chemical weapons if you make the circumstances look a bit murky.
If you don't understand why I'm so angry about this, then do some research into what different types of chemical weapons do to a person's body, look at some pictures.
It's a disgrace that the UK has pulled out without even knowing who the bad guy is.
#2. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 24, 201112Year Member
Posts: 3,642
Reputation Power: 161
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 24, 201112Year Member
Posts: 3,642
Reputation Power: 161
By your logic, every country that isn't planning to attack Syria (pretty much every country except for the US and France) shouldn't be a member of the UN.
It's not that it's fine to use chemical weapons, it really isn't, but most other countries don't want another potential war on their hands.
It's not that it's fine to use chemical weapons, it really isn't, but most other countries don't want another potential war on their hands.
- 2useful
- 0not useful
#3. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 20, 201113Year Member
Posts: 4,336
Reputation Power: 211
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 20, 201113Year Member
Posts: 4,336
Reputation Power: 211
Just goes to show how powerful Cameron's government is, doesn't it.
- 0useful
- 0not useful
#4. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Nov 12, 201112Year Member
Posts: 922
Reputation Power: 37
Status: Offline
Joined: Nov 12, 201112Year Member
Posts: 922
Reputation Power: 37
Leave it to obomber... he'll handle it
- 0useful
- 1not useful
#5. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 24, 201310Year Member
Posts: 7
Reputation Power: 0
maybe because we do not want to be dragged into another useless conflict to make America richer ?
- 8useful
- 0not useful
#6. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 06, 201211Year Member
Posts: 6,360
Reputation Power: 374
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 06, 201211Year Member
Posts: 6,360
Reputation Power: 374
Establish wrote By your logic, every country that isn't planning to attack Syria (pretty much every country except for the US and France) shouldn't be a member of the UN.
It's not that it isn't fine to use chemical weapons, but most other countries don't want another potential war on their hands.
The UK can and should do something.
Tackle one war now to save a lot more potential ones down the line.
A line in the sand needs to be drawn and Assad should be made an example of.
If it turns out that the rebels used Chemical weapons, sure we made the right choice.
It's the fact that the UK doesn't even know who did it and we've already pulled out that gets to me.
- 1useful
- 2not useful
#7. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Jul 17, 201211Year Member
Posts: 3,828
Reputation Power: 159
Status: Offline
Joined: Jul 17, 201211Year Member
Posts: 3,828
Reputation Power: 159
#8. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 20, 201113Year Member
Posts: 4,336
Reputation Power: 211
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 20, 201113Year Member
Posts: 4,336
Reputation Power: 211
e_e wrote The UK can and should do something.
Tackle one war now to save a lot more potential ones down the line.
A line in the sand needs to be drawn and Assad should be made an example of.
If it turns out that the rebels used Chemical weapons, sure we made the right choice.
It's the fact that the UK doesn't even know who did it and we've already pulled out that gets to me.
Cameron wanted to do something, but he was outvoted in parliament, not much can be done. If Cameron had complete control we'd be set and ready to go with France and the US. But no one likes a dictatorship.
- 2useful
- 0not useful
#9. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Feb 11, 201014Year Member
Posts: 2,861
Reputation Power: 93
Status: Offline
Joined: Feb 11, 201014Year Member
Posts: 2,861
Reputation Power: 93
KJJrProductionz wrote murica'
|* * * * * * * * * * OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO|
| * * * * * * * * * :::::::::::::::::::::::::|
|* * * * * * * * * * OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO|
| * * * * * * * * * :::::::::::::::::::::::::|
|* * * * * * * * * * OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO|
| * * * * * * * * * ::::::::::::::::::::;::::|
|* * * * * * * * * * OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO|
|:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|
|OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO|
|:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|
|OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO|
|:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::|
|OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Why do you keep spamming this? Is it supposed to be offensive or something? Please leave you most likely didn't even learn about the UN yet and follow the news for a living
- 6useful
- 1not useful
#10. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Jul 26, 201112Year Member
Posts: 2,415
Reputation Power: 61
Status: Offline
Joined: Jul 26, 201112Year Member
Posts: 2,415
Reputation Power: 61
Do you want there to be another war? i understand your point however not every single country that is in the UN are going to do something about it. The UK do not want to do anything because the U.S are too far into, almost having a war with Syria and if more countries were to get involved then Assad might panic and say "Lets launch a couple of nukes". If everyone was to get involved it would be 193 vs 1 (countries)
- 3useful
- 1not useful
You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.