The Middle East: only Wars & Conflict ! .. ??

[melthebell 862]

Bush Jnr in Iraq and Afghanistan. Cameron and Sarkozy in Libya. As for Mubarak I would imagine that Obama wasnt very happy at his demise. Mubarak after all was America's key ally in the Arab world but when the mobs take to the street and start yelling about liberty for all and Mubarak seen as a cruel dictator western leaders see themselves as being caught between a rock and a hard place

exactly, the west get rid of those strong leaders and wonder why it all turns to sheet

[Rupert_Baehr 10]

Who should be getting rid of those strong leaders?

 

Isn't that the job of the people who live there?

 

If they get rid of the 'strong leaders' and replace them with 'people we like' then they are (or should be) classed as 'our friends'. If they replace them with 'people we don't like" then they should be classed as 'not our friends.'

 

That's up to them - but (IMO) they can forget about 'foreign aid'.

 

Aid is something you give to your friends, not to any bunch of arseholes just because they happen to have taken over a country.

 

They (or not too many of them) won't starve to death because they have to do without foreign aid for a year or so ... (though hunger does tend to concentrate the mind.)

 

Their country. Their choice. But they should live with the result of that choice.

[janie48 95]

After reading your posts maybe more people will start thinking outside the box instead of relying on the controlled propaganda they are fed via popular media sources.

So what do you think the West should do in Middle East conflicts?

Ignore the pleadings of those who ask us to intervene and just let the suffering of masses of people continue and escalate, or should we make some attempt to provide assistance?

We just can't win on any decision, either way we seem to create upset, damned if we do, damned if we don't.

[Harleyman 12]

exactly, the west get rid of those strong leaders and wonder why it all turns to sheet

 

Who pressured the UN to take action to get rid of Ghadaffi? The Arab League... that's who... and then the UN got Cameron, Sarkozy and the somewhat unwilling Obama to to carry it out

 

It's time the Arab League got off their sorry, sad asses and started to act as a cohesive, effective entity tasked with settling and dealing with the prroblems amongst their quarellsome bretheren... or are too many of them too busy shopping for finery at Harrods or sipping Champagne on the Cote D'Azur to be concerned with such affairs?

[Rupert_Baehr 10]

So what do you think the West should do in Middle East conflicts?

Ignore the pleadings of those who ask us to intervene and just let the suffering of masses of people continue and escalate, or should we make some attempt to provide assistance?

We just can't win on any decision, either way we seem to create upset, damned if we do, damned if we don't.

 

 

Answering the question you put to Mafya - (it is, after all, an open forum) :

 

Yes, we should ignore the pleadings. It's their country and their civil war. If we don't ignore the pleadings, who should we send to fight it? - Our forces joined to defend the Realm, not to act as mercenaries at the beck and call of people like Hague.

 

The suffering of masses of people is indeed deplorable - but we (the UK) didn't start their CIVIL WAR and we are not responsible.

 

Their country. Their war. Their choice.

Edited August 25, 2013 by Rupert_Baehr

[Longcol 598]

Well standing back, and seeing this POSSIBLY objectively, the war in Syria is obviously a proxy war, between Saudi Arabia, and Syria, with the USA a hidden guiding hand for one side and Iran the other.

 

You missed out Russia. Syria has always been their proxy in the Middle East.

[Rupert_Baehr 10]

Syria is a part of Russia's 'soft underbelly'. Do you think they want a bunch of Islamic extremists crawling around it?

[erebus 10]

Syria is a part of Russia's 'soft underbelly'. Do you think they want a bunch of Islamic extremists crawling around it?

 

 

While we, with Haig playing the rabid dog, (doing a Blair) do whatever the US of A administration wants us to, from illegal wars, rendition, torture with our buddy Gaddafi, evidence came to us helping the very terrorists that are fighting in Syria, and who learned their craft in Afghanistan killing the great and good.

 

Is Iraq a place people feel free in? Is Libya another example of a people better off than before, and Afghanistan where democracy has revolutionised their previous life, of oppression. Are these symbols of success, to be repeated in Syria and then the grand satan …Iran?

 

Then living in glass houses springs to mind!

[janie48 95]

Answering the question you put to Mafya - (it is, after all, an open forum) :

 

Yes, we should ignore the pleadings. It's their country and their civil war. If we don't ignore the pleadings, who should we send to fight it? - Our forces joined to defend the Realm, not to act as mercenaries at the beck and call of people like Hague.

 

The suffering of masses of people is indeed deplorable - but we (the UK) didn't start their CIVIL WAR and we are not responsible.

 

Their country. Their war. Their choice.

Who said anything about sending our forces in to fight?

They're are always other alternatives.

 

Any intervention should only ever be on the grounds of humanitarian principles. We would always hope that peace talks between nations would help bring about a solution, and urgently with caution in the case of Syria.

[taxman 12]

So what do you think the West should do in Middle East conflicts?

Ignore the pleadings of those who ask us to intervene and just let the suffering of masses of people continue and escalate, or should we make some attempt to provide assistance?

We just can't win on any decision, either way we seem to create upset, damned if we do, damned if we don't.

 

As much as my heart goes out to those being gassed, bombed or driven to seek asylum in other countries, lets not forget that the UK, USA, France and Germany are not their neighbours, neither are they the richest countries in the world.

 

Their neighbours include oil rich kingdoms who sell us oil and buy our fighter planes. That's how rich they are. They **** gold. They are so rich they could buy and sell the UK a hundred times over.

 

Let them deal with it!

[Harleyman 12]

One way or another Assad has to go. I dont see how any country could extend diplomatic recognition to a government headed by a leader who uses chemical weapons against his own people. He's an obscenity.

 

Obama really is a case of damned if he does and damned if he does not. But in the event that it was decided to take Assad out if I were he I would not take any steps until it is fully sanctioned by the Arab League and the United Nations with the full and unconditional support of all NATO members and allies.

 

If Assad was toppled and some horrible Islamic extremist party took over and it ended up as another basket case then at least the blame would be fully shared by everyone

[Mecky 10]

Answering the question you put to Mafya - (it is, after all, an open forum) :

 

Yes, we should ignore the pleadings. It's their country and their civil war. If we don't ignore the pleadings, who should we send to fight it? - Our forces joined to defend the Realm, not to act as mercenaries at the beck and call of people like Hague.

 

The suffering of masses of people is indeed deplorable - but we (the UK) didn't start their CIVIL WAR and we are not responsible.

 

Their country. Their war. Their choice.

 

Suppose if happened here and you were getting pasted, would you want outside help? It would be foolish to suggest that no other country is involved either. There will always be governments looking to aid their allies. Remember the scene from the movie The Green Berets?

 

From Red China: Chicom K-50 sub-machine gun... Chinese communist! SKS Soviet-made semi-automatic carbine... Russian communist! Ammunition, Czechoslovakian-made... Czech communist! No sir, Mr. Beckworth! It doesn't take a lead weight to fall on me or a hit from one of those weapons to recognize that what's involved here is communist domination of the world!

 

The sides in Syria may not be communists but the principle is the same.

Edited August 27, 2013 by Mecky