Irishbeekeeper

Lest we forget, during the Iran-Iraq war in the 80s, Iraq was the only country to have used chemicals and guess who provided it to them, among others..

hypocrisy, thy name is...

I strongly feel that it would be a HUGE mistake to attack Syria at this point.

[source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Iraq_War]

mikewot

The fact that David Cameron is calling back all the MP's for a mass debate on Syria isn't a good sign. With so many mass debaters in one place and led by the biggest mass debater of them all, Cameron is sure to have his own way.
They'll pull it off but some heavy handed techniques will have to be used. Here's hoping for a happy ending.

Millhouse

It's a disaster to go there now. I see no benefit for us. It would be better to put up a big wall around the place and go back after 5 years once they have all killed each other.

The chemical weapons thing is rubbish. We are outraged at chemicals killing 1,300 people, yet ignore the previous 100,000 - or the 1,000+ killed by the Egyptian government inside a week.

My bet would be on the rebels having used the chemicals as a last ditch attempt to get the West's attention at a time when they are clearly starting to lose.

I'm sure the only winner here will be Teflon Tony selling both sides the weapons

Beaverstate

Yes. More than one winner though.

Inselaffen

Syria controlled by Assad and his Russian/Chinese/Iranian backers or Syria controlled by Religious nutters! Neither sounds a great option.

Beaverstate

Careful what you wish for.... Tunisia, Libya, Egypt all unwanted results, yet predictable.

britexpat76

I agree on all of that, the highlighted line being the interesting one. Why would Assad when he is finally getting the better of the rebels risk the wests intervention by using chemical weapons. Surely he is not that stupid? Looking at it last night a lot of MPs are not going to back the plans to intervene until the UN report in 4 days. Labour stance is laughable on the matter and they seem to of conveniently forgotten that bLIAR sent us into two countries for no reason

Millhouse

Only other theory is that the government isn't really one unit anymore and that maybe some arm of it with a different agenda to Asad let the gas loose.

britexpat76

The Yanks are claiming to have voice recordings between the government officials about it - Notably saying 'Who ****ing fired it'

Not as conclusive as Obama and Cameron seem to think..... I can see it getting unfortunately messy though not until after the weekend.

co durham boy

The Qatari's / Saudi's and Emirati's have plenty hardware at their disposal and plenty strategic air bases to help out

After all it's in their interests

shiva

should we intervene, maybe a year ago, now its just a ****ing mess best left alone.

quote from todays times re milibland

"The Government could not contain its fury. “No 10 and the Foreign Office think Miliband is a f****** c*** and a copper-bottomed s***. The French hate him now and he’s got no chance of building an alliance with the US Democratic Party,” said one Government source. "

might be my favorite quote of the year!

jam25mack

Whats a copper-bottomed S***?

Jim Smith

I cannot read Arabic newspapers but I think the Arab countries are being extremely quiet in the English versions available. Surely this problem should be solved by those in the region?!!!!

scrubbedexpat141

We haven't waded in yet because there is zero ****ing benefit.

Libya has the black gold and BP probably benefitted enormously from us bombing the joint.

Syria? We kind of have to react now, you can't go chucking chemical bombs around in this day and age, it's just not on.

flares

Tend to agree. But would they escalate it in guerilla fashion? Nerve gas smuggled into the UAE and then let off in MoE or on the Metro!!