Quote by GnV
snip
It has been said that the only way to negotiate with an Arab is with a knife to his throat. This concept is totally alien to the west and we should keep out of it.
agreed :thumbup:
Sex God
agreed :thumbup:
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Syria - why are we supporting the Islamic terrorists?
agreed :thumbup:
russia,china on one side.
uk,france and america on the other.
i remember tony blair standing up and telling us all that saddam had weapons of mass distruction which could hit us within 7 minutes. a lie!
then i remember doctor david kelly hanging himself.
we went into iraq and now things are worse as the iraqi sunni shia fight it out.
went into afghanistan, a place even the russians couldnt win and its still a mess.
and now syria? we must be mad to get involved with this. no one like to see kids dying but our bombs would kill them and who would we be bombing?
i dont believe what the powers say about who was responsible for the chemical attack as i remember the 7 minute blair lie!
also havnt our troops had enough of getting involved in things which really dont concern us?
when did syria declare war against the Uk and what weapons do they have which can hurt us?
the rebels are terrorists and if we have anything to do with this civil war then we will have more nutters living here who hate us and will plan attacks on our homeland.
if we are threatened and our safety at risk by all means use force to protect us.
but syria? really?.
where has all this money come from to fund another war?
we should not be forcing our way of life on others.
if they want to kill each other let them get on with it.
its not our problem!
uk,france and america on the other.
i remember tony blair standing up and telling us all that saddam had weapons of mass distruction which could hit us within 7 minutes. a lie!
then i remember doctor david kelly hanging himself.
we went into iraq and now things are worse as the iraqi sunni shia fight it out.
went into afghanistan, a place even the russians couldnt win and its still a mess.
and now syria? we must be mad to get involved with this. no one like to see kids dying but our bombs would kill them and who would we be bombing?
i dont believe what the powers say about who was responsible for the chemical attack as i remember the 7 minute blair lie!
also havnt our troops had enough of getting involved in things which really dont concern us?
when did syria declare war against the Uk and what weapons do they have which can hurt us?
the rebels are terrorists and if we have anything to do with this civil war then we will have more nutters living here who hate us and will plan attacks on our homeland.
if we are threatened and our safety at risk by all means use force to protect us.
but syria? really?.
where has all this money come from to fund another war?
we should not be forcing our way of life on others.
if they want to kill each other let them get on with it.
its not our problem!
I don't really know enough to know if we should or should not intervene...
However if we were walking down a road, and we saw a big guy beating up another small guy, and kicking him when down so hard, he was pouring of blood.......would we walk on by or would we try and intervene maybe not on our own but with the help of another couple of guys. Personally I would shout to leave him alone, and if still took no notice I would try and assist the smaller guy with the help of others.
Is this not what is happening here but on a bigger scale. In the end can we just stand on by and watch a bully, inflict his will, with sheer brute force on others. Do we not have a moral duty to at least go to the assistance of the smaller guy. We did warn them of a red line, but it seems they have just said ok.....and jumped over that red line with both feet and said come on then !!
I would not like to see any service men used in combat.....but I do think we should enforce a no fly zone, so as to stop any further actions of this sort.
However if we were walking down a road, and we saw a big guy beating up another small guy, and kicking him when down so hard, he was pouring of blood.......would we walk on by or would we try and intervene maybe not on our own but with the help of another couple of guys. Personally I would shout to leave him alone, and if still took no notice I would try and assist the smaller guy with the help of others.
Is this not what is happening here but on a bigger scale. In the end can we just stand on by and watch a bully, inflict his will, with sheer brute force on others. Do we not have a moral duty to at least go to the assistance of the smaller guy. We did warn them of a red line, but it seems they have just said ok.....and jumped over that red line with both feet and said come on then !!
I would not like to see any service men used in combat.....but I do think we should enforce a no fly zone, so as to stop any further actions of this sort.
Sex God
Lets see the evidence !
The UN Weapons Inspectors scheduled to be there until Sunday, so be interested in seeing what their actual Report (interim or final) says BEFORE any Nation should be considering action.
The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) is an arms control agreement which outlaws the production, stockpiling, and use of chemical weapons. Its full name is the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction. The agreement is administered by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which is an independent organization based in the Hague, in the Netherlands.
The main obligation under the convention is the prohibition of use and production of chemical weapons, as well as the destruction of all chemical weapons. The destruction activities are verified by the OPCW. As of January 2013, around 78% of the (declared) stockpile of chemical weapons has thus been destroyed. The convention also has provisions for systematic evaluation of chemical and military plants, as well as for investigations of allegations of use and production of chemical weapons based on intelligence of other state parties.
As of June 2013, 189 states are party to the CWC, and another two countries (Israel and Myanmar) have signed but not yet ratified the convention.
Of 5 Nations not signed up to the Convention, Syria is one.
In the UK I'd like messrs Camron and Clegg to clearly and fully explain how anything they propose in Parliament
(a) is inline with the UN
(b) is inline with the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)
(c) abides by the UK Chemical Weapons Act 1996
(d) why the 'rush' before the Weapons Inspectors report is issued
The UN Weapons Inspectors scheduled to be there until Sunday, so be interested in seeing what their actual Report (interim or final) says BEFORE any Nation should be considering action.
The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) is an arms control agreement which outlaws the production, stockpiling, and use of chemical weapons. Its full name is the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction. The agreement is administered by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), which is an independent organization based in the Hague, in the Netherlands.
The main obligation under the convention is the prohibition of use and production of chemical weapons, as well as the destruction of all chemical weapons. The destruction activities are verified by the OPCW. As of January 2013, around 78% of the (declared) stockpile of chemical weapons has thus been destroyed. The convention also has provisions for systematic evaluation of chemical and military plants, as well as for investigations of allegations of use and production of chemical weapons based on intelligence of other state parties.
As of June 2013, 189 states are party to the CWC, and another two countries (Israel and Myanmar) have signed but not yet ratified the convention.
Of 5 Nations not signed up to the Convention, Syria is one.
In the UK I'd like messrs Camron and Clegg to clearly and fully explain how anything they propose in Parliament
(a) is inline with the UN
(b) is inline with the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)
(c) abides by the UK Chemical Weapons Act 1996
(d) why the 'rush' before the Weapons Inspectors report is issued
Neither the US, France or the UK will take any military action in Syria, I know because a number of people here in these forums told me so a few months back, they said that there was no plans, intentions, thoughts of a military interference by the West. They said I was an alarmist, warmonger and stupid for suggesting that it may come to military intervention.
So that's it, forget what you read in the news it simply isn't true
So that's it, forget what you read in the news it simply isn't true
Sex God
I don't think Cameron will get a majority in Parliament to allow him use UK weapons against Syria at this time.
Still not our battle in my opinion.
John
Still not our battle in my opinion.
John
Quote by dean
In the end can we just stand on by and watch a bully, inflict his will, with sheer brute force on others.
Who are you referring to here dean?
Bashar al Assad or the faceless opposition forces (whoever and whatever nationality they are)?
In reality both may be as bad as each other in the blame game but that makes all the more reason not to get involved.
I remember an advert I think for Police recruitment years ago. The scenario was simple. What appeared to be a youth barging through the crowd (presumably with bad intent) was actually a young person returning a purse to a little old lady who had dropped it (or something on those lines).
What we see on our TV screens is what the opposition forces in Syria want us to believe. It may just not be the truth. What reporters want us to see on our TV screens is what they too want us to believe (because there is fuck all else happening in the world and they need the income).
Ulterior motives? You bet your life on it.
And by the way dean. Your interference in a street fight against the apparent attacker may just turn out to be an off duty or plain clothes policeman attempting to make a lawful arrest of some resisting armed terrorist or other law breaker. You might just let the criminal escape...
Think about it. It's not our fight and we have no right to interfere.
It's election year next year IIRC. Cameron is looking for the 'Thatcher Factor' in the run up to the election like it was with the Falklands (different situation for sure) but the same scenario as used by Tony Bliar to further his career...
I'm dismayed at William Hague to be honest. I thought he was made of sterner stuff but in the end, all politicians have a price when it comes to selling their soul. Cameron, I wouldn't trust with my (measly) pocket money.
Francois Hollande the same.
Quote by GnV
In the end can we just stand on by and watch a bully, inflict his will, with sheer brute force on others.
Who are you referring to here dean?
Bashar al Assad or the faceless opposition forces (whoever and whatever nationality they are)?
In reality both may be as bad as each other in the blame game but that makes all the more reason not to get involved.
I remember an advert I think for Police recruitment years ago. The scenario was simple. What appeared to be a youth barging through the crowd (presumably with bad intent) was actually a young person returning a purse to a little old lady who had dropped it (or something on those lines).
What we see on our TV screens is what the opposition forces in Syria want us to believe. It may just not be the truth. What reporters want us to see on our TV screens is what they too want us to believe (because there is fuck all else happening in the world and they need the income).
Ulterior motives? You bet your life on it.
And by the way dean. Your interference in a street fight against the apparent attacker may just turn out to be an off duty or plain clothes policeman attempting to make a lawful arrest of some resisting armed terrorist or other law breaker. You might just let the criminal escape...
Think about it. It's not our fight and we have no right to interfere.
So you saying you see a guy having seven barrels of shit kicked out of him, you would simply walk on other side of the road. Sorry I wouldn't.
It's election year next year IIRC. Cameron is looking for the 'Thatcher Factor' in the run up to the election like it was with the Falklands (different situation for sure) but the same scenario as used by Tony Bliar to further his career...
I'm dismayed at William Hague to be honest. I thought he was made of sterner stuff but in the end, all politicians have a price when it comes to selling their soul. Cameron, I wouldn't trust with my (measly) pocket money.
Francois Hollande the same.
Firstly see above in red.....as stated before I would shout a warning, but then ask for assistance and do my best to stop the violence. This has I believe happened here, Syria and the authorities were warned about the use of chemical weapons...seems they have taken no notice and just carried on regardless.
Now as stated I do want to see our or any other countries troops used in combat. My idea is to enforce a no fly zone over Syria.....this way no more bombs like this can be dropped. Any movement of armoury by land could also be easily seen, by reconnaissance flights and satellite use.
Sex God
Firstly can I point out that a no fly zone is exactly that. It prevents the other country from using the airspace, it does not prevent movement of armour, troops or other types of ground unit.
To enforce a no fly zone requires a lot of effort. Firstly you will have to take out the enemy communication and C2 net. You will need to remove all airborne or ground based warning systems. There is also the trouble of surface to air missiles, ground based interception, not to mention the opposition air force.
Some of this effort will be achieved through the use of missiles, but some will still have to be the modern day Biggles. And Biggles will be supported by many other Airmen and Sailors who will all be put within reach of Syrian weapons to do there job.
Even when the no fly zone is enforced it will not stop ground based artillery throwing chemical shells over 15Km.
Just thought I ought to point that out.
To enforce a no fly zone requires a lot of effort. Firstly you will have to take out the enemy communication and C2 net. You will need to remove all airborne or ground based warning systems. There is also the trouble of surface to air missiles, ground based interception, not to mention the opposition air force.
Some of this effort will be achieved through the use of missiles, but some will still have to be the modern day Biggles. And Biggles will be supported by many other Airmen and Sailors who will all be put within reach of Syrian weapons to do there job.
Even when the no fly zone is enforced it will not stop ground based artillery throwing chemical shells over 15Km.
Just thought I ought to point that out.
...and a no fly zone worked in
Where?
Iraq?
Iran?
Afghanistan?
Libya?
Jeez, we have more problems with a no fly zone over Spain into Gibraltar! And there's no civil war going on there. We can't even control the skies over our own territory let alone over someone else's
And who is going to enforce this? The US?
And after regime change has been enforced under the legalities of the UN (as it supposedly was in Libya, Iraq etc etc) will the position change?
Will it fuck. It will be worse.
There are more deaths now in Iraq, Libya and other places since the west's involvement in affairs it does not understand! Oh, yes dean. Beating the shit out of people in the streets then becomes somehow legal, doesn't it. And, as in the case of Egypt, if the home military team don't like the legally installed western style influenced elected regime, it just deposes it and installs one it likes.
I think the UK should stick to dealing with cruelty to kids and solving the appalling treatment of the elderly and vulnerable in it's institutions first before it takes the moral high ground and teaches the Arab community how to live its life.
As has been said, life to an Arab is cheap. People are dispensable. Something to trade in for a sheeps head or a goat. That this is abhorrent to westerners is legendary but what gives the westerner the right to dictate what happens in a foreign land?
The US with it's own appalling record on human rights?
Dean, I respect your view that going to the aid of someone on the streets of Britain might be the right thing to do although becoming more and more risky in itself but doing this on the streets of Syria - if indeed you were foolish enough to be there in the first place - would be suicidal. They would slit your throat without a moments thought.
Best to stay on the other side of the road. Indeed, best not to be there in the first place.
Where?
Iraq?
Iran?
Afghanistan?
Libya?
Jeez, we have more problems with a no fly zone over Spain into Gibraltar! And there's no civil war going on there. We can't even control the skies over our own territory let alone over someone else's
And who is going to enforce this? The US?
And after regime change has been enforced under the legalities of the UN (as it supposedly was in Libya, Iraq etc etc) will the position change?
Will it fuck. It will be worse.
There are more deaths now in Iraq, Libya and other places since the west's involvement in affairs it does not understand! Oh, yes dean. Beating the shit out of people in the streets then becomes somehow legal, doesn't it. And, as in the case of Egypt, if the home military team don't like the legally installed western style influenced elected regime, it just deposes it and installs one it likes.
I think the UK should stick to dealing with cruelty to kids and solving the appalling treatment of the elderly and vulnerable in it's institutions first before it takes the moral high ground and teaches the Arab community how to live its life.
As has been said, life to an Arab is cheap. People are dispensable. Something to trade in for a sheeps head or a goat. That this is abhorrent to westerners is legendary but what gives the westerner the right to dictate what happens in a foreign land?
The US with it's own appalling record on human rights?
Dean, I respect your view that going to the aid of someone on the streets of Britain might be the right thing to do although becoming more and more risky in itself but doing this on the streets of Syria - if indeed you were foolish enough to be there in the first place - would be suicidal. They would slit your throat without a moments thought.
Best to stay on the other side of the road. Indeed, best not to be there in the first place.
Sex God
Quote by GnV
...and a no fly zone worked in
Where?
Iraq?
Iran?
Afghanistan?
Libya?
Th only UN authorised no fly zones were in Bosnia in the 90's, Northern and southern Iraq from the mid 90's and Libya in 2011.
There has never been a no fly zone enforced against Iran or Afghanistan.
Quote by Trevaunance
...and a no fly zone worked in
Where?
Iraq?
Iran?
Afghanistan?
Libya?
Th only UN authorised no fly zones were in Bosnia in the 90's, Northern and southern Iraq from the mid 90's and Libya in 2011.
There has never been a no fly zone enforced against Iran or Afghanistan.
Well, ok Trev.
It didn't (couldn't) work in those places then
Sex God
Quote by GnV
...and a no fly zone worked in
Where?
Iraq?
Iran?
Afghanistan?
Libya?
Th only UN authorised no fly zones were in Bosnia in the 90's, Northern and southern Iraq from the mid 90's and Libya in 2011.
There has never been a no fly zone enforced against Iran or Afghanistan.
Well, ok Trev.
It didn't (couldn't) work in those places then
i take it officially we are now doing nothing
unofficially
so, after being warned for 12 months of a red line in the sand, after the proven use by the western backed mercenary foreign jihadists by the u.n. in may, after the arrest of foreign jihadists with sarin by turkish police in southern turkey in july, the day after the u.n. inspectors arrive, assad bombs his own capital city with sarin gas ? this london trained neurologist must be completely mad or......
its all a total load of bollox to draw us into a worldwide nuclear confrontation with russia and china with the hubris of the western leaders expecting a climbdown of russia and china who say the claims are utter nonesense.
al nursra a la queader jihadist will be dissapointed if their airforce does'nt arrive in time to save them. read brezinski and understand the geopolitical moves here.
its all a total load of bollox to draw us into a worldwide nuclear confrontation with russia and china with the hubris of the western leaders expecting a climbdown of russia and china who say the claims are utter nonesense.
al nursra a la queader jihadist will be dissapointed if their airforce does'nt arrive in time to save them. read brezinski and understand the geopolitical moves here.
Sex God
Quote by gulsonroad30664
gona be a warm september
Hope so....
I'm sick of this rain already :lol2:
Sexpert
Okay, no apologies for sounding a bit middle England!This is a Civil war and at the moment contained within Syria's boarders so not sure what right we have to intervene. What is happening is truly horrendous and humanitarian aid is quite rightly flooding in. (but not from every nation)
We should be prepared to take action if either gene side is proven or if the dispute spills over the boarders into neighbouring states (Israel is next door)Other than that, diplomacy and trade sanctions seem to be the way forward, One man drawing a red line in a country that is not respected in a lot of middle east countries has shown the detachment that a lot of the political class living in there ivory towers don't even know the feeling of the people in there own country. Although "Mr President" does not have to worry about public opinion, he retires in a couple of years! All Hale democracy!
We should be prepared to take action if either gene side is proven or if the dispute spills over the boarders into neighbouring states (Israel is next door)Other than that, diplomacy and trade sanctions seem to be the way forward, One man drawing a red line in a country that is not respected in a lot of middle east countries has shown the detachment that a lot of the political class living in there ivory towers don't even know the feeling of the people in there own country. Although "Mr President" does not have to worry about public opinion, he retires in a couple of years! All Hale democracy!
Sex God
Quote by Steve
gona be a warm september
Hope so....
I'm sick of this rain already :lol2:
looks like he got that one wrong already
Sex God
Quote by Jeffxxx_2009
wtf this todo with sw
:welcome: To the forums.
I would feel a little bit more comfortable answering your question if I knew what 'sw' meant?
Quote by Jeffxxx_2009
wtf this todo with sw
in adult speech I think this translates as "what the fuck is this post to do with swinging"
And the answer is bugger all, if you want swinging/sex posts you go to the other forum subjects "lets talk about sex", "dogging", "lets meet up" or go to the chat rooms or send numerous mails out to others hoping you'll get a response.
The "fancy a chat" is the area for generally "vanilla" discussions covering any subject anyone wants to raise. I will admit quite a few of the discussions are political however the view points are generally interesting until some of the more mature members start bickering. I think of the "fancy a chat" forum as the equivalent of sitting in the pub nattering with your friends.
Quote by Gerty35
wtf this todo with sw
in adult speech I think this translates as "what the fuck is this post to do with swinging"
And the answer is bugger all, if you want swinging/sex posts you go to the other forum subjects "lets talk about sex", "dogging", "lets meet up" or go to the chat rooms or send numerous mails out to others hoping you'll get a response.
The "fancy a chat" is the area for generally "vanilla" discussions covering any subject anyone wants to raise. I will admit quite a few of the discussions are political however the view points are generally interesting until some of the more mature members start bickering. I think of the "fancy a chat" forum as the equivalent of sitting in the pub nattering with your friends.
In that case....can I have a Corona with a lime wedged in top of bottle please....thanks
Sexpert
Quote by Gerty35
wtf this todo with sw
in adult speech I think this translates as "what the fuck is this post to do with swinging"
And the answer is bugger all, if you want swinging/sex posts you go to the other forum subjects "lets talk about sex", "dogging", "lets meet up" or go to the chat rooms or send numerous mails out to others hoping you'll get a response.
The "fancy a chat" is the area for generally "vanilla" discussions covering any subject anyone wants to raise. I will admit quite a few of the discussions are political however the view points are generally interesting until some of the more mature members start bickering. I think of the "fancy a chat" forum as the equivalent of sitting in the pub nattering with your friends.
After all, nobody involved in the swinging scene has a point of view about anything other than swinging do they?
We don't read the newspapers, we don't watch the news, formulate opinions on any other subject other than swinging!
When we sit at home, the only thing we think about is swinging. We don't have jobs because we are too busy swinging. We only cut the grass when we know we are entertaining swingers in the garden.
In fact, if you have any other thought than swinging, whether it be on sport, fashion, politics, music, art, rural affairs then how dare you even think of calling yourself a swinger. Cancel your subscription at once go and be a rounded individual!
Sex God
Quote by herts_darlings1
wtf this todo with sw
in adult speech I think this translates as "what the fuck is this post to do with swinging"
And the answer is bugger all, if you want swinging/sex posts you go to the other forum subjects "lets talk about sex", "dogging", "lets meet up" or go to the chat rooms or send numerous mails out to others hoping you'll get a response.
The "fancy a chat" is the area for generally "vanilla" discussions covering any subject anyone wants to raise. I will admit quite a few of the discussions are political however the view points are generally interesting until some of the more mature members start bickering. I think of the "fancy a chat" forum as the equivalent of sitting in the pub nattering with your friends.
After all, nobody involved in the swinging scene has a point of view about anything other than swinging do they?
We don't read the newspapers, we don't watch the news, formulate opinions on any other subject other than swinging!
When we sit at home, the only thing we think about is swinging. We don't have jobs because we are too busy swinging. We only cut the grass when we know we are entertaining swingers in the garden.
In fact, if you have any other thought than swinging, whether it be on sport, fashion, politics, music, art, rural affairs then how dare you even think of calling yourself a swinger. Cancel your subscription at once go and be a rounded individual!
Yup nothing but screwing around innit
