Military strikes on Syria 'as early as Thursday,' US officials say

reply to post by Silcone Synapse

could you fix the link you shared, please ?
this is what was displayed when i clicked it.

We're unable to locate the page you requested.
The page may have moved or may no longer be available.

reply to post by Honor93


Looks like it was corrected now

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Silcone Synapse

 

could you fix the link you shared, please ?
this is what was displayed when i clicked it.

We're unable to locate the page you requested.
The page may have moved or may no longer be available.

fixed that source link
source

Originally posted by princeofpeace
UK has already voted yes.

British Prime Minister David Cameron said Wednesday that his National Security Council had unanimously backed such a step, 24 hours after he made the case for a targeted strike..

"The NSC (National Security Council) agreed unanimously that the use of chemical weapons by Assad was unacceptable - and the world should not stand by," Cameron said on his official Twitter feed after a meeting of the high-level security body."

No "The UK" did not vote yes.... The national Security Council said there was definitely ground for getting involved but the motion and "permission" for this still has to be passed by Parliament, all elected officials have a vote and it will not get passed in the house of commons.


The opposition to the government (Labour) have already said that it's not right for the Prime Minister to ask for a blank cheque on Syria without any proper evidence.

If this happens, it will be same way Iraq happened, illegally and without UN backing/approval.

reply to post by princeofpeace


The Navy and Raytheon have developed the SeaRAM antimissile system to replace the CIWS. SeaRAM usesa modified air to air missile fired from a box launcher on the ship. In tests of the Block I missile, SeaRAM went ten for ten on targets up to Mach 2.5, at all aspects of flight, from sea skimming, to maneuvering, to multiple targets flying together. The improved Block II is I'm testing now and expected to enter service any time BBB

it reminds me of iraq all over again. the missiles will fly, but i do not think china and russia will be to pleased?

Looks like strikes are now not expected until Sunnay - Monday Latest as the UN SC are pushing for the US to not go go ahead until 4 days of inspection is carried out for definite details.

Does the US have to follow this or can they just go ahead without the UN SC proposal ?

If the details of chemical weapon wasn't used by the Syrian Arab Army will it chance the tide or will the US ?


Apparently just on Channel 4 news a Conservative MP was just stating 'Evidence proves that Rebels did not use CW because way would they bomb themselves and the rebels did not have a stock pile of Nerve agent.'

My question is where is the god damn evidence.

thanks all, that was an interesting read.
yet again, the 'government' fails to protect its citizens/ppl ... does any government provide as the ppl insist it will ?

i do hope the Israeli ppl are not merely collateral damage but i just don't see how that's possible.

i did find it disturbing that even their talking heads are already insisting Assad is at fault with -0- evidence ... will it ever change?

i think it's odd that anyone would believe that the rebels had no access to chem weapons ... does Benghazi ring any bells ??

since the US openly discussed such a 'frame job' back in January, it becomes rather obvious that only the rebels had/have reason to use such weaponry.

The media in the UK (and no doubt the US too) is shamefully repeating it's antics during the run up to the Iraq War.

I've seen no serious opposition voices on BBC news or any attempt to question what is going on here and whether the rebels could be responsible. We're just told that the Syrian government have used chemical weapons and it's undeniable. Cue emotive pictures of dying children and lots of empty rhetoric from Cameron and Hague about moral and humanitarian reasons.

The other day even Blair crawled out of his box to trumpet for the military intervention in Syria - what unbelievable gall he has! All you had to do was change the word Syria to Iraq and it was like 2003 all over again.

reply to post by Kram09


That's true there is no conversation. Its very one sided.

Originally posted by deviant300
Looks like strikes are now not expected until Sunnay - Monday Latest as the UN SC are pushing for the US to not go go ahead until 4 days of inspection is carried out for definite details.

Does the US have to follow this or can they just go ahead without the UN SC proposal ?

If the details of chemical weapon wasn't used by the Syrian Arab Army will it chance the tide or will the US ?


Apparently just on Channel 4 news a Conservative MP was just stating 'Evidence proves that Rebels did not use CW because way would they bomb themselves and the rebels did not have a stock pile of Nerve agent.'

My question is where is the god damn evidence.

The USA can do whatever it pleases because it has the power, the UN is convenient at times but all the big powers ignore it when they feel like it. However, politically they will want at least one western ally on board so they can claim they are the 'international community'.

Hopefully parliment will clip the UKs wings, that would leave the french as the coalition member.

I've not yet one person in the UK that supports this yet. There is a real anger here i've not felt for a while. People are tired of expensive wars on one hand and age of austerity preaching on the other. If they do this i suspect the tories will be a one term government and the libs go along they are done forever.

Originally posted by Kram09
The media in the UK (and no doubt the US too) is shamefully repeating it's antics during the run up to the Iraq War.

I've seen no serious opposition voices on BBC news or any attempt to question what is going on here and whether the rebels could be responsible. We're just told that the Syrian government have used chemical weapons and it's undeniable. Cue emotive pictures of dying children and lots of empty rhetoric from Cameron and Hague about moral and humanitarian reasons.

The other day even Blair crawled out of his box to trumpet for the military intervention in Syria - what unbelievable gall he has! All you had to do was change the word Syria to Iraq and it was like 2003 all over again.

Channel 4 were absolutely hammering the Gov and spokespeople.

Kept asking, Where is the evidence?

Minster kept repeating well we have eye witness accounts, again presenter was like "we need evidence"

There really is opposition here.... almost everywhere, every poll, most politicians are against it too.
Cameron is part of a MASSIVE minority and he knows it.

reply to post by blupblup

Channel 4 were absolutely hammering the Gov and spokespeople.

Kept asking, Where is the evidence?

Minster kept repeating well we have eye witness accounts, again presenter was like "we need evidence"

There really is opposition here.... almost everywhere, every poll, most politicians are against it too.
Cameron is part of a MASSIVE minority and he knows it.

That's good to hear, and I stand corrected.

I'll hold my hands up and admit, I've only watched BBC News and browsed a couple of the other main newspaper websites.

reply to post by blupblup


I watched the same news broadcast, I've also been keeping an eye out on various party political sites, forums etc too. Sentiment is almost universally hostile to UK participation in any capacity whatever ... amongst the ordinary, grassroots supporters.

Nope, I with the publication of the motion for debate in the UK lower house of parliament tmorro ... I have a feeling the Brits are taking a backseat with this one. I don't know if the USA will wait for UK to get on board, they'll just press ahead with their attacks anyway.

Which leaves my own nation in a peculiar position ... will France join USA in attacking Syria, without the UK ?

Hmmm.. this just been posted on a blog..this blogger has been on UK tv recently talking about the munitions used in Syria.. It is interesting to say the least.

brown-moses.blogspot.co.uk...

RT Main page

it’s coming: US finalizing plans for military strike on Syria

Two unnamed White House officials told the Associated Press that the Obama administration is still deciding on what Syrian targets will be attacked and to what degree during a military strike that now seems inevitable.

rt.com...

Why the hell are they sending Nuclear Capable aircraft carrier USS Harry S anyone ?

reply to post by sueloujo

i can't view videos but from the pics at your link ...

Red berets are worn by members of the Syrian Republican Guard, also known as the Presidential Guard, as well as the military police

so, the military members wear tennis shoes too ???

it couldn't possibly be rebels disguised as military, could it ?

I thought the Al Qaeda was US's most hated and most hunted terror organisation ???? this is getting soo confusing now !

Originally posted by sueloujo
Hmmm.. this just been posted on a blog..this blogger has been on UK tv recently talking about the munitions used in Syria.. It is interesting to say the least.

brown-moses.blogspot.co.uk...

edit on 28-8-2013 by sueloujo because: (no reason given)

So are the comments under it.

'Just to clarify, as it's confused some people, the August 21st CW attack was at night, but this video shows the munition being used by the government forces, something it has used several times before, so while it might not be the CW attack, it shows the government using them. I also believe there's a high explosive version of this munition as well.'

Well that's me convinced then. Men in green did it.

reply to post by Honor93


Not the video you are thinking of I am afraid. This is new footage.