Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by citizenx1
I actually agree with you regarding Britain and global military operations, in that if we are going to get involved then it should be for those cases
where we have a moral duty and obligation to get involved. But surely that postition actually makes waiting for the investigation more important? Just
rushing in could mean we are on the wrong side, as it were (not that there is a right side in a civil war).
Lets face it, the UK and US governments know what has happened, they have a huge amount of intelligence capability focuses on Syria and almost
certainly have special forces in the area who have reported back. The UN report in my view will simply reinforce the information they already have.
It stands to reason that the use of such sources would be protected and not used as part of the public information campaign.
As a result, I'd be happy for them to proceed sooner rather than later - if for no other reason as to prevent a repeat before we get our act together.
Beyond that, others around the world need to know action will follow use of such weapons - if it doesn't, they effectively have free reign to do as
they wish. That doesn't really bear thinking about.
If we get involved in conflicts, it has to be for the right reasons. Sudan, Sierra Leone and Rwanda would all have been perfect examples but,
sadly, we missed every one of those opportunities. Instead, we get involved in Iraq which was a lie from the beginning.
Military action should always be a last resort, not the seemingly "go to" position that we, along with the USA and France, now seem to hold at
every available opportunity. Basically, i am uncomfortable with us adopting an international position of "look how big my willy is and what i can do
with it". Sorry for the schoolboy analogy but it is apt as we seem to be seeing a lot of school boy reactions to international incidents these days
from our ruling classes.
In general, I'd agree. Believe it or not i'm totally against military intervention and would be happy to scale back ours so it serves only to defend
the UK BUT we have the capacity and commitment to a range of international treaties, many of which formed after the use of such weapons in the
As such we have a moral obligation to act.
I strongly believe that Cameron, Clegg, Obama and other world leaders know what has happened and who is responsible.
In most cases this information is shared with the opposition so i'd be surprised if Miliband didn't know, as such I'm outraged by his nasty public
point scoring. I don't know if you heard but it has been said that Number 10 and the FCO have referred to him in less than complimentary terms - I
suspect because he has been briefed and has still taken this approach.
I'm confident that the UN will report back in due course but in the meantime, we look weak and indecisive. This gives Assad time to put measures in
place to mitigate the effects of our action and potentially plan a counter attack.
Action is inevitable, it should be done as a broad based coalition as rapidly as possible - anything else makes the situation far more dangerous than
it otherwise would be.
edit on 29-8-2013 by citizenx1 because: ..