Apparent chemical weapon attacks in Syria

[pap]

B*ll*cks. Its been going on since the time of the Pharoahs. And interestingly, there was a headline in one of the weekend papers about Persians used primitive chemical weapons on Romans in that region nearly 2000 years ago. Didnt read the article so dont know the details.

 

Everything goes back to the time of the Pharoahs if you follow historical threads far enough. The main issue in the Middle East is Israel, the long-term consequences of stealing a country and the West's insistence that this is a legitimate arrangement. I wasn't around at the time, but my granddad, who was (and in the region too) speaks of the terrible sense of betrayal that the Arab world felt over the creation of the state of Israel.

 

The modern issues can be traced back to that one point. I've heard all the arguments about Israel having enemies on all sides, but I find those irrelevant too. If Britons started moving to Germany and declared a new state there on the basis of ancestral claim, we'd probably have enemies on all sides too. That's what happens when you steal a country.

 

What annoys me, apart from the fact that few on here seem to have an appreciation of the bigger picture, is a perceived inability to step into the shoes of others. How would we really view the West if we were unlucky enough to be caught up in one of the human brush fires it has created? How must it feel to be a British Asian, knowing that your native country is being bombed by your adopted one? If we forget the chemical equation in these attacks for a moment (not that we need to - Syria's accusers are just as complicit) who has actually been a bigger menace to the world in the last decade? Actually, pick whatever timeframe you want after 1945. US Imperialism began there, and I know that you know that's true - you've certainly banged on about the raw deal we got from FDR enough times. All that's happening here is a rush to Tehran before it gets the bomb, to get Iran back into the Western fold while it is still possible.

Edited 9 September, 2013 by pap

[alpine_saint]

Everything goes back to the time of the Pharoahs if you follow historical threads far enough. The main issue in the Middle East is Israel and on a broader level, the long-term consequences of stealing a country and the West's insistence that this is a legitimate arrangement. I wasn't around at the time, but my granddad, who was (and in the region too) speaks of the terrible sense of betrayal that the Arab world felt over the creation of the state of Israel.

 

The modern issues can be traced back to that one point. I've heard all the arguments about Israel having enemies on all sides, but I find those irrelevant too. If Britons started moving to Germany and declared a new state there on the basis of ancestral claim, we'd probably have enemies on all sides too. That's what happens when you steal a country.

 

What annoys me, apart from the fact that few on here seem to have an appreciation of the bigger picture, is a perceived inability to step into the shoes of others. How would we really view the West if we were unlucky enough to be caught up in one of the human brush fires it has created? How must it feel to be a British Asian, knowing that your native country is being bombed by your adopted one? If we forget the chemical equation in these attacks for a moment (not that we need to - Syria's accusers are just as complicit) who has actually been a bigger menace to the world in the last decade? Actually, pick whatever timeframe you want after 1945. US Imperialism began there, and I know that you know that's true - you've certainly banged on about the raw deal we got from FDR enough times. All that's happening here is a rush to Tehran before it gets the bomb, to get Iran back into the Western fold while it is still possible.

 

Aaaaaah. I knew the "Its all Israels fault" and therefore by association "Its all the UKs fault" hacks would raise their ugly heads at some point..........

[pap]

Aaaaaah. I knew the "Its all Israels fault" and therefore by association "Its all the UKs fault" hacks would raise their ugly heads at some point..........

 

Israel is actively militating for war with Iran.

 

Might be something you miss if you only read the headlines and not the article, but it's on the public record. Peace is very difficult to achieve when one party is actively petitioning for war. Spin that however you like; doesn't make it any less true.

[alpine_saint]

Israel is actively militating for war with Iran.

 

 

It wouldnt surprise me in the slightest; in my opinion until there is regime change in Iran there will never be peace in the Middle East.

 

You seem to gloss over the fact that half the Arab nations in the area actually agree with Israel; they just cannot be seen in public agreeing with it.

[Picard]

In French

[video=youtube_share;ykjx1vrEyH4]http://youtu.be/ykjx1vrEyH4

Pierre Piccinin recently released by rebels in Syria says he overheard rebels saying Assad was not responsible for the chemical weapon attack. He himself is a supporter of the FSA.

[pap]

It wouldnt surprise me in the slightest; in my opinion until there is regime change in Iran there will never be peace in the Middle East.

 

What's peace? Perhaps we should ask the newly liberated people of Libya, who have gone from worrying about one dictator to many warlords. Maybe we could take a look at newly-democratised Iraq, IED capital of the world. We could possibly take a look at Egypt, which had its revolution, elections and then a coup, pretty much returning us to the status quo. The one good thing you could argue happened in Egypt is that unlike Libya, there is fair chance that the country will have some cohesive command structure or a single person to deal with.

 

I don't think there will ever be peace in the Middle East, not now. All we'll see are the embers of long-dormant tribal fires being stoked into the conflagration of conflict. Extremely sh!t if you happen to be a citizen of one of those countries, but very handy if you're a Western agent trying to rob the place blind.

[buctootim]

until there is regime change in Iran there will never be peace in the Middle East.

 

Been there, done that. Mossadegh had the temerity to want to move Iran to democracy and regain control of the nation's oil resources - ie be the same as the West - except the west wanted a supine client state so they overthrew him and placed the Shah in control again. Thats what created the conditions for the extremists and the Iranian Revolution. Iran is starting to change and moderate again. Interfere some more now and we will set the moderates and democrats back decades.

[pap]

In French

[video=youtube_share;ykjx1vrEyH4]http://youtu.be/ykjx1vrEyH4

Pierre Piccinin recently released by rebels in Syria says he overheard rebels saying Assad was not responsible for the chemical weapon attack. He himself is a supporter of the FSA.

 

Cheers for this, Picard.

 

An article in which the same claims are made (from same outlet). Google Translate will do the rest

 

http://www.rtbf.be/info/monde/detail_libere-des-griffes-djihadistes-pierre-piccinin-est-arrive-a-bruxelles?id=8085103

[Bearsy]

Pierre Piccinin

 

i don't think ur sposed to use that word no more. I would edit it before mod sees.

[pap]

John Kerry has dropped a massive boll*ck on this:-

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24022866

 

Basically said (rhetorically, as US state department clarified) that war could be averted if Syria gives up all its chemical weapons within a week.

 

Russia has taken the initiative seriously. It's going to be extremely difficult for the US to rubber stamp these strikes now.

[alpine_saint]

John Kerry has dropped a massive boll*ck on this:-

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24022866

 

Basically said (rhetorically, as US state department clarified) that war could be averted if Syria gives up all its chemical weapons within a week.

 

Russia has taken the initiative seriously. It's going to be extremely difficult for the US to rubber stamp these strikes now.

 

Isnt this good news ?

 

Why has he "dropped a b*ll*ck" if he has found a way forward that averts war ?

 

Why cant, for once, the response be taken at face value ?

 

EDIT: OK, its a b*ll*ck dropped. Read the part about "Rhetorical argument". A pity, until now I though the US were genuine about stopping chemcial attacks.

Edited 9 September, 2013 by alpine_saint

[pap]

Good piece by Gary Younge of the Guardian. He's only about a week behind SaintsWeb, bless him

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/08/us-little-credibility-syria-chemical-weapons

[dubai_phil]

John Kerry has dropped a massive boll*ck on this:-

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24022866

 

Basically said (rhetorically, as US state department clarified) that war could be averted if Syria gives up all its chemical weapons within a week.

 

Russia has taken the initiative seriously. It's going to be extremely difficult for the US to rubber stamp these strikes now.

 

The sound of reality hitting home?

 

And now he is in real trouble, because it allows the Russians to send in the Armed Guards.

 

You know? There is a fundamental flaw in Democracy & Politics in general. Everyone who takes part wears clothes all the time.

 

Our lives truly would be a lot easier if the MoFo's had to START every policy discussion & Negotiation WITHOUT trying to show they have a bigger Penis than they were actually born with

[dubai_phil]

Good piece by Gary Younge of the Guardian. He's only about a week behind SaintsWeb, bless him

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/08/us-little-credibility-syria-chemical-weapons

 

Sooner or later, the Unthinkable will have to be said.

 

The only way to solve the problem in Syria is for "Bashar" to win & the nutters to be slaughtered.

 

ONCE that thought process is accepted THEN a search for a proper solution can begin. The "" around Bashar are deliberate, the Military needs to defeat the nutters and the True Rebels, The Syrian People themselves can be brought to the table.

 

Can the Nation actually survive? The reality is no, Iraq has proven that. Syria will need to be split into into individual Emirates working in a Federation. It will need TIME for the Sects to accept and build the structures. The PEOPLE want freedom but one person's freedom is another persons Perjury.

 

The "Government" needs to be given the Time and the Incentive to exit, and engage with the True Rebels.

 

Syria cannot be bombed into chaos like Libya. The Russians have the influence, they need to be pushed to get Bashar to retire (preferably to a Gulag in Siberia)

 

The PROBLEM is = once again the ticking clock of the West. Obama wants it done NOW. It will take YEARS.

[hypochondriac]

Well after that if Syria complies and the US still go ahead with it then they deserve everything they get.

[Viking Warrior]

Good to see our resident expert is also now an expert in chemical weapons . Who needs Hans. Blick

 

when we have our own Hans Blick

[dubai_phil]

Good to see our resident expert is also now an expert in chemical weapons . Who needs Hans. Blick

 

when we have our own Hans Blick

 

[farawaysaint]

It wouldnt surprise me in the slightest; in my opinion until there is regime change in Iran there will never be peace in the Middle East.

 

You seem to gloss over the fact that half the Arab nations in the area actually agree with Israel; they just cannot be seen in public agreeing with it.

 

Not a chance, if Israel said the sky was blue, every Arab nation would say it was green with polka dots right or wrong. Opinion polls have placed Israel comparable to NORTH KOREA in the popularity stakes worldwide and outside of America, the nation of Israel has few friends. Blocs will always support their crazy allies in public as what happens in private is meaningless. China historically has backed North Korea to the hilt, (although I grant that support has waned since Kim-Jong Un took power) South Africa supports the mad Zimbabwe through thick and thin, Russia and China support anyone who will stir anti-Western sentiment etc etc. International politics are predictable and idiotic.

[alpine_saint]

Good to see our resident expert is also now an expert in chemical weapons . Who needs Hans. Blick

 

when we have our own Hans Blick

 

The joke might have had a bit more gravitas if you could actually spell his name correctly

[alpine_saint]

Sooner or later, the Unthinkable will have to be said.

 

The only way to solve the problem in Syria is for "Bashar" to win & the nutters to be slaughtered.

 

ONCE that thought process is accepted THEN a search for a proper solution can begin. The "" around Bashar are deliberate, the Military needs to defeat the nutters and the True Rebels, The Syrian People themselves can be brought to the table.

 

Can the Nation actually survive? The reality is no, Iraq has proven that. Syria will need to be split into into individual Emirates working in a Federation. It will need TIME for the Sects to accept and build the structures. The PEOPLE want freedom but one person's freedom is another persons Perjury.

 

The "Government" needs to be given the Time and the Incentive to exit, and engage with the True Rebels.

 

Syria cannot be bombed into chaos like Libya. The Russians have the influence, they need to be pushed to get Bashar to retire (preferably to a Gulag in Siberia)

 

The PROBLEM is = once again the ticking clock of the West. Obama wants it done NOW. It will take YEARS.

 

Absolutely bizarre. So I assume you advocate the use of more chemical weapons or mass bombardments in order to weed out the rebels from the civilian populations, and sod the number of them that get killed.

 

I think you've been down there too long, pal.

[alpine_saint]

Not a chance, if Israel said the sky was blue, every Arab nation would say it was green with polka dots right or wrong. Opinion polls have placed Israel comparable to NORTH KOREA in the popularity stakes worldwide and outside of America, the nation of Israel has few friends. Blocs will always support their crazy allies in public as what happens in private is meaningless. China historically has backed North Korea to the hilt, (although I grant that support has waned since Kim-Jong Un took power) South Africa supports the mad Zimbabwe through thick and thin, Russia and China support anyone who will stir anti-Western sentiment etc etc. International politics are predictable and idiotic.

 

In public, for public consumption, sure.

 

I maintain that some of the governments in the area have more problems with their neighbours than with Israel, and would privately happily see Israel do said neighbour if they had to make such a choice. My prime suspects here are Saudi Arabia and Jordan.

[dubai_phil]

Absolutely bizarre. So I assume you advocate the use of more chemical weapons or mass bombardments in order to weed out the rebels from the civilian populations, and sod the number of them that get killed.

 

I think you've been down there too long, pal.

 

Nice interpretation and quality selective reading. Congratulations on your analysis of my opinion and your deduction of it.

 

And of course thank you for telling me what my Opinion on the subject is so eloquently.

[alpine_saint]

Nice interpretation and quality selective reading. Congratulations on your analysis of my opinion and your deduction of it.

 

And of course thank you for telling me what my Opinion on the subject is so eloquently.

 

OK, so why dont you clarify then ?

 

IMO, you've advovated mass murder / genocide to solve the problem. Therefore, its no better than the Yanks.

[dubai_phil]

ORLY?

 

http://rt.com/news/syria-rebels-chemical-attack-israel-618/

 

A chemical attack may be launched on Israel by Syrian rebels from government-controlled territories as a "major provocation," multiple sources told RT.

The report comes as Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov proposed that Syria puts its chemical weapons arsenal under international control for subsequent destruction in order to prevent a possible military strike against the war-torn country.

Moscow also urged Syrian authorities to join the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. The offer has already been passed over to Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem, who met Lavrov in Moscow for talks on Monday.

“We don’t know if Syria will accept the offer, but if imposing international control over chemical weapons stored in the country can help to avoid military strikes, we are immediately going to start working with Damascus,” Lavrov said.

The Syrian Foreign Ministry has welcomed Moscow's initiative, “based on the Syrian’s government care about the lives of our people and security of our country,” Muallem said later on Monday.

Meanwhile, US National Security Adviser Susan Rice made a statement saying that Damascus' alleged "use of chemical weapons against its own people" posed a threat to US national security. “The use of chemical weapons also directly threatens our closest ally in the region, Israel,” she said, speaking at the New America Foundation in Washington.

[dubai_phil]

http://rt.com/news/experts-un-syria-chemical-649/

 

[h=1]Intl experts have strong proof images of chemical victims fabricated – Moscow[/h]

 

FUD.

 

No comment on the headline or the lack of detail. Just reporting it

[pap]

ORLY?

 

http://rt.com/news/syria-rebels-chemical-attack-israel-618/

 

Funnily enough, was just wondering how "Plan A" might be advanced after Kerry's boll*ck drop yesterday. This'll do.

 

One of the most heartening things on this thread is seeing how questioning people are.

[farawaysaint]

http://rt.com/news/experts-un-syria-chemical-649/

 

 

 

FUD.

 

No comment on the headline or the lack of detail. Just reporting it

 

Moscow have consistently backed Bashad I wouldn't believe a word that came from their press agency.

[pap]

Moscow have consistently backed Bashad I wouldn't believe a word that came from their press agency.

 

You're a fool if you believe any network. It's all propaganda. Don't make the mistake of thinking we're any different.

[alpine_saint]

You're a fool if you believe any network. It's all propaganda. Don't make the mistake of thinking we're any different.

 

Well, thats bullsh*t for a start. Most of the UK press are anti Syria intervention.

[hypochondriac]

Funnily enough, was just wondering how "Plan A" might be advanced after Kerry's boll*ck drop yesterday. This'll do.

 

One of the most heartening things on this thread is seeing how questioning people are.

 

Because there is actual reason to believe that there is another side to this. Don't confuse people seeing both sides to this with them supporting your other crackpot theories. Dismissing the notion that the Boston bomb and London incidents were all faked isn't people not questioning, it's being a sane individual.

[dubai_phil]

Moscow have consistently backed Bashad I wouldn't believe a word that came from their press agency.

 

Did say I was reporting the article not an opinion on it.

 

BUT, in this context your reply is an example of incredibly dangerous thinking. I understand your point, (and agree FWIW) but too many times an instant or emotive logical response is wrong in this instance. What is needed is to try and seek an understanding of WHY it is being said.

 

The article reflects management of Public Opinion (not The West but in Russia). IMHO that management is starting to try to create uncertainty at least at home. That could create a backlash SHOULD the US go it alone. Which can then provide internal "Political Will" for other "steps" to be taken.

 

The message stays pretty clear. Obama has to play with the Russkies to get a solution, The US Military/Industrial Complex is probably not very happy about that. (how ARE the order books for Tomahawk Missiles these days?)

 

Kerry dropped the clanger, it's going to continue to bounce.

 

The Russians will get the Chemical Weapons under THEIR control - no brainer there, and they will buy enough time for Government Forces to inflict even more damage to the rebels.

 

Bashar keeps rocking & his wife keeps shopping. The country keeps getting destroyed and Children on BOTH sides will be maimed, orphaned and their futures destroyed.

 

Well done Kerry - like I say, keep morons out of this it is way too complex.

 

Bombs weren't the answer, now you've given all the initiative & moral high ground to Bashar's supporters.

 

Could not have ****ed that up better even if he had tried

[pap]

Well, thats bullsh*t for a start. Most of the UK press are anti Syria intervention.

 

I dunno, Alps - I just live here, see the actual papers, read the editorials and listen to a sh!tload of Radio 4. Still, whip it out - let's see "most" of the British press. Funny thing is that after the Parliament vote, most of the papers spouted the same opinions as you are now.

[pap]

Because there is actual reason to believe that there is another side to this. Don't confuse people seeing both sides to this with them supporting your other crackpot theories. Dismissing the notion that the Boston bomb and London incidents were all faked isn't people not questioning, it's being a sane individual.

 

The big difference, hypo?

 

Conducting an op on your own soil is far easier than trying to start sh!t under the gaze of the international community, as Syria and Benghazi have shown (oddly enough, thwarted by two unwitting NAVY Seals doing their patriotic duty )

[farawaysaint]

Did say I was reporting the article not an opinion on it.

 

BUT, in this context your reply is an example of incredibly dangerous thinking. I understand your point, (and agree FWIW) but too many times an instant or emotive logical response is wrong in this instance. What is needed is to try and seek an understanding of WHY it is being said.

 

The article reflects management of Public Opinion (not The West but in Russia). IMHO that management is starting to try to create uncertainty at least at home. That could create a backlash SHOULD the US go it alone. Which can then provide internal "Political Will" for other "steps" to be taken.

 

The message stays pretty clear. Obama has to play with the Russkies to get a solution, The US Military/Industrial Complex is probably not very happy about that. (how ARE the order books for Tomahawk Missiles these days?)

 

Kerry dropped the clanger, it's going to continue to bounce.

 

The Russians will get the Chemical Weapons under THEIR control - no brainer there, and they will buy enough time for Government Forces to inflict even more damage to the rebels.

 

Bashar keeps rocking & his wife keeps shopping. The country keeps getting destroyed and Children on BOTH sides will be maimed, orphaned and their futures destroyed.

 

Well done Kerry - like I say, keep morons out of this it is way too complex.

 

Bombs weren't the answer, now you've given all the initiative & moral high ground to Bashar's supporters.

 

Could not have ****ed that up better even if he had tried

 

You are of course quite correct, having lived in countries operated by repressive regimes with press freedom on par with or worse than Russia I just have an inherent bias against any "official" sources coming from certain governments. They were/are occasionally right however and your point stands about my bias and the need to understand the politicking behind the statement.

[pap]

You are of course quite correct, having lived in countries operated by repressive regimes with press freedom on par with or worse than Russia I just have an inherent bias against any "official" sources coming from certain governments. They were/are occasionally right however and your point stands about my bias and the need to understand the politicking behind the statement.

 

The Russians are playing a blinder on this one. From day one, the options, parroted here by the gormless, have been "strike" or "do nothing". John Kerry gave them a chink of light yesterday and they've barrelled in with a third way.

[aintforever]

The Russians are playing a blinder on this one. From day one, the options, parroted here by the gormless, have been "strike" or "do nothing". John Kerry gave them a chink of light yesterday and they've barrelled in with a third way.

 

There is no reason why the US can't use the current situation to their advantage though (and I think Obama is doing this perfectly). In agreeing to hand over their chemical weapons Syria have basically admitted they carried out the attack.

 

There was NEVER any chance of it getting through congress, they were miles short of getting support from the US public. Now they have Russia's backing to draw up a UN resolution making the Syrians hand over all their chemical weapons or else.

 

They can play exactly the same way as Iraq - send in the weapons inspectors, say they are not being allowed full access, then hey presto - we have military strikes backed by a UN resolution.

[pap]

There is no reason why the US can't use the current situation to their advantage though (and I think Obama is doing this perfectly). In agreeing to hand over their chemical weapons Syria have basically admitted they carried out the attack.

 

Incorrect. It just means that the red line that Obama has created can no longer be crossed.

 

There was NEVER any chance of it getting through congress, they were miles short of getting support from the US public. Now they have Russia's backing to draw up a UN resolution making the Syrians hand over all their chemical weapons or else.

 

There's no need to put it through Congress. Even if the vote is defeated, Obama can still conduct the campaign he is after. Could have done all along. Obama is either seeking democratic legimitacy (which I agree, probably won't get) or a means of passing the buck to someone else if things get out of hand. e.g. You voted for action, Congress.

 

They can play exactly the same way as Iraq - send in the weapons inspectors, say they are not being allowed full access, then hey presto - we have military strikes backed by a UN resolution.

 

Except the US didn't have authorisation to go into Iraq, or at least, not to wage war. They went in on the back of our lies, not a UN resolution.

[aintforever]

Incorrect. It just means that the red line that Obama has created can no longer be crossed.

 

 

 

There's no need to put it through Congress. Even if the vote is defeated, Obama can still conduct the campaign he is after. Could have done all along. Obama is either seeking democratic legimitacy (which I agree, probably won't get) or a means of passing the buck to someone else if things get out of hand. e.g. You voted for action, Congress.

 

 

 

Except the US didn't have authorisation to go into Iraq, or at least, not to wage war. They went in on the back of our lies, not a UN resolution.

 

Wrong, though the UN didn't authorise military action the war in Iraq was justified as enforcing a UN resolution - that's how Blair got the war deemed 'legal' by his lawyers before we went in.

 

Obama didn't need support of congress but going against their vote would have been political suicide.

 

I see the French have already drawn up a tough UN resolution meaning that if Syria don't comply fully then we have military action fully backed by the UN - that will probably mean the UK getting involved as well.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24031203

[pap]

Wrong, though the UN didn't authorise military action the war in Iraq was justified as enforcing a UN resolution - that's how Blair got the war deemed 'legal' by his lawyers before we went in.

 

Obama didn't need support of congress but going against their vote would have been political suicide.

 

I see the French have already drawn up a tough UN resolution meaning that if Syria don't comply fully then we have military action fully backed by the UN - that will probably mean the UK getting involved as well.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24031203

 

The US and UK needed to provide proof to the UN to justify their actions under the terms of the existing resolution ( they couldn't get a new one, remember ). They had no proof because they had no case. They can't even claim that they were acting in good faith. The facts were bludgeoned to suit the policy of war. Bush, Blair and all the other hawks that fabricated the case for war with Iraq should be up before the Hague.

[Viking Warrior]

For the attention of our very own Hans Blix

 

Although the clinical manifestations of acute sarin poisoning have been reported in detail, no comprehensive study of the chronic physical and psychiatric effects of acute sarin poisoning has been carried out. To clarify the chronic effects of sarin on the nervous system, a cross-sectional epidemiologic study was conducted 3 years after the Tokyo subway sarin attack. Subjects consisted of the rescue team staff members and police officers who had worked at the disaster site. Subjects consisted of 56 male exposed subjects and 52 referent subjects matched for age and occupation. A neurobehavioral test, stabilometry, and measurement of vibration perception thresholds were performed, as well as psychometric tests to assess traumatic stress symptoms. The exposed group performed less well in the backward digit span test than the referent group in a dose-effect manner. This result was the same after controlling for possible confounding factors and was independent of traumatic stress symptoms. In other tests of memory function, except for the Benton visual retention test (mean correct answers), effects related to exposure were also suggested, although they were not statistically significant. In contrast, the dose-effect relationships observed in the neurobehavioral tests (psychomotor function) were unclear. None of the stabilometry and vibration perception threshold parameters had any relation to exposure. Our findings suggest the chronic decline of memory function 2 years and 10 months to 3 years and 9 months after exposure to sarin in the Tokyo subway attack, and further study is needed..

[Viking Warrior]

So Hanzie

do you think the recent inspection by the UN team in Syria examined anyone that may have been exposed to the recent chemical attacked and survived

I dont recollect any media reporting on the subject.

 

What is known is that when a nerve type agent is used this tends to inhibit the acetylcholinesterase ensymes in the body breakdown in the synapsethus causing amongst other symptoms muscular spasms and the susequent in ability top breathe etc, Do we know if any of those who survived were given atropine sulphate aor pralidoxime chloride. Maybe we should send the rebel forces and civilians our stocks of Pyridiostigmine Bromide (Naps}

[pap]

VW, just for the benefit of clarity, who are you referring to when (ahem) "talking to Hanzie"?

[Viking Warrior]

Its my nick name for the resident chemical weapons and military hardware expert on here , Its not you pap

 

Its the one that knows more about nucleur submarines than our resident submariner from down town gotham city

[alpine_saint]

Hey, Pap.

 

Whilst you are wetting yourself at Russia "showing the US whats what", maybe you should chew over these words from Garton Ash.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/11/crisis-resolves-little-syria-says-much-about-us

 

You seem to be running to embrace a word dominated by the thug regimes of Russia and China. Have you really thought it through ? Some of you seem to be cutting off your noses to spite your faces.

[Seaford Saint]

I have really enjoyed the discussion on this subject. I can only speak in generalisations.

 

Pap makes a good point about the media and Radio 4. I learn a lot about world events by listening to it.

[pap]

Hey, Pap.

 

Whilst you are wetting yourself at Russia "showing the US whats what", maybe you should chew over these words from Garton Ash.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/11/crisis-resolves-little-syria-says-much-about-us

 

You seem to be running to embrace a word dominated by the thug regimes of Russia and China. Have you really thought it through ? Some of you seem to be cutting off your noses to spite your faces.

 

Had a look at the article. It's an interesting read, but has little to do with the agency of Russia and China ( we'll get back to those in a bit ). There are a number of problems. The author begins with the point of truth that US intervention is somehow a benevolent thing for the world, something I'd have a hard time agreeing with. For the benefit of Israel and it's own corporations, possibly. I spend a lot of time with Americans. The article quotes that even though 75% of US citizens believe Assad to be responsible, the vast majority are still against military intervention. That's got bugger all to do with Russia and China, and a great deal to do with US Foreign Policy over the last decade.

 

I'm not running to embrace Russia or China, but neither do I think that we should be emulating the US. The "slightly scared of nukes" ten year old version of myself would be amazed to learn that Russia would be the chaps trying to sort out a peaceful solution. Yes, I know they have their own agenda; I'm not ten any more. It's not like Russia is without its problems either. It's been called a mafia state, we repeatedly chortle about the semi-regular job-swap between Putin and Medvedev and we're aware that when its own interests are threatened, it can be a brutal state regime. Russia hasn't increased its standing through good deeds. Aptly enough, their handling of the situation has been akin to judo, which Putin is reported to be a fan of. They sit back, wait for the US to make it's move, and then use the momentum of that move against them. In other words, they're fully aware that with enough rope, the US will hang itself on the gallows of its own foreign policy.

[alpine_saint]

Had a look at the article. It's an interesting read, but has little to do with the agency of Russia and China ( we'll get back to those in a bit ). There are a number of problems. The author begins with the point of truth that US intervention is somehow a benevolent thing for the world, something I'd have a hard time agreeing with. For the benefit of Israel and it's own corporations, possibly. I spend a lot of time with Americans. The article quotes that even though 75% of US citizens believe Assad to be responsible, the vast majority are still against military intervention. That's got bugger all to do with Russia and China, and a great deal to do with US Foreign Policy over the last decade.

 

I'm not running to embrace Russia or China, but neither do I think that we should be emulating the US. The "slightly scared of nukes" ten year old version of myself would be amazed to learn that Russia would be the chaps trying to sort out a peaceful solution. Yes, I know they have their own agenda; I'm not ten any more. It's not like Russia is without its problems either. It's been called a mafia state, we repeatedly chortle about the semi-regular job-swap between Putin and Medvedev and we're aware that when its own interests are threatened, it can be a brutal state regime. Russia hasn't increased its standing through good deeds. Aptly enough, their handling of the situation has been akin to judo, which Putin is reported to be a fan of. They sit back, wait for the US to make it's move, and then use the momentum of that move against them. In other words, they're fully aware that with enough rope, the US will hang itself on the gallows of its own foreign policy.

 

Ok, a simple question.

 

Do you think the world is a better/safer place now that the US, and according to you its corporations and Israel as well by association, have had their noses rubbed in it by Russia and its Thug-in-Chief ?

[pap]

Ok, a simple question.

 

Do you think the world is a better/safer place now that the US, and according to you its corporations and Israel as well by association, have had their noses rubbed in it by Russia and its Thug-in-Chief ?

 

Temporarily, yes.

 

I don't expect the Russian solution to the Syrian crisis to be the end of it, though. It doesn't segue with the general plan to dominate and balkanise the Middle East.

 

The US only has itself to blame for the general lack of trust in its foreign policy.

[alpine_saint]

Temporarily, yes.

 

I don't expect the Russian solution to the Syrian crisis to be the end of it, though. It doesn't segue with the general plan to dominate and balkanise the Middle East.

 

The US only has itself to blame for the general lack of trust in its foreign policy.

 

Wow, thats utterly bizarre.....

 

Of course, Russian motives in the Middle East are completely altruistic; Russian foreign policy comlpetely trustworthy....

 

We'll come back to this discussion in a few years when Putin has turned the gas off to Europe, controls oil from the Middle East and people in the West are dying from the cold and food supply disruptions...

[Spudders]

I have really enjoyed the discussion on this subject.

 

I've been very impressed that Phil has been able to write so much on a non golfing subject