Unwashed Village
General Discussion => Unwashed Village => Topic started by: Xerxes on August 31, 2013, 08:03:30 PM
-
http://i.imgur.com/kA2rOWt.jpg
But, being serious for a moment, this was Parliamentary democracy working as it should - the PM couldn't make out a good enough case for 30 of his own MPs to support him, the Leader of the Opposition actually did his job for once, and the country has been saved from yet another Middle Eastern war. Never thought I'd say this, but thank God for the Tory awkward squad!
-
I wish the US would stop trying to be world police. They never gave me a chance to vote on this, and if it were I would vote against it.
At least the brits are level headed enough not to rambo into syria.
-
At least the brits are level headed enough not to rambo into syria.
But rambo is an american hero! His documentaries on pow's and the vietnam war are priceless! I've always wanted to be just like him!
/sarcasm
-
Well... who should police someone like Assad then?
No one?
-
Well... who should police someone like Assad then?
To me it's a question of "why is it always us?" We dont have the infrastructure to support too much more. Yes something needs to be done, but can we afford it?
Looking at where I'm at (Michigan) the answer is no. Then again, we're in minning country and options are slim
-
Well... who should police someone like Assad then?
No one?
-
also, its kind of like what she said. Are the rest of our (.U.S.) allies seriously this incompetent (no disrespect) that WE are expected to save the middle east every 3 years? or do we just have much more at stake than them?
from what i understand, polls show voters are unfavorable of intervention in syria anyway
-
Just something anecdotal;
In the UK the government have introduced a 'bedroom tax', essentially the tax is applied to people who live in council acommodation who have more bedrooms than they have occupants / more bedrooms that the government say can be comfortably shared. We have had a number of families made homeless or people making attempts on thier own lives because a £50 per month increase in bills has seen them face eviction and penury or if they aren't evicted it has taken food out of thier families mouths and exacerbated social issues. It doesn't make any difference but for clarities sake these aren't all pople who live of benefits / welfare.
I applied for a council house when I was at college many years ago and got placed in a terrible area where the available housing stock and I think housing stock in general consisted of two bedroom flats. I live in an ex-coal mining area where the mining co-operative built three bedroom houses as a standard which the council then inherited, there are very few one bedroom properties where I live. I own my house but if I hadn't bought it just when I did I would probably have gotten a council house as large as mine and I would have been facing an extra £50 charge a month which, while not crippling would have affected my finances and my families freedom to do certain things.
My point is, and this is in lieu of a huge rant, that our governments need to clean house and improve thier export before they go off round the world liberating other countries.
I don't think that American allies are incompetent, and nobody has 'saved the middle east' ever to my knowledge, the middle east is a crucible where the west burns blood and money and I think people are just getting sick of seeing that happen. Actually the campaigns and engagements themselves serve as the crucible.
-
I don't think it is about 'saving' the Middle East; I don't think it's about imposing our will on other countries.
To me, it's about dealing with tyrants.
It can be argued that it is none of our business but that argument seems slight when you realize that radical elements could easily get a hold of some nasty weapons if Syrian society and government collapses. I'm pretty sure I know who those elements will pick as targets.
There are also a bunch of international treaties that Syria has signed on to that they clearly are ignoring.
And finally, can you think of a despot/tyrant/dictator who has actually been 'talked out' (ie, diplomatically, politically) of power? Libya, Romania, Laos, Chile, WWII Germany... none of those guys were willing to give up their positions without a fight.
OK, sure, it's not really 'good' to attack other countries. But there exist problems with no 'good' solutions; only less evil ones.
-
I always see the same ending to all of these things, the poor or common people of countries like Syria, usually suffer no matter what happens.
To me it's a pointless effort sending people in if it does no good.
-
It can be argued that it is none of our business but that argument seems slight when you realize that radical elements could easily get a hold of some nasty weapons if Syrian society and government collapses. I'm pretty sure I know who those elements will pick as targets.
Except the radical elements are on the rebel side whereas Assad has led a more secular government. So in bombing Syria to weaken Assad we would be increasing the odds of those weapons falling into the wrong hands. Thus also increasing a need to send our troops in.
Not to say that I agree with or support Assad's regime in any way. I just think we're better off sitting this one out.
Here's a really good article written by Dennis Kucinich over at Huffpo. I suggest everyone read it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-j-kucinich/syria-war-questions_b_3870763.html
-
Hi Brug welcome back.
When the west takes action like this it's not as simple as deposing an oppressive regime, government needs to be reformed. It's a bit of a given that the interim and likely future governance will resemble the government of the 'liberating' force, so whether imposing will is by design or not it happens anyway.
The catastrophic failure of any form of government and the implied inefficiency of a fledgling / interim one also suggests that nasty elements will get their hands on nasty stuff anyway so it's not so much a case of being 'none of our business' but more a case of how naive the notion of military action as a resolution is.
I think my main issue with western powers taking a hand in middle eastern issues is that it's couched in a ponies and rainbows 'we're off to liberate them so everything will be hunky dory' kind of way. I suppose explaining the grind and hideous loss of life in a conflict that doesn't directly or obviously protect sovereign interests is never particularly appealing though.
-
I wish the US would stop trying to be world police. They never gave me a chance to vote on this, and if it were I would vote against it.
At least the brits are level headed enough not to rambo into syria.
Isn't world police the UN's job?
-
I wish the US would stop trying to be world police. They never gave me a chance to vote on this, and if it were I would vote against it.
At least the brits are level headed enough not to rambo into syria.
Isn't world police the UN's job?
No, their job is just to stand at the side-lines during atrocities and say "Don't do that, that's naughty!"
-
Isn't world police the UN's job?
No, their job is just to stand at the side-lines during atrocities and say "Don't do that, that's naughty!"
Win.
-
OK, so let's get all the governments together and sign an agreement that says "we won't do that".
So what do we do when "they do that"?
-
Fracture and bicker basically.
Honestly though the UN just isn't impartial to external politics, it always has been and always will be a hobbled institution.