The Student Room Group

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

OK. I think it's time to attack Syria.

Scroll to see replies

Original post by whorace
Imo the Middle East should go the way of the Holy Roman Empire and just create a ****ing unified state. Preserve the ranks and customs of each nation, and ensure the wealthy in each country still have their **** and be done with it already. You all speak Arabic and follow Islam, whats the ****ing problem


Your British right?

It is categorically not in western interests to have a strong and unified Muslim state. Imagine if it developed a decent army.

What we want are stable, small states.
LOL, If the rebels had the capability to stage a spectacular inside job, they would have won the war years ago. There's zero chance that Syrian rebels sneaked into regime-controlled Central Damascus, went to the top of a really tall government building with large launching pad and massive chemical weapon and fired it (after spending hours assembling the pad and studying wind direction). And then escaped without anyone noticing and the regime security forces not becoming suspicious.

And also to gas themselves.. why?? If you wanted Western intervention and you could stage a inside job this sophisticated, you would launch it at Israel, because then there would be no doubt about the west intervening.

No, I think its clear that the Syrian regime gassed their own people- a few hours after the attack there was a huge pro-Government rally in Central Damascus celebrating the attack.
Reply 62
Avatar for JD8897
JD8897
9
Original post by arminb
It will cost but every penny is worth it. We can save millions of people and help build a real democracy with a working economy in the Middle East. Then we can trade with them and the world will be a better place. Using chemical weapons against you own people is disgusting and I can't think of anything more filthy than that. Kim Jung Il wouldn't do that.

I agree with intervention, but there wont be a real democracy or a working economy in Syria for a very long time, the country is in an awful state.
Reply 63
Avatar for Jorus
Jorus
6
Original post by arminb
I think Assad's gone far enough. What have we become? Is this humane to let a moron use chemical bombs on his own people? Is it right to let innocent children die in the civil war? I think we all agree that diplomacy doesn't work with Assad. He is not sane other wise he wouldn't allow hundreds of thousands to die for his throne. What happens if we allow the dictatorship in Syria to use chemical boms against its own people? What message does it send to dictators in Iran and Saudi Arabia? The use of chemical bombs is banned under international law, even in classic warfare against another state. There is no reason against humanitarian intervention in Syria and the UN should act IMMEDIATELY. I can't stand to see children die like that for the game politics and power.


What exactly are we attacking - Assad, ISIS, the Free Syrian Army? How would we do it - ground invasion, air strikes? Do you know how much it would cost? Do you know how much it would escalate the conflict and cause thousands more to die? Do you know that until ISIS is destroyed in Iraq, there are very few ways of actually launching an invasion (Turkey refuses to take military action)?

The Middle East is far too complicated to simply barge into conflicts like the superheroes we used to be. It's like trying to fix your phone with a sledgehammer. Hummanitarian aid is fine but large-scale military action in Syria would be problematic and unpredictable to say the least.
Original post by arminb
I think Assad's gone far enough. What have we become? Is this humane to let a moron use chemical bombs on his own people? Is it right to let innocent children die in the civil war?
I think we all agree that diplomacy doesn't work with Assad. He is not sane other wise he wouldn't allow hundreds of thousands to die for his throne. What happens if we allow the dictatorship in Syria to use chemical boms against its own people? What message does it send to dictators in Iran and Saudi Arabia? The use of chemical bombs is banned under international law, even in classic warfare against another state. There is no reason against humanitarian intervention in Syria and the UN should act IMMEDIATELY. I can't stand to see children die like that for the game politics and power.


Chemical bomb was not used by the Assad government, it was proven without a doubt with the investigation led by UN security council for syria...

Stop reading Western media propoganda...
(edited 9 years ago)
In terms of the numbers killed in Syria if the West intervenes, in the short term it will make very little difference in the number killed. Syria averages 100-200 killed per day, the only real difference is that Western causalities will be included in those numbers.

But in the long term it could be what Syria needs. An intervention that speeds up the collapse of the Syrian regime (note regime and not State) will result in short-term chaos, but will lead to stability and better governance in the future. At this minute in time, Syria will cost us more because we are trying to maintain the chaos there. The longer the regime continues, the longer the destruction will continue, the more widespread extremism will seep into Syrian Civil Society and the eventual cost to the world (which Britain will partially pay for) will be a lot greater. If we intervene now, the future cost will be less than if we allow it to continue.


Its important to remember that Syria is not Iraq. We need to approach Syria differently from the Iraqi crisis.
Reply 66
Avatar for Aj12
Aj12
18
Original post by DaniilKaya
Chemical bomb was not used by the Assad government, it was proven without a doubt with the investigation led by UN security council for syria...

Stop reading Western media propoganda...


Source?
Check this guy at for info on chemical attack by the Assad regime http://foreignpolicy.com/author/eliot-higgins/
Original post by arminb
I think Assad's gone far enough. What have we become? Is this humane to let a moron use chemical bombs on his own people? Is it right to let innocent children die in the civil war?
I think we all agree that diplomacy doesn't work with Assad. He is not sane other wise he wouldn't allow hundreds of thousands to die for his throne. What happens if we allow the dictatorship in Syria to use chemical boms against its own people? What message does it send to dictators in Iran and Saudi Arabia? The use of chemical bombs is banned under international law, even in classic warfare against another state. There is no reason against humanitarian intervention in Syria and the UN should act IMMEDIATELY. I can't stand to see children die like that for the game politics and power.


And pave the way ISIS taking over Syria? No thanks

Assad is fighting our war and we should be helping him, giving him weapons and showing him political support. Assad is a good man unlike Bagdhadi.
Original post by Aj12
Source?


http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s_2013_735.pdf

It says on page 21 and 22 that sarin was used both against Syrian soldiers and its citizens.

I feel that it is the end of you reading a western media propoganda, and the start of researching UN reports to find out about the truth of geopolitics
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 70
Avatar for al_94
al_94
14
My advise to you is stop being a damn neocon and try to understand the world
Are we going to team up with ISIS?


I'd happily see our taxes being spent helping those Kurds though. Hope they don't get squished by ISIS and Asad :sad:
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Are we going to team up with ISIS?


I'd happily see our taxes being spent helping those Kurds though. Hope they don't get squished by ISIS and Asad :sad:


why Assad? he is a good guy, he was fighting against the opposition funded by USA+Europe for a lot of years which turned into the ISIS
Original post by Untitled.
2 / 3 pretty much go hand in hand.

Aside from the Islamic state, most groups (including Qaeda) fight alongside each other even though they might differ in methodology.


So get rid of Assad and let all those people live under Islamic Fascism?
Jesus, we just got out of Afghanistan and you want more war? No surprise it won't be you on the front line. It's also unsolvable from a military perspective with the constraining rules of engagement and UN human rights as well as being complete, unfathomable chaos.
Original post by DaniilKaya
why Assad? he is a good guy, he was fighting against the opposition funded by USA+Europe for a lot of years which turned into the ISIS


Why is Assad going to tolerate a bunch of anarchist socialists demanding democracy everywhere? These kurds have enemies everywhere and are technically classed as terrorists by us. No one is going to help them. Assad wont, ISIS wont and the west wont, all three of those will want to see them gone.
Just let them be.

Invasion doesn't solve anything, as it's already been proven many times. You remove power from a vile group of people, and a group of people even more vile than the previous lot gains power.
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
So get rid of Assad and let all those people live under Islamic Fascism?


The people of Syria can decide for themselves what they want.

:smile:
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Untitled.
The people of Syria can decide for themselves what they want.

:smile:


Kittens and Unicorns for all.
Original post by Babada Boopy
Why are people still mentioning the chemical weapons attack? It was proved by experts to be a false flag by the west to demonise Assad and allow the country to collapse. Stop being so gullible, we've seen this done so many times in the Middle East, our governments lie to us about what really happens there, Assad is not a threat to peace, he is one of the few figures of stability in the region that can stop the suffering.


I wonder if Assad has weapons of mass destruction :hmmmm:

Better ask Tony.

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you