Donald Trump

[Margaret Pilkington]

I think you have to go back to the meddling that was done by George Bush and Tony Blair.
They have a lot to answer for in the destabilisation of the Middle East.
I think it was hoped that Bashir Al-Assad would be a reformer, a moderniser of Syria.
The Middle East is a very complex political arena...and the conflict there goes way back.
It has been diplomatically mis-handled many times....the civil war has been ongoing for seven years, shows no signs of abating....and the involvement of Russia has made it even more problematic.

There are no easy solutions(if there are any solutions at all), but the use of chemical weapons(I think) had to be scrutinised and actioned by the wider global community.(hence the involvement of three countries)
It would have been better if it had been done under supervision/auspices of the United Nations Security Council...maybe it would have been seen as less provacative and inflammatory.

The message that Chemical weapons are unacceptable,needs to be heard...not that I think it will make one jot of difference to the Syrian Government or for that matter to Vladimir Putin and Russia.

[hilleluk]

When the nerve agent Novochok was used in Salisbury on the Skripals, and two policeman, nearly killing them, and they will probably have health problems for the rest of there lives, this was a Russian attack on the British people. Let's hope Putin has learned a lesson with this air strike in Syria today...This country could not sit back and do nothing

[hilleluk]

My last post was a reply to Mark 2009

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Mark2009

As awful as Syria's use of chemical weapons in their own boundarys is, how does it concern us? The UK , USA or France were not directly attacked so did we have any right to take action ? The UN should surely have been asked to consider action if it was felt to be necessary. The Russian Ambassador has apparently said that "there will be consequences". I wonder if President Trump will now use his Twitter account again to say whether any further action is planned?
I feel we are looking over a precipice. Lets hope we don't fall in.

The U.N. get vetoed every time anything is proposed by Russia so yer talking rubbish, which dont surprise me one bit.and you probably know that or are yeh one of them up Corbyns bum?

[Mark2009]

Originally Posted by hilleluk

When the nerve agent Novochok was used in Salisbury on the Skripals, and two policeman, nearly killing them, and they will probably have health problems for the rest of there lives, this was a Russian attack on the British people. Let's hope Putin has learned a lesson with this air strike in Syria today...This country could not sit back and do nothing

When Russian agents used Novochok on British soil
much of the international community expressed their strong and to my mind quite correct disapproval by expelling Russian intelligence officers from their countries.
The bombing of Syria was due to their use of chemical weapons, and if this can be supported legally then this was an appropriate response to remove their capability to carry out further attacks. However the two issues were different and the bombing of Syria in my opinion should not be viewed as a retaliation for the Salisbury incident or "a lesson to Putin".

[Margaret Pilkington]

I don't think it should be seen as a retaliatory attack for what happened in Salisbury.
I think that the combined forces of three countries was a way to deter anyone from linking the two...especially Russia.
It was(I think) a way to get across to the Syrian government, that the use of chemical weapons is forbidden.
The Syrian government deny the use of Chlorine gas and sarin, but they have used these agents before...and these are their own people that they are using them against.

[Mark2009]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

I don't think it should be seen as a retaliatory attack for what happened in Salisbury.
I think that the combined forces of three countries was a way to deter anyone from linking the two...especially Russia.
It was(I think) a way to get across to the Syrian government, that the use of chemical weapons is forbidden.
The Syrian government deny the use of Chlorine gas and sarin, but they have used these agents before...and these are their own people that they are using them against.

In full agreement Margaret. As 3 countries were involved, it hopefully won't be linked to salisbury. It was an international statement tnat chemical weapons won't be tolerated and on reflection, probably a statement of intent that chemicals will not be tolerated rather than strategic bombing.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Yes Mark, if it had been just the UK doing the bombing then Russia could have construed it as a retaliation for Salisbury...and yet that is a stretch, because it was not Syria who smeared a nerve agent on door handles(interestingly, the agent has a signature that is alleged to come from a laboratory in southern Russia).
The fact that France and the US were also involved sends out the message that the use of chemical weapons is unacceptable to the global community.

Russia is complicit in this use of chemical weapons, because if they had anything about them they would be reining in Assad...or threatening to remove their support.
But that is not happening, in fact Russia is being inflammatory in offering to provide missile systems to the Syrian government.

[cashman]

Corbyn is once again displaying what a useless pillock he is again, now questioning the legality of the airstrikes. Blair made a mess of the Labour Party, this prat is virtually Destroying it. He is saying consult Parliament should have happened, that would probably suit him? putting our forces in even more danger, by warning them.

[Big Joe]

As was pointed out Donald was democratically elected. Now he didn’t get more of the vote but the way the electoral college works meant that he won. Some critics have said he didn’t really win the election Hillary Clinton lost hit it. Well boo hoo. Traditionally and this is a historical fact the USA is a republican country and only votes democrat if there has been a bad republican beforehand although there are exceptions JFK and Obama. While I believe JFK was a great statesmen Obama was a spineless indecisive weakling who pandered to lost causes and who quite frankly was made to look stupid by Vlad the Bad in Syria. Trump stood up to Putin and is rattling the sabre back at him. Also many Americans believe he is doing a good job and let’s not forget he was elected by Americans to run America for the benefit of Americans and no one else.And as they Americans do Trump will probably get an aircraft carrier named after him where Obama won’t even get a surf board in his name. And finally the media talk up conflict because it sells newspapers and for no other reason. There isn’t going to be a nuclear war because nobody can win it and Vlad isn’t going to start a ground war with nato for the same reason. If you want something to be worried about then worry about Comrade Corbyn getting elected here. Now if him and the rest of his mealy mouthed cronies get in we are in trouble. This is a guy who as leader of the opposition is doing what he has always done shout useless rhetoric that he cannot back up. This is a man who cannot sort out anti Semitic in his own party let alone run a country. His lack of decision making makes Barack Obama look positively dynamic.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Yes, BJ....that is MY big worry...that folk will get bamboozled into voting JC into power...believing his promises, that he can shake the money tree and give us all a nice easy life.

As for war...I think that the possibility of some nut pressing the destruct button will always be there.
But there are many other ways to take conflict into the heart of enemy countries...and the Salisbury thing underlines that.
It is only one way to bring places to a stand still.
Biowarfare is another possibility...disseminating something like Ebola.
The authorities would be so twisted trying to deal with such a thing....and it would wipe out much of the population...there are many other diseases that would be just as horrifying.
I think we need to be more aware of the cyber attacks on services that are essential to our everyday life.

A lot of what is going on is because the west have destabilised the Middle East...the Arab Spring was not the new dawn that it was portrayed as.
There are some places where democracy is never going to be a working model because they have a tribal mentality.

[Big Joe]

I take your point about biological and on that point chemical warfare. The one attack in Salisbury according to last nights news is going to cost millions to clean up and it wasn't even a major attack.
As for the Arab Spring it heralded a time of potentially great change. But we in the West don't get it. We try and impose our style of law and democracy on countries that don't want or need it. When I was in the military I spent time in Saudi Arabia and India as part of a training team.Two different cultures with different values and they operate and think totally different from us and yet the West bangs on about equal rights, democracy. What works for us doesn't work for everyone!

[Margaret Pilkington]

When we fail to learn the lessons of our mistakes, then it is a certainty that we will repeat them and with concentrated consequences.

If Tony Blair had left well alone, if he had not lied about WMD's then maybe we would be in a different place.
There is no doubt that there are places where governments are undemocratic, but by trying to impose our brand of democracy, we alienate nations and create problems that need not exist.
Removing Salam Hussain did not make the region safer, it left a vacuum which malign forces were happy to occupy.

[ossy kid]

Just left a comment on your thread Margaret, it was removed with a message it was illegal, don't tell me Trump is overseeing comments on here also?

[Margaret Pilkington]

I am sure his reach is wide....but cannot imagine him to be reading Accyweb.
Unless it is the Stanley Thread.