Obama and the UK

Written By: - Date published: 2:10 pm, September 1st, 2013 - 26 comments
Categories: Syria, uk politics, us politics, war - Tags: , , , ,

So Barack Obama is going to adhere to the US constitution this time around ( unlike as was the case with Libya) and await the potential green light of Congress before commencing with any military action in Syria.

A victory for accountability and small ‘d’ democracy – or a play to ‘give’ the UK Government the time to find good enough reason to call a second vote on the matter…one that will produce the ‘correct’ outcome?

My money’s on the latter.

And on that front,  I see that efforts are already being made to ‘persuade’ the British Labour Party to change its mind with Sunday’s ‘Independent’ reporting on a Dr Rola on BBC’s Newsnight claiming that Labour’s Miliband has failed the people of Syria by blocking military action.

Dr Rola works for a charity ‘Hand in Hand for Syria’ – a UK based charity, set up in 2011 at the beginning of the ‘Syrian uprising’ and that claims to be non-political.

Better then to not pay any attention to their rather partial literature that simply doesn’t mention foreign backed Salaafists, Jihadists or any other such like and that, at least on a quick first read, would have readers believe that all casualties are being caused by Bashir Assad’s forces who also round up and jail doctors for treating injured civilians.

For clarity…all things being equal, I’d be very much on the side of the Syrian people’s attempt to be rid of Assad and the police state he imposed on them. But given the amount of foreign intervention and the geo-political ambitions of Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern dictatorships in the region (not to mention US designs), I’m aware that Syrians are just so much meat caught between spore infected slices of sandwich bread.

And while I have no idea how they can set their situation to rights given current realities, I know that promoting or arming this side or that side will simply alter the details of the hell that will be imposed on them…the brutality of a police state versus the brutality of Sharia law versus the casual brutality of endless chaos .

And given that, any so-called humanitarian calling for support or action on behalf of one party or another is no humanitarian at all.

26 comments on “Obama and the UK ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. ghostwhowalksnz 1
    1 September 2013 at 3:59 pm

    Its well worth reminding every one that Britain used poison gas against Iraqi tribes in the 1920s
    To Quote Churchill:
    “I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas……. I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum.”

  2. clifford wright 2
    1 September 2013 at 4:54 pm

    On the Syria issue I have long decided that we are being played for suckers. With the probable semi connivance of ignorant journalists.
    Next time you hear of another “atrocity” in Syria have a look CAREFULLY on your screen.
    Almost every time, and this includes UN inspectors, there are empty shell cases shown.
    No, I don’t mean cartridge cases from bullets, I mean field gun or tank gun artillery shell cases.

    Now! Just consider this. When a shell is fired at a target the shell case remains in the breech of the gun. Only the shell itself does the damage at the target.
    SO! Why are there shell cases around the target zone?
    They should only be present where the artillery piece was discharged, which could be literally kilometers from the target.
    One UN inspector was looking at a shell case (probably around 120mm size) inside a building.
    That had to be placed there as the blast of such a powerful weapon would have wrecked any building it was discharged from.
    Also, since any “poison gas” would be within the shell itself and the case would be exposed to extremely hot gases from the discharge of the gun, is it even slightly likely that residue would still be present?

    Before we go haring off into yet another war, we should be very careful about our facts.
    IMO while some crazy officer from the government forces might have used gas against orders, the real people who profit from Western intervention are the “rebels” many of whom are those same lovely folk who gave you 9/11 and dozens of other religion inspired atrocities.
    I cannot accept the argument that they are not capable of gassing their own people, as Dr Phil says
    “the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour”, and since when have they shown mercy to anyone?

    • leftriteleft 2.1
      1 September 2013 at 5:23 pm

      I can see where you are coming from, but –
      This is a False Flag to get the US in a war.
      I believe that most of the evidence is contrived.
      Since when does a nation use Utube videos as evidence.
      There is still no proof the Asaad government troops did this, but there is
      amounting evidence that it was the rebels (funded by USA and Saudi Arabia).
      Never rely on the MSM to get the facts.
      Try some Alternative News services to get the true story.
      It’s just like NZ. The news media is a flake.
      That’s why you have posted here.
      Alternative views on a very serious issue.

      • GregJ 2.1.1
        1 September 2013 at 9:02 pm

        If it is established that chemical weapons were used (I believe that is actually the mandate of the UN team – not to determine who used them – although I’m sure they will form an opinion) then the possible scenarios are:

        1. Used by Syrian Government Forces – a) with approval b) without approval

        2. Used by proxy forces for the Government – a) with tacit approval b) without approval

        3. Used by Rebel Forces – a) intentionally to gain international sympathy & action b) unintentionally due to incompetence

        4. Something else too weird to imagine

        As someone who lives & works in the Middle East all of these are plausible possiblities and equally as likely.

        • Tamati 2.1.1.1
          1 September 2013 at 10:04 pm

          The frequency, consistency and systematic nature of the attacks would probably rule 1b and 2b. And make 1a and 3a more likely.

    • exkiwiforces 2.2
      1 September 2013 at 7:30 pm

      As a CBRND instructor, Chemical and Bio warheads that are fired from an Artillery gun/ heavy mortar or as a bomb go pop unlike a HE warhead which is explosive. A Chemical / Bio warhead go pop once hit the ground with the argent coming out the back of the round hence the pop noise as the detonator sets off a very small charge forcing the argent out and Air delivery argent is like a Cluster bomb going off without the bang.

      So seeing that artillery in that room is what would expect of a Chemical or Bio round as HE round is green in colour with a yellow band.

      My guess the Chemical argent they are dealing with is a Phosgene or Dis-phosgene as its very easy to make.

    • infused 2.3
      1 September 2013 at 8:58 pm

      Just watch liveleak. This shit is shown time and time again. Both sides are doing it though.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 3.1
      1 September 2013 at 5:34 pm

      Shelling civilians in their homes is every bit as reprehensible as gassing them.

      Lat time I checked that was a war crime too.

      But of course , no one ‘drew a line in the sand’ when its was Israel who flattened a Beruit suburb,Haret Hreik by aerial bombardment not so long ago. The bombs generally were supplied by the US as was their replacement stocks.

    • leftriteleft 4.1
      1 September 2013 at 5:56 pm

      Read the links. Yes, very factual.
      Alternative news is starting to surmount MSM.
      And Obama has made an idiot of himself (so has Kerry) hence the backdown.
      Next question: will the US population lay this thing to rest.
      Lobby lobby lobby and we won’t see W3.
      Because this is the ultimate outcome if US and allies move.

  5. tracey 5
    1 September 2013 at 7:53 pm

    John key will be feeling bewildered. The usa and uk are bowing to democracy. His head may have exploded.

    • Tracey 5.1
      2 September 2013 at 9:46 am

      I’m sorry, but this had me really laughing out loud

      “Prime Minister John Key has stopped short of pledging military support, but says the country offers moral support, to nations considering military strikes on Syria after the US said it had proof the regime used sarin gas against its citizens.”

      He’s gone from not being able to make a decision at all and constantly waiting for Cameron to call (3 days he said “soon” and in 24 hours), then he said he would prefer a un mandate and now…

      This is what he said

      “”The Foreign Minister spoke to Secretary John Kerry over the weekend. They’re certainly giving us all the information as they get it – we’re aware of what they’re doing,” Mr Key said.

      New Zealand’s view was to work through the UN, which had had inspectors in and around Damascus looking for evidence of chemical attacks on its citizens.

      “I think those inspectors would be out by now – they’ve got to take some time analysing the information – but let’s see how this thing plays out,” Mr Key said.”

      Note he said thy are telling him everything, but by the end he doesn’t know if the inspectors are out yet… obviously not telling him everything.

  6. Bill 6
    1 September 2013 at 9:19 pm

    From a Pepe Escobar piece written (obviously) just prior to Obama stalling. Interesting claim made on the location of the rocket launch site. (Click through to the article for the links.)

    Israeli intelligence has leaked to a Kuwaiti newspaper that Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Benny Gantz handed over to his good pal US Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey “documents and pictures” as evidence of the Syrian government’s culpability. Arguably, this will be the core of the White House “revelation” this Thursday.

    The evidence points to rockets launched from a “Syrian army post near Damascus” – which Finnish researcher Petri Krohn, currently conducting a meticulous investigation, conclusively placed as occupied by the “rebels” since June. (scroll down to “Qaboun rocket launches”)

    http://rt.com/op-edge/war-chemical-weapons-obama-syria-120/

  7. Tracey 7
    2 September 2013 at 8:02 am

    Key will be so relieved because if you noticed, he never actually had to make a decision. Every other world leader expressed a preference… key, through gritted teeth finally conceded he would prefer a UN resolution…

    Crisis maketh the leader. Ours just kept waiting for a phone call to tell him what he thinks.

  8. Sable 8
    2 September 2013 at 12:00 pm

    Obama’s image is so tarnished he knows going to alone will only fuel the disgust of the world who already have a very low opinion of the amoral US government. Now if we could only get National to stop kissing his arse….

  10. clifford wright 10
    2 September 2013 at 5:02 pm

    To Exkiwiforces in particular.
    You are quite correct about the ammunition coding. However, whatever the nature of the shell contents
    my point was about the shell CASING. In other words the bit that goes into the breech with the propellant charge and primer.
    Of course, you will see at once what I mean. This remains with the artillery gun that fired it, it goes nowhere near the target. UNLESS it is carried there deliberately.
    Also the damage to a building I was referring to was from the muzzle blast of something like a 120mm cannon, not the explosion of a shell. You will be well aware that this is pretty powerful!

    I have read up on the use of “war gases” in WW1 and as you say they burst rather gently. Just enough to disperse their contents. SO where are the SHELLS themselves?
    BTW I am old enough to still remember some old WW1 veterans who had ruined lungs from Phosgene and Mustard gas. Some lived until after WW2.

    So it is good to see that even the French are showing signs of “cold feet” on the news today.

    What an irony! Obama could end up fighting FOR the terrorists!

    • Sable 10.1
      2 September 2013 at 9:16 pm

      You almost seem gleeful about all the destruction, personally I find it nauseating. My advice get a girlfriend.

      As to Obama fighting FOR the terrorists by the standards he himself ascribes to his administration ARE the terrorists.