Airliners-India.com

G-BYGB

There is nothing in this world that can stop US from taking unilateral action against their so called enemies. All they need to do is cook up reasons and present them assuringly. And their allies and few other countries accept and be a part of the game.

We have to prepare to witness another possible attack against a regime which is looming ever so near. US is planning to ouster Assad government from Syria because it is believed that they are using chemical weapons in the on going Syrian civil war.

This is not going to bring any ideal result that the Middle East region wants. The rebels, whom the Western regions believe are to be friendly, are actually the Islamic fundamentalists who are not going to be democratic either.

So it is going to be another failure like in Iraq. We still see a lot of blood sheds in that country with the sectarian violence. The US and its allies did not see WMDs in Iraq and hence it was not legitimate.

The question is how come US gets away every time by giving some reason to go to war against a nation and the world community remains silent about it?
_________________
www.flickr.com/G-BYGB photos

PAL@YWG · Posted: Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:50 am Post subject:

G-BYGB · Posted: Wed Aug 28, 2013 2:36 am Post subject:

What is winning for USA, most of the time, is that they are a democratic society and therefore Europe, UK, Japan, South Korea and other democratic nations are willing to listen to whatever US wants them to do.

Whereas, the world community does not listen to China and Russia because they are a communist nation.

It is unfortunate that the world community is willing to have US as its 'World Police'.
_________________
www.flickr.com/G-BYGB photos

Jaysit · Member Joined: 19 Dec 2006 Posts: 4346

Except that in this case, there is ample evidence that supports Assad's use of chemical weapons against his own people.

You're comparing apples and oranges when you compare Iraq with Syria - the possible existence of "WMDs" with the tangible evidence in the form of persons killed by chemical weapons.

Fascinating to read that you're on the side of a murderous thug because of your idiotic anti-US phobia.

PAL@YWG · Posted: Wed Aug 28, 2013 7:59 am Post subject:

G-BYGB · Posted: Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:59 am Post subject:

iah87 · Member Joined: 17 Apr 2007 Posts: 2566

Many in the US do not want it to become involved in other wars - Republicans and Democrats alike. In this case, it is not about regime change, but to serve as a warning to not to use chemical weapons. Regime change is undesirable in Syria since the opposition is also undemocratic and hostile to minorities.

G-BYGB · Posted: Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:00 pm Post subject:

The_Goat · Posted: Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:21 pm Post subject:

I don't know how true this is but.

http://www.cyberwarnews.info/reports/a-look-into-the-britam-defence-data-leak-files/

So it looks like it was staged. Someone else fired the chemical weapons, not the Syrians themselves, so that Assad could be deposed and the 'interested parties' could get their hands on Syria's oil.

Sounds familiar! Sounds VERY familiar!
_________________
I don't know which is the more pampered bunch : AI's widebodies (the aunties) or Jet's widebodies (the planes).
-Jasepl

G-BYGB · Posted: Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:18 pm Post subject:

In fact, it should be seen as the rebels using the chemical weapons against Syrian rather than the regime.

Syria's allies like Russia, China and Iran have said that there will be grave consequences in this region, if there is a US strike here.

But it won't matter much to the Westerners because it is a mere rhetoric and they know that Russia and China are not going to join Syria in this military attack by the US.

Even the political analysts in the US and Europe are biast in their opinions and are urging Obama to launch a military attack against Assad.
_________________
www.flickr.com/G-BYGB photos

ssbmat · Member Joined: 20 Dec 2006 Posts: 1710

iah87 · Member Joined: 17 Apr 2007 Posts: 2566

G-BYGB · Posted: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:57 pm Post subject:

Middle East is a complex region in itself for any nation to intervene whether militarily or diplomatically. It is for the people in this region to decide what kind of future they want for its children and for themselves.

I think people from these region should get out of this religious fundamentalism, if they ever want peace. Otherwise, the common people there, are going to periodically face tyranny from dictators and jiadhists, interchangeably.
_________________
www.flickr.com/G-BYGB photos

Spiderguy252

jasepl · Member Joined: 26 Jul 2008 Posts: 4257 Location: bund-bay

So it looks like Tony Blair's ghost (complete with cheshire cat grin) still haunts Britain and Parliament voted not to blindly follow Washington this time.

Good.

That country's come a long way... whipped by America and owned by the Arabs. Yet they remarkably manage to hold on to and perpetuate an illusion and keep themselves relevant on the global stage.

As for Obama, I'm a bit confounded by the claim that bombing Syria is in America's interests. How?

In the meantime, Israel will occupy some more land and throw itself another pity party.

Deux poids, deux mesures as te saying goes. No altruism here at all; they probably just need to increase arms sales again, and what better way than to instigate yet another "war".
_________________
four years free of jetya punti!

HAWK21M · Posted: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:24 pm Post subject:

The world with one superpower...... Wink

_________________
Think of the Brighter side !!!

G-BYGB · Posted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 12:50 am Post subject:

Spiderguy252 · Posted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 3:18 pm Post subject:

stealthpilot · Member Joined: 19 Dec 2006 Posts: 2325 Location: BLR, DXB

Syria is not comparable to Iraq, if anything it has more in common with Bosnia/Serbia in the sense this is not about regime change or oil.
If Assad did use chemical weapons (and its not just America who say so...) I for one believe the international community should not sit by and watch.

Obama is not Bush. This is not about oil ... nor regime change (as much at least). He's trying to get the Europeans/other Arab states (not to mention his Congress) on the same page- and wrt Syria they are. The issue is a lot of countries cant commit their military but they (Arab states included) believe something needs to be done.

Nimish · Posted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 11:52 pm Post subject:

Why don't the heavily militarized (and much closer) Arab states shoot down the menace of Chemical weapons themselves? Why must they get a "safai-karamchari" from miles away?
_________________
We miss you Nalini!

G-BYGB · Posted: Thu Sep 05, 2013 1:20 am Post subject:

It is imminent that the US senate committee for foreign relations will approve the military action against Syria. It will give US military 60 days to target the Syrian air force base and destroy the chemical weapons base, with 30 days extension.

It will be interesting to see if the 'House of Representatives' will approve this limited military action. Because it seems some of the Congressmen from both the parties are reluctant to take any military action because of the public sentiments in their respective constituents.
_________________
www.flickr.com/G-BYGB photos

G-BYGB · Last edited by G-BYGB on Thu Sep 05, 2013 1:54 am; edited 1 time in total

G-BYGB · Posted: Thu Sep 05, 2013 1:52 am Post subject:

ssbmat · Member Joined: 20 Dec 2006 Posts: 1710

G-BYGB · Posted: Thu Sep 05, 2013 4:40 pm Post subject:

The_Goat · Posted: Fri Sep 06, 2013 12:44 pm Post subject:

Spiderguy252 · Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2013 3:44 pm Post subject:

On the subject of oil...

Peak Oil is behind Syria's problems. Their fields had their heyday back in the mid-90s but they've since become a net importer and have been paying the going market rate of $108-$120 per barrel, and have done so each day for the better part of the last couple of years. There's a limit to what a nation's GDP can afford to spend on energy on a daily basis, and the economic friction has caused the country to crumble. Religion, Assad and the allegations of chemical weapons are merely the facade to project a smokescreen in front of population explosion, and natural resource and hydrocarbon depletion.

_________________
Yeah.

ssbmat · Member Joined: 20 Dec 2006 Posts: 1710

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24091633

I think this is a piece of diplomatic masterstroke from Russia. Obama was going hammer and tongs trying to convince every G20 leader how important it was to strike Syria, geopolitical consequences be damned.
But Russia quietly worked the diplomatic channels to bring the situation under control.
In a nutshell:
Complicated solution- You have 'em, you have used 'em so we strike you..

Simple solution- if you have 'em, hand 'em over, thats it!!

OF course there are all sorts of riders and by-lane clauses and face saving measures etc.. but on the "principle" of it, Putin has certainly triumphed over Obama..who for all his smooth and didactic style, appears a bit of a chump... not to mention Cameron, who , in light of his G20 press speech, appears to have made a complete fool of himself.
UK would do better than to blindly side by USA in worldly matters hereon.

The_Goat · Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2013 1:46 pm Post subject: