Since Obama has approved supplying arms directly to rebels, is this the start of a slippery slope of the west getting dragged into yet another war?.
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Syria - Slippery slope?
Collapse
X
-
Syria - Slippery slope?
10Yes50.00%5No10.00%1Andyw's mum will depose the Assad regime with her handbag40.00%4 -
already "ruined by proggy"
Originally posted by Stevie Wonder BoyI can't see any way to do it can you please advise?
I want my account deleted and all of my information removed, I want to invoke my right to be forgotten. -
Probably.
I'm open to a decent argument, but is there a good reason why we shouldn't just leave them to their own civil wars? Some of those rebel groups are no better than Assad anyway.Comment
-
The problem is nations arming opposing sides of the conflict. At some point US supplied weapons will wipe out a Russian convoy delivering weapons for the governement and we have a diplomatic nightmare on our hands.Comment
-
Originally posted by Ketchup View PostThe problem is nations arming opposing sides of the conflict. At some point US supplied weapons will wipe out an Iranian convoy delivering weapons for the governement and we have a diplomatic nightmare on our hands.
But arming Al Qaeda in one country, and fighting them in another seems almost too funny to laugh about.
And if Al Qaeda get hold of sarin, I am not pootling about in London again...Comment
-
So if we can stike a deal with the Russians where we arm opposing sides via satalite states then we could make a fair amount of money. Once the money is all gone we can pull out and let them finish each other before moving in to 'help' and then plundering any natural resoures the country has. If they do not have any then ***** 'em - it is against our policy to interfere in another country's internal political affairs.Comment
-
Originally posted by Ketchup View PostThe problem is nations arming opposing sides of the conflict. At some point US supplied weapons will wipe out a Russian convoy delivering weapons for the governement and we have a diplomatic nightmare on our hands.
I think there is already a diplomatic issue because you have ~ 100k dead people including thousands of children and you have chemical weapons being used. I think it would be reasonable looking at recent history to expect the UN to intervene at some point with a multinational peacekeeping force, though I can see that it's not going to happen in this case.While you're waiting, read the free novel we sent you. It's a Spanish story about a guy named 'Manual.'Comment
-
Originally posted by Doggy Styles View PostProbably.
I'm open to a decent argument, but is there a good reason why we shouldn't just leave them to their own civil wars? Some of those rebel groups are no better than Assad anyway.Comment
-
Originally posted by Doggy Styles View PostProbably.
I'm open to a decent argument, but is there a good reason why we shouldn't just leave them to their own civil wars? Some of those rebel groups are no better than Assad anyway.
Its easy to batter the US, UK or 'the West' for standing by while murderous regimes do what they want in their own country. If the UN was truely non country specific and could do a job as the World's policeman, we might be able to sleep at night. But it cant and it is down to the US, ourselves and other like minded countries to do something until it (the UN) can.
There is the old argument that the West \ US \ UK \ France may have provided arms to Assad in the past. But, even if they hadnt, he'd probably have got them off China, Russia or Iran etc.I couldn't give two fornicators! Yes, really!Comment
-
Originally posted by proggy View PostIt's a no win for the politicians , if they don't intervene and hundreds of thousands more die they get accused of apathy. Also Obama said if chem weapon were used then that was the red line. So he's bound to take some action now given it looks like that has happened (not sure if its been confirmed yet)
Israel gains by its Arab neighbours fighting amongst themselves, so I'm sure they'll find some ways to stir the pot.Will work inside IR35. Or for food.Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Comment