Considering Western Europe moved so quickly to settle the civil war situation in Libya isn't it quite frankly disgraceful that they are leaving Syria to it's own devices? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17242412 As a natural cynic but an ultimate pragmatist I went against my better nature to turn a blind eye to Libya - sure they had Gaddafi attending diplomatic dinners in Downing Street a year earlier - but at the end of the day we all knew it was for the benefit of the greater society that they sorted this situation out as fast a possible, considering we're all relying on that oil. Now we have a country in Syria which isn't worth much to us in economic terms but which is suffering much worse Government oppression than Libya - yet the Western leaders are doing nothing. I don't mind securing strategic benefits for our society, but I would very much appreciate if the society which had just benefited from military intervention would give a little bit back in moral terms and indeed interfere to protect the people of a country which doesn't offer us anything in return, for once.
I seen uttercunt had replied to this thread and I thought "he's a bit of a ****, but at least he's usually intelligible". Naw he's just a ****.
On my phone so can't type too much because i'm lazy... The situation in Syria is ****ed, but i think the problem is that the rebel movement isn't as widely supported there as it was in Libya. It's still out of order that nothing has been done to help, the reports coming from there are ****ed. On a side note, the eyepatch lady journalist that died there recently deserves a 'would you' thread.
Why turn a blind eye to Libya? Or for that matter and country in the middle east...protagonists of oppression to a man.... Certain elements of our media come in for heavy criticism for their coverage of issues that are "newsworthy", but those that convey the real news have been instrumental in the Arab spring.
I turn a blind eye to having selfish reasons to sort an unjust situation - just like most of us turned a blind eye to welcoming Gaddafi to Britain despite the fact he was the perpetrator of an unjust situation. My point was the people who are supposed to represent us and pretend to represent moral absolutes could have done their own pretence some good by spending a few quid on sorting this Syria situation out.
But why would they when they can point the finger at the previous government and blame them? It's not ideal, but their argument is based on permission from the previous incumbent, and lack of funds to combat it is now due to the very same people's term in office., who in turn pointed the finger 13 years prior etc etc
Well bringing party politics and financial costs into this situation completely strips Britain of the moral authority it so often gives itself. You're either trying to make the world a better place, or you are only trying such things when it has a direct benefit to you. Of course personally coming from a community who seen the British as being Imperialistic I may find it convenient to spot scenarios which back up my own prejudice - but then the British Government, or indeed any other Western Government do not seem to be making much of an effort to disprove such prejudices.
If you listened to the Tories on foreign policy you'd get the impression that they do have a rather inflated sense of their own worth.
I may be wrong but didn't the response to Libya go through the UN Security council? The British & western countries wanted action and the Russians and Chinese vetoed it.. The yanks aren't interested in this one due to the lack of oil, and the UK don't have the resources to do it.. Especially when you consider we are gearing up to defend the Falklands. My history isn't great Mick, but a barman in my old local was Maltese an he loved the British, as the place would have been levelled by the Italians and Germans if we didn't defend it.. Perhaps the reAsons to defend it were self serving but defended it was.
Loads of oil, just not of the same quality that is of use to the yanks...once Libya came under pressure our lines were then supplied by west Africa as it could be refined by us more easily than other regions...our refineries can't deal with Saudi crude as well as Libyas or Nigerias...apparently? West Africa = corrupt = more than Libya = more bunce from us
My pragmatic view is that it would be better to invest in a viable electric automobile system rather than spend biliions sporadically invading oil rich dictatorships.
Steal their oil and **** them up. Then send all the Muslim *****s/rapists/drug dealers/thugs back to the middle east to live in their sandhuts. Or is that too simplistic?
How much oil does Syria have? Russia and China wil probably veto any attempt of military intervention.
Lots of it mate - already the Yanks are sniffing - thats why the Russians won't play ball with sanctions.
