We always have, that is how things work, where did I deny it?
Maybe we are just incompetent eh baz? No collusion. No funding. Just incompetently funnelling support to terrorists through the ages.
We’re consistently incompetent then, whilst knowingly committing illegal acts.
What kind of would believe that
Knowingly committing illegal acts?
Are you naive?
They’re the fucking secret service, nefarious acts have always been so.
I’m talking about our government position there. Sent any planes/missiles in without a Un mandate? We haven’t been attacked by Syria. That’s breaking international law, isn’t it?
Possibly, all it proves is the UN is a waste of space.Bosnia, Rwanda, the UN needs a clear mandate for it to be taken seriously.
All it proves is that we’ve broken international law, so you can wave the moral high ground bullshit out the window.
If it ends with less destruction than Raqqa(given that all the nastiest jihadists are bottled up there with apparently nothing to lose, makes it 10x harder), you would have to agree that the Syrian army under Assad’s leadership(with the help of their allies) are tactical geniuses and humanitarian gods. Wouldn’t you?
Hypothetically of course(like yours earlier).
Encouraging as it may be, that buffer zone is not a solution.
Trade and aid needs a north/south axis in Syria, Idlib staying in rebel hands blocks that.
In geo-politics it should also be a concern for “the West” and their ME partners as it signals a move by Turkey to start working with the Russia/Syria/Iran partnership.
Expect to see msm reacting. It also opens up the question of the Kurdish factions who fight IS etc in both Syria & Iraq but have other long term objectives.
It isn’t a solution it is a pause.
For tin foil wearers it allows Putin to ship all those Jihadists back to the West…
Nice to see the mentalists respecting the cease fire. French frigate firing missiles too. Who is the aggressor here again?
I’m not waving anything, I simply don’t believe two wrongs makes a right and its the right course of action.
You’re simply trying to poorly frame an argument.
You won’t but continue.
I’ll think you’ll find it was friendly fire old boy.
Has Assad committed human rights atrocities before the war?
You know the answer.
Yeah just heard this on radio. Said shot down by Syrian air defence then said Israel is yet to respond. What’s all that about? Why would Israel need to respond?
Because the Russians don’t like Israeli’s patrolling their air space, they also aren’t very good at talking to their allies.
From who? Syria?
With all these military super powers and rogue states flying over Syria it must be a pretty dangerous place. Not quite as dodgy as going for a blueberry muffin and a flat white in Salisbury town centre , but pretty close.
The Russians are saying that the Israeli fighters used the transport plane as cover during the strike - that is their public position. Whether that is what they are saying to Syria behind closed doors is another matter.
Not at all Barry. You came out with a hypothetical scenario and demanded we all denounce the only people with a right to be there. I merely offered an alternative view.
I’ll ask again, do you agree that if the result is better and the destruction less, it can only be described as a success, in relation to the devastation brought on the Syrian people by illegal foreign intervention?
One thinks this a classic case of friendly fire and the Russians are using any excuse, if the Israelis were using the reconnaissance aircraft as cover one thinks the Syrians seriously need to upgrade their air defence systems.
Regardless, its awful for the 15 people who needlessly lost their lives.