Anyone have anything to say about our amazing prime minister Thresa May, who decided to bomb Syria and managed to get 30 out of 100 bombs on targets mostly already vacated. I think the Brits have enough trouble already with our overseas relationships and home problems.
Most of these comments are exactly what Putin (and Assad) rely on.
They are dictators, meaning they can push ahead without any sort of backlash from their own populations, in secure in the knowledge that western nations, fettered by all sorts of requirements to debate and vote, cannot take decisive, retaliatory action. Look at the invasion and annexation of the Crimea, just for starters. How many time has a chemical weapon attack taken place in Syria? Very, very, many!
Every time, there has been a UN debate, and a motion deploring the action and that is it.
Even in the hypothetical case that all parties were in agreement, there would need to be a debate, and every single delegate would insist on having their say, so that by the time the vote had been passed, the entire affair is either so long past that it is too late to do anything, or the perpetrators have had time to prepare for whatever action is decided.
THAT IS ONE OF THE WEAKNESSES OF THE UK!! Every person who becomes an apologist, or demands 100% proof rather than accepting 90% certainty, encourages rogue states to continue and then bald facedly deny their actions, or even outrageously claim that Britain itself arranged it.
As for 30 out of 100 bombs on target - where on earth did you dig that up? Farcebook?
Assuming the Syrian government did attack its people using chemical weapons, then it is the duty all other countries to step in and prevent by force any further attacks of this nature by any government upon its people. These rules originally came in with the league of Nations, and taken on by the United Nations. This is the cover in the event of a member of the permanent Security Council vetoing humanitarian support by the United Nations. And so, the countries which have bombed Syrian governmental are legally obliged to do so. The targets chosen of those which will provide a demonstration of firepower.
This time despite strong words from the Kremlin, Russia chose to stand off with its anti-aircraft assets for fear of the easy and imminent destruction by overwhelming American firepower.
The Kremlin could also demonstrate a degree of behind-the-scenes support for the United Nations proposals which it had publicly vetoed. This way Russia can attempt to avoid a direct conflict United States and the United Nations whilst still appearing strong in front of people.
Perhaps the big question is, what should be done about the government and leadership of Syria once they have gained victory over the rebels. And help can peace be rebuilt in the Middle East following this long and disastrous civil war.
The people that suffer most of the ordinary people of Syria have had to put up with the violence of the neighbours the government and the outside world. Torn apart by religious divides within Islam together with petty tribal rivalries that had remained hidden within their state from before the Ottoman Empire.
Let us hope that this debacle can finish as peacefully as possible, without spilling into a world war.