Pah, I looked up this "Professor" and he's only got about four degrees, and two of them - including a masters - were from The University Oxford of all places.
Clearly just a ****...
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Pah, I looked up this "Professor" and he's only got about four degrees, and two of them - including a masters - were from The University Oxford of all places.
Clearly just a ****...
Ricster
Well-Known Member
Someone posted on this thread earlier that they know someone from Syria who lives in Germany now and was on the front line.pussy
Go back to around page 37.
Now it states the region the chem weapon was dropped was an ISIS area and they were to wait for the gas to clear.
So while Assad is dropping chem weapons on ISIS strongholds, civilian casualties are going to happen.
So we now have conflicting views. What the MSM is reporting and a first hand witness account courtesy of Bluemoon.
Do people still think there would be as many people up in arms had this been the case and reported properly?
Would people be celebrating had it been footage of ISIS fighters dying or would they still be calling Assad?
We all want to see an end to ISIS, and who i consider a bigger threat to the UK than Assad or Syria.
Out for tonight. The knuckle draggers have awakened
Ricster
Well-Known Member
Didnt realise he only had 4 degrees. Total ****!Pah, I looked up this "Professor" and he's only got about four degrees, and two of them - including a masters - were from The University Oxford of all places.
Clearly just a ****...
Didnt realise he only had 4 degrees. Total ****!
With those qualifications he isn't even capable of running a Made in Chelsea fan account on Twitter.
OK, I've been drinking all night. So let's get that straight for starters. I've no context and just bobbed in here and saw your post. I wanted you to say what you feared to say cos you just fukin say it. Don't feel bullied. We're all behind our screens. Problem is - so are our leaders. There are no more proper big fights. No WW1 trenches. No away fans slipping on carefully placed dog shit down our Maine Road alleys. Well it still happens (bus) but you know what I mean.Someone posted on this thread earlier that they know someone from Syria who lives in Germany now and was on the front line.
Go back to around page 37.
Now it states the region the chem weapon was dropped was an ISIS area and they were to wait for the gas to clear.
So while Assad is dropping chem weapons on ISIS strongholds, civilian casualties are going to happen.
So we now have conflicting views. What the MSM is reporting and a first hand witness account courtesy of Bluemoon.
Do people still think there would be as many people up in arms had this been the case and reported properly?
Would people be celebrating had it been footage of ISIS fighters dying or would they still be calling Assad?
We all want to see an end to ISIS, and who i consider a bigger threat to the UK than Assad or Syria.
Out for tonight. The knuckle draggers have awakened
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,661
The hypocrisy of some people is quite unbelievable when it comes to this. You have them all on saying how terrible the things we are doing are when in actual fact Russia is the one who has been pounding Syrian streets and hospitals.
Oh no. It’s fine when Russia does it as he was invited in.....
The ****, you so willingly call him is Professor Jack Goldsmith. A man who graduated from Harvard Law School and went onto become assistant Attorney General.
Not really a **** but someone far more knowledgeable on this sort of stuff than the keyboard warriors or bullies on this forum
And he has a different opinion to that of the current Attorney General and current Assistant Attorney General?
Let me know the U.N. deem it illegal.
Ifwecouldjust.......
Well-Known Member
“Blood thirsty”
For supporting the destruction of factories that make chemical weapons.
You really are incredible
In that case we should launch a strike at Porton Down
I
I
inbetween
Guest
In that case we should launch a strike at Porton Down
Do Porton Down use chemical weapons to kill British people? Actually don't answer that..
G
G
ganganvince
Guest
Boris was also at Oxford just sayingPah, I looked up this "Professor" and he's only got about four degrees, and two of them - including a masters - were from The University Oxford of all places.
Clearly just a ****...
Ancient Citizen
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 15,712
I'd just like to say that I agree with everything Ban Jani says and I'm not homosexual yet.
Scottyboi
Well-Known Member
Least we know Russia are nothing more than shitbag bullies.
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
OPCW being prevented access to the bomb site.
Well I never.......
Well I never.......
I
I
inbetween
Guest
OPCW being prevented access to the bomb site.
Well I never.......
So the Russians veto independent access through the UN and now the Syrians/Russians refuse access for an independent body.
The plot thickens.
Have you never heard of Article 27? If a permanent member of the security council veto's a motion it cannot be passed.Where’s the link the UN vote stating that air strikes were illegal?
You claimed there was one.
You claimed I was ignorant for saying there wasn’t one.
Why lie?
The council voted on a new policy on chemicals in Syria and Russia choose to Veto that vote.
On the back of that the US, France and UK have unilaterally decided on military action with no weapons inspectors going in and based on a video provided by a group linked to ISIS.
Attacking a sovereign nation unilaterally is illegal.
Here's your link which no doubt you will also deny https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...-about-syria-as-inspectors-prepare-to-head-in
Here's another one - https://news.un.org/en/story/2018/04/1006991
I would love to know why on the back of this a nation can then unilaterally launch a military attack on another sovereign nation.
The only circumstance where unilateral action may be justified is if there was an immediate threat to life and this must be based on a weapons inspection which hasn't yet happened.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/syria-is-an-attack-on-the-country-legal-1.1412395
The only evidence is a video provided to us by ISIS and we now attack a nation of whom the prime minster was house guest of the Queen a few years back.
Last edited:
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,661
Yes because neither of those links provide what you stated with this:Here's your link which no doubt you will also deny https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...-about-syria-as-inspectors-prepare-to-head-in
Here's another one - https://news.un.org/en/story/2018/04/1006991
No as the UN security council voted against it which makes it an illegal action.
That never happened so I’ll ask again.
Why are you lying?
Ifwecouldjust.......
Well-Known Member
Have you never heard of Article 27? If a permanent member of the security council veto's a motion it cannot be passed.
The council voted on a new policy on chemicals in Syria and Russia choose to Veto that vote.
On the back of that the US, France and UK have unilaterally decided on military action with no weapons inspectors going in and based on a video provided by a group linked to ISIS.
Attacking a sovereign nation unilaterally is illegal.
Here's your link which no doubt you will also deny https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...-about-syria-as-inspectors-prepare-to-head-in
Here's another one - https://news.un.org/en/story/2018/04/1006991
I would love to know why on the back of this a nation can then unilaterally launch a military attack on another sovereign nation.
The only circumstance where unilateral action may be justified is if there was an immediate threat to life and this must be based on a weapons inspection which hasn't yet happened.
The only evidence is a video provided to us by ISIS and we now attack a nation of whom the prime minster was house guest of the Queen a few years back.
This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ the Executive prerogative only applies in waging war when its needed to 'keep the Queens peace' for example when we are under attack ....... not when we randomly decide to launch weapons (we only threw 4 missiles at them ) at a sovereign nation without UN backing.
May has well overstepped her powers here and should be made to resign
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,661
Maybe read your own link and provide one that’s not five years old.The only circumstance where unilateral action may be justified is if there was an immediate threat to life and this must be based on a weapons inspection which hasn't yet happened.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/syria-is-an-attack-on-the-country-legal-1.1412395
I
I
inbetween
Guest
Have you never heard of Article 27? If a permanent member of the security council veto's a motion it cannot be passed.
The council voted on a new policy on chemicals in Syria and Russia choose to Veto that vote.
On the back of that the US, France and UK have unilaterally decided on military action with no weapons inspectors going in and based on a video provided by a group linked to ISIS.
Attacking a sovereign nation unilaterally is illegal.
Here's your link which no doubt you will also deny https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...-about-syria-as-inspectors-prepare-to-head-in
Here's another one - https://news.un.org/en/story/2018/04/1006991
I would love to know why on the back of this a nation can then unilaterally launch a military attack on another sovereign nation.
The only circumstance where unilateral action may be justified is if there was an immediate threat to life and this must be based on a weapons inspection which hasn't yet happened.
The only evidence is a video provided to us by ISIS and we now attack a nation of whom the prime minster was house guest of the Queen a few years back.
So what is your solution, do we have to just leave it and forget about it because we might break the law?
I'm assuming you agree therefore that Russia and Syria are participating in genocide and/or therefore accountable for war crimes against the Syrian people?
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 90,661
She hasn’t and won’t as will be born out by her not being forced to resign. She is well within her remit. You may not like it but you can shout and shout and stamp your feet all you want as you’re both technically and factually wrong.May has well overstepped her powers here and should be made to resign
I
I
inbetween
Guest
This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ the Executive prerogative only applies in waging war when its needed to 'keep the Queens peace' for example when we are under attack ....... not when we randomly decide to launch weapons (we only threw 4 missiles at them ) at a sovereign nation without UN backing.
May has well overstepped her powers here and should be made to resign
Explain to me how one achieves UN backing when it requires Russian agreement?
Also explain to me when you will demand that Russia comes to the UN to also agree its involvement in Syria?
Or is it okay for Russia to be there in accordance with international law bombing Syrians?