Over 90,000 killed in Syrian crisis - UN

[Mosha]

Any developments on who deployed the chemical weapons? What type of chemicals etc.?

BBC World News this morning

Rebels and their allies say it's the government forces.

Government and their allies say it's the rebels.

Take your pick.

[simple1]

Any developments on who deployed the chemical weapons? What type of chemicals etc.?

Death toll now alledged to be more than 1220 with many uploaded videos of children amongst the dead. Doctors not yet to be able to identify the chemical used, but saying symptoms of survivors are not akin to Sarin nerve gas. Given they are rebel areas likely to be Syrian government forces & they have never claimed the rebel forces have seized chemical weapons.

EDIT: The Israeli defense Minister is saying the Syrian army has previously utilised chemical weapons against the rebels.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.542849

Edited August 22, 2013 by simple1

[chuckd]

The latest from the UN Security Council:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How Russia Neutered Obama's Chemical Weapons Response

Posted By Colum Lynch Wednesday, August 21, 2013 - 8:19 PM

An effort by the Obama administration to reinforce the powers of U.N. chemical weapons inspectors in Syria Wednesday evening foundered in the face of Russian and Chinese opposition in the U.N. Security Council, according to council diplomats.

...from the article...

..."The three western powers (US, UK, France) also wrote a letter to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki moon, signed by 32 other governments, calling for an urgent investigation. But the efforts failed to result in anything other than a tepid statement from the Security Council thanks to some final edits by the Russians and Chinese."

Entire article here: http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/08/21/how_russia_neutered_obamas_chemical_weapons_response

What did the US Ambassador do when the Chinese and Russians blocked the administration request?

She took to TWITTER and proclaimed that famous Obama line from the Benghazi phony scandal..."Those responsible will be held accountable."

[simple1]

The latest from the UN Security Council:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How Russia Neutered Obama's Chemical Weapons Response

Posted By Colum Lynch Wednesday, August 21, 2013 - 8:19 PM

An effort by the Obama administration to reinforce the powers of U.N. chemical weapons inspectors in Syria Wednesday evening foundered in the face of Russian and Chinese opposition in the U.N. Security Council, according to council diplomats.

...from the article...

..."The three western powers (US, UK, France) also wrote a letter to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki moon, signed by 32 other governments, calling for an urgent investigation. But the efforts failed to result in anything other than a tepid statement from the Security Council thanks to some final edits by the Russians and Chinese."

Entire article here: http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/08/21/how_russia_neutered_obamas_chemical_weapons_response

What did the US Ambassador do when the Chinese and Russians blocked the administration request?

She took to TWITTER and proclaimed that famous Obama line from the Benghazi phony scandal..."Those responsible will be held accountable."

What can US/NATO actually do if they are not willing to either put "boots on the ground", provide harder hitting weapons systems, implement no fly zones etc etc

Even if the rebels win the war, their will be even more killing and destruction while they sort out who's boss e.g. Islamic radicals versus Syrian Sunnis, get revenge on the Shiites and Christians who support Assad and so on.

For the moment, one way or the other, no matter who wins, the Syrian people are in for a terrible time in the coming few years or more.

[Scott]

This thread is not an excuse to make trollish comments about Obama. One post has been deleted and continuing to post in an off-topic manner will result in a suspension.

Stick to the topic.

[boomerangutang]

jeezo, with each country in the region having several different hot-head groups, it's gotten to where you need an intricate game card to try to decipher who hates whom in any given month. And there are degrees of hate. Some groups hate their neighbor, but they hate their neighbor's neighbor more, so that only adds more levels to the insanity of the situation. One mitigating factor you can say about war is, at least it puts a little bit of a temporary damper on overpopulation. That whole region is so bereft of natural resources, that it was beyond its carrying capacity for humans before the time of Ur. Perhaps a variation of humans will evolve which can subsist on sand and salt water, and will manage better in those barren places.

[simple1]

jeezo, with each country in the region having several different hot-head groups, it's gotten to where you need an intricate game card to try to decipher who hates whom in any given month. And there are degrees of hate. Some groups hate their neighbor, but they hate their neighbor's neighbor more, so that only adds more levels to the insanity of the situation. One mitigating factor you can say about war is, at least it puts a little bit of a temporary damper on overpopulation. That whole region is so bereft of natural resources, that it was beyond its carrying capacity for humans before the time of Ur. Perhaps a variation of humans will evolve which can subsist on sand and salt water, and will manage better in those barren places.

Just as a reminder the Syrian civil war kicked off when the Shitte dictatorship violently suppressed the Arab Spring demonstrations. Since then it's now estimated 100,000 killed, primarily civilians, with an approximate 1.7 million refugees plus an additional 2 million internally displaced. Your casual dismisal of the suffering completely underlines your bigotry that is so common in Australia

[boomerangutang]

jeezo, with each country in the region having several different hot-head groups, it's gotten to where you need an intricate game card to try to decipher who hates whom in any given month. And there are degrees of hate. Some groups hate their neighbor, but they hate their neighbor's neighbor more, so that only adds more levels to the insanity of the situation. One mitigating factor you can say about war is, at least it puts a little bit of a temporary damper on overpopulation. That whole region is so bereft of natural resources, that it was beyond its carrying capacity for humans before the time of Ur. Perhaps a variation of humans will evolve which can subsist on sand and salt water, and will manage better in those barren places.

Just as a reminder the Syrian civil war kicked off when the Shitte dictatorship violently suppressed the Arab Spring demonstrations. Since then it's now estimated 100,000 killed, primarily civilians, with an approximate 1.7 million refugees plus an additional 2 million internally displaced. Your casual dismisal of the suffering completely underlines your bigotry that is so common in Australia

I'm not an Aussie. You're just as off-base mentioning 'casual dismissal of the suffering' .....how do you get that spin? Perhaps you didn't take your smart pills with your oatmeal this morning.

[F430murci]

jeezo, with each country in the region having several different hot-head groups, it's gotten to where you need an intricate game card to try to decipher who hates whom in any given month. And there are degrees of hate. Some groups hate their neighbor, but they hate their neighbor's neighbor more, so that only adds more levels to the insanity of the situation. One mitigating factor you can say about war is, at least it puts a little bit of a temporary damper on overpopulation. That whole region is so bereft of natural resources, that it was beyond its carrying capacity for humans before the time of Ur. Perhaps a variation of humans will evolve which can subsist on sand and salt water, and will manage better in those barren places.

Just as a reminder the Syrian civil war kicked off when the Shitte dictatorship violently suppressed the Arab Spring demonstrations. Since then it's now estimated 100,000 killed, primarily civilians, with an approximate 1.7 million refugees plus an additional 2 million internally displaced. Your casual dismisal of the suffering completely underlines your bigotry that is so common in Australia

Bwahaha. I bet your just the life of the party everywhere you go!

[Scott]

Well, well, well, we are having fun this morning, but there are rules and you will have to play nicely.

Please stay on topic and stick to the topic. Post in a civil manner please and drop the unnecessary comments about other posters.

I had a pill with my oatmeal this morning, by the way, but it was only a vitamin.

[boomerangutang]

Deciding whether to give tangible support to the so-called 'rebels' is a tough decision. On the side of 'arming', here's what often happens:

>>> The seemingly good guys likely prevail, yet it's just as likely they get commandeered by Islamic extremists, and they devolve to their true colors, once in power. This has happened several times, particularly in the M.East.

>>> War tools provided - often end up with bad guys later on.

On the side of standing aside, and just offering rhetoric, ....this is what could happen:

>>> armed conflict spreads over borders, beyond what's already happening.

>>> with Russia and China firmly on one side, and the US and Europe on the other, WWIII is not a too-outlandish result. Grave tensions and conflict are always brewing in that part of the world.

Nobody asked me, but, I would advise Obama and anyone else to stay clear. Even if the carnage spills over borders, it's just a rotten situation that was itching to happen. It's obviously grievous to those, particularly innocents, suffering and dying. Not much different than the types of struggles which erupt in the natural world. We are animals, after all. When a school of sardines get attached by swordfish, or a colony of termites get attacked by an army of ants - how different is that - to a group of people getting attacked by another group? In a warped way, the sufferings going on in the M.East are indicative of the struggles of animals trying to stay alive.

[Credo]

The best thing to do is nothing until you can do something that will likely work.

Unfortunately, a lot of countries tend to act first and think later. It's difficult to watch so many people die, but sometimes the alternative will not save lives.

[simple1]

Deciding whether to give tangible support to the so-called 'rebels' is a tough decision. On the side of 'arming', here's what often happens:

>>> The seemingly good guys likely prevail, yet it's just as likely they get commandeered by Islamic extremists, and they devolve to their true colors, once in power. This has happened several times, particularly in the M.East.

>>> War tools provided - often end up with bad guys later on.

On the side of standing aside, and just offering rhetoric, ....this is what could happen:

>>> armed conflict spreads over borders, beyond what's already happening.

>>> with Russia and China firmly on one side, and the US and Europe on the other, WWIII is not a too-outlandish result. Grave tensions and conflict are always brewing in that part of the world.

Nobody asked me, but, I would advise Obama and anyone else to stay clear. Even if the carnage spills over borders, it's just a rotten situation that was itching to happen. It's obviously grievous to those, particularly innocents, suffering and dying. Not much different than the types of struggles which erupt in the natural world. We are animals, after all. When a school of sardines get attached by swordfish, or a colony of termites get attacked by an army of ants - how different is that - to a group of people getting attacked by another group? In a warped way, the sufferings going on in the M.East are indicative of the struggles of animals trying to stay alive.

You're right about potential direct conflict between US/NATO and Russia; became close in the Yom Kippur War and during an attempt by Russia to intervene on the behalf of the Serbs during the brake up of Yugoslavia.

As you know humans use forethought, malice and conscious cruelty. Nearly all the suffering in the Muslim world has come about by minority dictatorships deploying state resources for oppression and of course the complexities introduced by strategic policy mistakes of the West.

I for one would be fighting back if my family and friends had been murdered or tortured by a dictator such as Assad. The Assad regime went way beyond by detaining, torturing and murdering children of as a means to suppress dissent by their families.

[boomerangutang]

There is no clean solution. With such a miasma as Syria, every decision, even a decision of non-action carries repercussions.

One would think Syria's neighbors would offer solutions, but they're frustrated also. Saudi is holding back for now. Iran is fanning the flames. Turkey and Lebanon are harboring refugees, Lebanon is trying to hold back, but fighting is spilling over to there. Israel is manning its walls, knowing anything it does will be met with scorn.

The explosion of troubles in Syria is symptomatic of dire problems which must have been seething there for decades. Perhaps it's better to have so-called 'pressure relief valves' (or PRV's in plumber's lingo). In other words, when angers are pent-up, let them blow while they're at earlier stages. With so much pressure to maintain appearances of peace (from within and from outside) the pressure of conflicts build up for years, and the results are what we saw in Libya and see now in Syria.

Egypt, Yemen and Bahrain fit more with my theory of letting smaller conflicts flare up, in the hope that will preclude bigger conflicts if rivalries are suppressed for years. There was bloodshed in those places, but not civil wars.

Best is; no anger. 2nd best, is to try and resolve conflicts via discussions or sports events or cultural exchanges, etc. But human nature and its skill at conflict resolution is still at a primitive state of development, barely beyond the level of chimps, no offense to chimps. Of course, there are ways in which chimps deal with conflict better than humans. Bonobos resolve conflict with sex, but that's another topic.

Giraffes deal with conflict by standing next to each other, and one at a time, swinging their necks to thump their rival. People can learn from animals. 'Giraffe' is word taken from Arabic, btw.

Edited August 23, 2013 by boomerangutang

[simple1]

I see more calls for the US to get involved

*Deleted out*

These are probably the same azzholes that will accuse the US of fabricating the data to intervene if the US did get involved.

Use history as guidance. Go in with the EU and/or other countries but not alone. PS If the Saudis and the EU aren't interested, why is the US?

Edit

Shoot, I thought this editor would auto insert the link to the article. Sorry gang, the source was from Reuters via Yahoo.

The Saudis are definately "interested" and in conjunction with Qatar provide weapons and funding to the Free Syrian Army as proxies for the US.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22906965

The Saudi response to the gas attack.

"It is time for the Security Council to shoulder its responsibility and overcome differences between its members and restore the confidence of the international community by convening immediately to issue a clear and deterrent resolution that will put an end to this human crisis," Prince Saud said in a statement.

EU member response:

France's position is that there must be a reaction, a reaction that could take the form of a reaction with force". He did not elaborate on whether that meant backing military action, but did rule out the idea of deploying troops inside Syria.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23795088

Edited August 23, 2013 by Scott

[rgs2001uk]

I see more calls for the US to get involved

*Deleted Quote edited out*

These are probably the same azzholes that will accuse the US of fabricating the data to intervene if the US did get involved.

Use history as guidance. Go in with the EU and/or other countries but not alone. PS If the Saudis and the EU aren't interested, why is the US?

Edit

Shoot, I thought this editor would auto insert the link to the article. Sorry gang, the source was from Reuters via Yahoo.

The Saudis are definately "interested" and in conjunction with Qatar provide weapons and funding to the Free Syrian Army as proxies for the US.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22906965

The Saudi response to the gas attack.

"It is time for the Security Council to shoulder its responsibility and overcome differences between its members and restore the confidence of the international community by convening immediately to issue a clear and deterrent resolution that will put an end to this human crisis," Prince Saud said in a statement.

EU member response:

France's position is that there must be a reaction, a reaction that could take the form of a reaction with force". He did not elaborate on whether that meant backing military action, but did rule out the idea of deploying troops inside Syria.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23795088

The Saudis are definately "interested"

Of course they are, buts lets be honest its more to do with covering their ass.

The same regime that was quick enough to send its troops into Bahrain to support their Sunni friends keep the Shia majority in line.

How many boots on the ground are the Saudis willing to send to Syria?

The region will split along sectarian lines as each tries to oudo the other.

How those in the west must long for the good old days when they had friendly dictators such as Saddam, Gaddafi and Mubarak in place to keep the lid on things and do their dirty work for them.

Arab problem, arab soultions should be applied, let them sort it out themselves, its not as if they dont have the manpower or weapons capability to do so.

Edited August 23, 2013 by Scott

[simple1]

I see more calls for the US to get involved

*Deleted Quote edited out*

These are probably the same azzholes that will accuse the US of fabricating the data to intervene if the US did get involved.

Use history as guidance. Go in with the EU and/or other countries but not alone. PS If the Saudis and the EU aren't interested, why is the US?

Edit

Shoot, I thought this editor would auto insert the link to the article. Sorry gang, the source was from Reuters via Yahoo.

The Saudis are definately "interested" and in conjunction with Qatar provide weapons and funding to the Free Syrian Army as proxies for the US.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22906965

The Saudi response to the gas attack.

"It is time for the Security Council to shoulder its responsibility and overcome differences between its members and restore the confidence of the international community by convening immediately to issue a clear and deterrent resolution that will put an end to this human crisis," Prince Saud said in a statement.

EU member response:

France's position is that there must be a reaction, a reaction that could take the form of a reaction with force". He did not elaborate on whether that meant backing military action, but did rule out the idea of deploying troops inside Syria.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23795088

The Saudis are definately "interested"

Of course they are, buts lets be honest its more to do with covering their ass.

The same regime that was quick enough to send its troops into Bahrain to support their Sunni friends keep the Shia majority in line.

How many boots on the ground are the Saudis willing to send to Syria?

The region will split along sectarian lines as each tries to oudo the other.

How those in the west must long for the good old days when they had friendly dictators such as Saddam, Gaddafi and Mubarak in place to keep the lid on things and do their dirty work for them.

Arab problem, arab soultions should be applied, let them sort it out themselves, its not as if they dont have the manpower or weapons capability to do so.

Agree it's playing out along secretarian lines, with the US/NATO indulging in a dangerous game, supporting both Shiite and Sunnis regeimes according to their regional strategic interests. Their have been scenarios presented whereby the borders should be realigned along Sunni/Shiite majority populations, this would of course lead to a tremendous amount of bloodshed, similar to the the breaking up of India at Independence in 1947.

Edited August 23, 2013 by Scott

[Scott]

A series of posts has been deleted. The main post is a quote without a link. You cannot simply say where the information came from. You need to actually provide a link to the quoted text. The quoted text must also comply with fair use policy.

Unfortunately, numerous posters quoted the article and then replied.

My apologies.

[Chicog]

What did the US Ambassador do when the Chinese and Russians blocked the administration request?

She took to TWITTER and proclaimed that famous Obama line from the Benghazi phony scandal..."Those responsible will be held accountable."

What do you think she should do then Chuck?

Tell them off?

Because without Chinese and Russian support, the UN Security Council is toothless.

The Russians have even had the audacity to criticise the rebels for "denying access to UN Inspectors".

Sorry, but the US aren't the playground bully any more, they have others to answer to.

[chuckd]

What did the US Ambassador do when the Chinese and Russians blocked the administration request?

She took to TWITTER and proclaimed that famous Obama line from the Benghazi phony scandal..."Those responsible will be held accountable."

What do you think she should do then Chuck?

Tell them off?

Because without Chinese and Russian support, the UN Security Council is toothless.

The Russians have even had the audacity to criticise the rebels for "denying access to UN Inspectors".

Sorry, but the US aren't the playground bully any more, they have others to answer to.

Don't get your knickers in a twist. The US Ambassador to the UN wasn't even at the Security Council meeting. She was out of town.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Power missed Syria session for personal trip

By Chris Stirewalt

Published August 23, 2013

WHERE IN THE WORLD IS SAMANTHA POWER? - UN Ambassador Samantha Power was on a personal trip when she missed this week’s emergency Security Council meeting on the use of chemical weapons in Syria, U.N. diplomats have told Fox News. Power, who tweeted a call for U.N. action after news broke of the gas attack and has long advocated military intervention in the ongoing Syrian civil war, was said to be in a location where no travel arrangements could be made.

Whether it was a family vacation with husband Cass Sunstein, also a senior adviser to President Obama, or something else, a diplomat leaving her duty post so soon after being confirmed does not suggest a high administration priority for the crisis or its putative emphasis on the UN.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/23/power-missed-syria-session-for-personal-trip/#ixzz2cnxDMMA3

Edited August 23, 2013 by chuckd

[NeverSure]

What did the US Ambassador do when the Chinese and Russians blocked the administration request?

She took to TWITTER and proclaimed that famous Obama line from the Benghazi phony scandal..."Those responsible will be held accountable."

What do you think she should do then Chuck?

Tell them off?

Because without Chinese and Russian support, the UN Security Council is toothless.

The Russians have even had the audacity to criticise the rebels for "denying access to UN Inspectors".

Sorry, but the US aren't the playground bully any more, they have others to answer to.

Bullshit. The US pays no attention to the UN security council, nor do most members of NATO. Who was it that took out Libya, and who's permission did they need, led I think by France?

No UN resolution is binding anyway.

If certain European nations feel they need to do something in Syria they'll do it. If the US wants to be involved, it will.

Personally I hope they are allowed to just kill each other off with no intervention from the West or the ME, but that's just me. I think we've all "liberated" too many Muslim countries only to see the next regime be even worse.

There were 22 nations on the ground in the invasion of Iraq and the taking out of Saddam, and where did that get us? Many people think that was the US, but Britain supplied 1/3 of the troops in that invasion, and even Thailand had troops on the ground. 22 nations and look where it is now.

[Credo]

Wow, Chuckd, no wonder Syria is such a mess. The US Ambassador is allowed to take time off? No one to replace her? No reason given? Perhaps they could just close down the UN if the US Ambassador isn't there. I think you are on to something big here.

Meanwhile back on the topic. Whatever the international community decides to do, it will be of little value. They may be able to stop the use of chemical weapons, but the country is going to be a mess for a very, very long time. There are just too many factions and groups for anything but a most unsteady truce. There is now just too much anger and hate for that truce to ever hold.

[Chicog]

What did the US Ambassador do when the Chinese and Russians blocked the administration request?

She took to TWITTER and proclaimed that famous Obama line from the Benghazi phony scandal..."Those responsible will be held accountable."

What do you think she should do then Chuck?

Tell them off?

Because without Chinese and Russian support, the UN Security Council is toothless.

The Russians have even had the audacity to criticise the rebels for "denying access to UN Inspectors".

Sorry, but the US aren't the playground bully any more, they have others to answer to.

Bullshit. The US pays no attention to the UN security council, nor do most members of NATO. Who was it that took out Libya, and who's permission did they need, led I think by France?

The Security Council approved the actions in Libya. Don't confuse Russian's non-participation in that action with its tacit approval of it.

In this case, no military actions will be approved by the Security council, because Russia and China are in bed with the "enemy".

And if the US or Europe decided to try their own action, they might find they're fighting MIGs with Russian pilots instead of Syrian ones.

No way are they going to risk that.

Otherwise a volley of cruise missiles would already have been launched, let's face it.

And the US is still frightened to give the rebels the weapons they need to win, not least because they might end up being used against it.

We'll probably be having the same conversation in a year's time.

Edited August 24, 2013 by Chicog

[Credo]

The difficulty seems to be that it is starting to spill over into Lebanon. How much of a spread before someone decides they need to intervene?

[chuckd]

Wow, Chuckd, no wonder Syria is such a mess. The US Ambassador is allowed to take time off? No one to replace her? No reason given? Perhaps they could just close down the UN if the US Ambassador isn't there. I think you are on to something big here.

Meanwhile back on the topic. Whatever the international community decides to do, it will be of little value. They may be able to stop the use of chemical weapons, but the country is going to be a mess for a very, very long time. There are just too many factions and groups for anything but a most unsteady truce. There is now just too much anger and hate for that truce to ever hold.

The Ambassador had been on her new job for a grand total of 19 days. I suppose that is quite a lot of work for a government employee but taking a vacation after only 19 days seems a little over the top.

As far as closing down the UN is concerned...I am totally in agreement that this useless organization can go the way of the dodo birds, whether the US Ambassador is gracing the halls with her presence or not. Saves the US treasury lots of money each year.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Found: Samantha Power in Ireland during urgent Syria meeting, sources say

Published August 23, 2013

Mystery solved. America's ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power was in Ireland on a personal trip when she missed an emergency meeting on the alleged chemical gas attack in Syria, U.N. sources tell Fox News.

A day earlier, State Department officials were mum when asked for information on Power's whereabouts. She had come under fire for missing Wednesday's urgent U.N. Security Council meeting, where delegations weighed how to respond to charges that the Assad regime had just committed the deadliest chemical weapons attack in the country's two-year civil war.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/23/found-samantha-power-in-ireland-during-urgent-syria-meeting-sources-say/#ixzz2crOuC0yK

[Credo]

Do ya think maybe she had a life before the UN? Maybe made plans before given this job? Every had a death in the family or a funeral to attend?

Do ya think Syria will be better/worse off because of her absence?

[Chicog]

Do ya think maybe she had a life before the UN? Maybe made plans before given this job? Every had a death in the family or a funeral to attend?

Do ya think Syria will be better/worse off because of her absence?

And more to the point she's only a mouthpiece for the administration, and a trained monkey can pass on a fax.

Edited August 24, 2013 by Chicog

[simple1]

The difficulty seems to be that it is starting to spill over into Lebanon. How much of a spread before someone decides they need to intervene?

Not started, already has with an estimated 700k Syrian refugees in Lebanon and car bombing by both Shiite and Sunni extremists. Plus Hezbollah sending fighters into Syria in liaison with Iran. The Lebanese government and military will have a very tough job to contain and try to stop another civil war being triggered in Lebanon. The Iraqi government has already acknowledged that the Syrian civil war has spilled over it's border and of course a NATO member; Turkey. Iran is the regional elephant in the room for potential further military esculation in Syria in suport of Assad.

US/NATO want to limit their risk/exposure so currently very grey as to what concrete measures they will put in-place. Could be wrong, but I do not believe Russia or China will want to involve their military combat personnel in a conflict over Syria.

Edited August 24, 2013 by simple1

[Mosha]

uk msn reports 4 US navy ships move closer to Syria.

[timewilltell]

Too many weapons everywhere, too much politics, too many megalomaniacs, too much nationalism, too much religion. Too many countries, too many lies, too many useless self-serving politicians with too much ignorance.

Too little truth, too little respect, too little humanity, too little education, too little willingness to listen, too little understanding and too little basic morals.

Muslim or Arabs, people are people with feelings and families. My heart goes out to those poor families who have lost their children, children who have lost their parents and lovers who are now single.

If action by the West would stop the killing and restore order without ulterior motive I would wholeheartedly support it; unfortunately the motives would all be ulterior and therefore involvement would be for profit and not for Defence or any morally valid reason.

Such a shame this world we live in with the despicable politicians we have little choice but to elect.we need some heros!