View Single Post
Old 27-08-13, 21:55   #26
Ladybbird
 
Ladybbird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 47,363
Thanks: 27,593
Thanked 14,456 Times in 10,262 Posts
Ladybbird has a reputation beyond reputeLadybbird has a reputation beyond reputeLadybbird has a reputation beyond reputeLadybbird has a reputation beyond reputeLadybbird has a reputation beyond reputeLadybbird has a reputation beyond reputeLadybbird has a reputation beyond reputeLadybbird has a reputation beyond reputeLadybbird has a reputation beyond reputeLadybbird has a reputation beyond reputeLadybbird has a reputation beyond repute

Awards Showcase
Best Admin Best Admin Gold Medal Gold Medal 
Total Awards: 8

Default re: VIDEOS-ISIS -New Beheading >> US Aid Worker

'We're Ready to Go': Britain and US could launch missile strikes on Syria as Early as FRIDAY as Assad's Foreign Minister Warns it will Defend Itself using 'All Means Available'

  • PM considering 'proportionate response' to 'abhorrent' chemical attack
  • '600 canister strikes, 12 tanks, 100 soldiers': Witness reveals devastating details of raids on Damascus as Assad’s snipers are accused of ambushing UN chemical weapons team

  • David Cameron recalled Parliament for Thursday and has promised vote
  • He said any action would be to prevent the use of chemical weapons
  • He said their use was 'wrong' and the 'world should not stand idly by'
  • He has said Syria has used chemical weapons on 10 previous occasions
  • U.S. Defence Secretary says they're 'ready to go' if action is ordered
  • Russians: West acts 'towards Islamic world like a monkey with a grenade'
  • Syrian foreign minister denied 'utterly' the state was behind gas attack

By Daily Mail UK, 27 August 2013

David Cameron today insisted any military action in Syria would be to prevent the future use of chemical weapons as he warned Britain was not looking to get involved in 'a Middle Eastern war'.

The Prime Minister said the Syrian regime had used chemical weapons on 10 other occasions before the attack that killed up to 1,200 in Damascus last week and warned the world 'should not stand idly by'.

But the tyrannical al-Assad regime has warned it will fight back with 'all means available' and its foreign secretary said attacking the country to help rebels in their war with the state was 'delusional'.

Earlier today, Mr Cameron announced Parliament would be recalled four days early, on Thursday, to debate the crisis, followed by a vote by MPs on what action to take against president al-Assad.






Threat: David Cameron, pictured arriving at No 10 this morning, is considering whether to take 'proportionate' military action against Syria in response to the chemical weapons attack last week



Message: David Cameron has revealed this lunchtime that Parliament would be called back four days early and a vote on what action Britain will take




Summit: Foreign Secretary William Hague arrives at 10 Downing Street for a meeting with Prime Minister David Cameron this morning


Speaking this afternoon, he said no decision had been made about British involvement but the world had agreed almost a century ago chemical weapons should not be used.

He said action must be 'proportionate', 'legal', and 'would have to specifically be about deterring the use of chemical weapons'.


He said: 'Let me stress to people, this is not about getting involved in a Middle Eastern war or changing our stance in Syria, or going further into that conflict.

'It's about chemical weapons. Their use is wrong and the world should not stand idly by.'


Mr Cameron said the question for Britain is whether failing to act this time would lead to more use of chemical weapons in Syria and elsewhere in future.

'It must be right to have some rules in our world and try to enforce those rules,' he said.

'Of course as Prime Minister I take my responsibilities about the safety of our Armed Services incredibly carefully, seriously but the question we need to ask is whether acting or not acting will make the use of chemical weapons more prevalent.'

Mr Cameron said Thursday's debate would ensure 'proper' scrutiny and allow the Government to listen to MPs.

Cameron slams 'abhorrent' Syria chemical weapons attack









Business: Chancellor George Osborne and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg arrive to speak to the PM today




Crisis talks: Foreign Secretary William Hague is also at No 10 as the Armed Forces began to draw up plans to attack Syria if needed



'Obviously this is a developing situation, as I say, decisions have not been taken, but we shouldn't stand by when we see this massive use of chemical weapons and appalling levels of suffering,' he said.

'I think in Parliament is the right place to set out all of the arguments, all of the questions.
'But I would say this to people - there is never 100 per cent certainty, there is never one piece or several pieces of intelligence that give you absolute certainty.

'But what we know is this regime has huge stocks of chemical weapons. We know they have used them on at least 10 occasions prior to this last widescale use.

'We know they have both the motive and the opportunity whereas the opposition does not have those things and the opposition's chance of having used chemical weapons in our view is vanishingly small.'

Mr Cameron said: 'Let's be clear what is at stake here.

'Almost 100 years ago the whole world came together and said the use of chemical weapons was morally indefensible and completely wrong.

'What we have seen in Syria are appalling scenes of death and suffering because of the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime.

'I don't believe we can let that stand.'

He concluded: 'I understand people's concerns about war in the Middle East, about getting sucked into the situation in Syria.






'This is not about wars in the Middle East, this is not even about Syria.

'It's about the use of chemical weapons and making sure as a world we deter their use and deter the appalling scenes we have all seen on our TV screens.'

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said this afternoon failing to act against the use of chemical weapons would set a 'very dangerous precedent'.

Labour leader Ed Miliband said: 'When I saw the Prime Minister this afternoon, I said to him that we the Labour Party would consider supporting international action, but only on the basis that it was legal, that it was specifically limited to deterring the future use of chemical weapons, and that any actions contemplated had clear and achievable goals. And we'll be scrutinising any action that is contemplated on that basis.'




Call to arms: Tony Blair today urged David Cameron to back military intervention in Syria to avoid a 'nightmare scenario' for the West in the Middle East



Mr Miliband added: 'The use of chemical weapons on innocent civilians is abhorrent and cannot be ignored.'

Environment Secretary Owen Paterson indicated he would be voting with the Prime Minister, saying he was 'a loyal member of the Government'.

He added: 'And the United Nations Security Council will be looking at the difficult options facing this country.

'But what we've seen in the past week is horrific and we will wait to see what those proposals are on Thursday, and I think it's absolutely right that the Prime Minister has recalled Parliament.'


Politicians have speculated that if an attack is agreed it could be launched within days of the vote because Britain has a RAF base in Cyprus, less than 100 miles from Syria, while the Royal Navy has several warships and a submarine with missiles on board already in the Mediterranean.


A decision on whether to fire missiles into Syria could be taken before the results of a report by UN weapons inspectors into the attack is produced.

Russia on Tuesday warned a military intervention in Syria could have 'catastrophic consequences' for the region and called on the international community to show 'prudence' over the crisis.

Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin tweeted: 'the West behaves towards the Islamic world like a monkey with a grenade.'

Downing Street said all options were still on the table adding they wanted to 'deter' al-Assad from using more chemical weapons.


'Let me stress to people, this is not about getting involved in a Middle Eastern war or changing our stance in Syria, or going further into that conflict'
- David Cameron

'Any decision taken will be taken under a strict international framework. Any use of chemical weapons is completely and utterly abhorrent and unacceptable and the international community needs to respond to that,' Mr Cameron's official spokesman said.

'No decision has yet been taken. We are continuing to discuss with our international partners what the right response should be, but, as part of this, we are making contingency plans for the armed forces'.

US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel said this afternoon it was 'clearer and clearer the Syrian government was responsible' for chemical attacks in the suburbs of Damascus last week.
'I think it is pretty clear chemical weapons were used against people in Syria. I think the intelligence will conclude it was not the rebels who used it,' he told the BBC.
'We have moved assets in place to be able to fulfill and comply with whatever option the president wishes to take. We are ready to go.'

French president Francois Hollande added his voice to the growing clamour for action, saying France is 'ready to stand with Britain and punish those who took the heinous decision to gas innocents'.


The Arab League also threw its weight behind calls for punitive action, blaming the Syrian government for the toxic attack that activists say killed hundreds of people and calling for the perpetrators to be brought to justice.
The announcement by the 22-member body, which is dominated by Gulf powerhouses Saudi Arabia and Qatar, provides indirect Arab cover for any potential military attack by Western powers.




Free Syrian Army fighters hold up their weapons as they cheer after seizing Aleppo's town of Khanasir on Monday





An opposition fighter fires a rocket propelled grenade during clashes with regime forces over the strategic area of Khanasser, situated on the only road linking Aleppo to central Syria





A heavily damaged street in Syria's eastern town of Deir Ezzor



British warplanes have apparently been arriving at RAF Akrotiri, the UK's airbase in Cyprus which sits just 100 miles from Syrian targets.

The Guardian said today that commercial pilots in the area have seen military aircraft from their windows and also 'formations of British fighter jets on their radar screens'.

RAF Akrotiri was built in the mid 1950s and first used in the Suez crisis.
More recently the base was used as a supply post during the Iraq wars and also used to support the attacks on Libya in 2011.


'What we have seen in Syria are appalling scenes of death and suffering because of the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime. I don't believe we can let that stand'
- David Cameron
It came as former Prime Minister Tony Blair compared the violent Bashar al-Assad regime to the 'dark days of Saddam'.
Mr Blair, who took Britain to war in Afghanistan and Iraq, said this morning that it is 'time we took sides'.
'People wince at the thought of intervention. But contemplate the future consequence of inaction and shudder,' he wrote in The Times.

This morning David Cameron returned early from his Cornish holiday to consider whether to recall Parliament.
MPs are demanding a binding vote over plans to launch missile strikes on Syria without the backing of the United Nations.
But Mr Blair, whose views appear to be out of step with current Labour MPs, urged the Government to ignore 'the impulse to stay clear of turmoil'.

'I understand every impulse to stay clear of the turmoil, to watch but not to intervene, to ratchet up language but not to engage in the hard, even harsh business of changing reality on the ground.

'But we have collectively to understand the consequences of wringing our hands instead of putting them to work.

'I hear people talking as if there was nothing we could do: the Syrian defence systems are too powerful, the issues too complex, and in any event, why take sides since they're all as bad as each other?



Tyrant: President Bashar al-Assad speaking with journalists from a Russian newspaper in Damascus, Syria




Talks: Prime Minister David Cameron (right) is expected to hold a second telephone call with US President Barack Obama (left) within the next 48 hours to finalise plans for military action (file picture)




Threat: An attack by Britain and France on Syria would involve long-range Tomahawk missiles

'But others are taking sides. They're not terrified of the prospect of intervention. They're intervening. To support an assault on civilians not seen since the dark days of Saddam.
'It is time we took a side: the side of the people who want what we want; who see our societies for all their faults as something to admire; who know that they should not be faced with a choice between tyranny and theocracy.'
Mr Blair is now the Middle East peace envoy for the US, Russia, the EU and the United Nations, and said allowing the enduring controversy over the decision to invade Iraq in 2003 to hold back military intervention in Syria could help produce a 'nightmare scenario' for the West in the Middle East.


Syrian foreign minister Walid Muallem denied 'utterly and completely' that state forces had been behind the attack.

At a press conference in Damascus, he said:

'They said that the Syrian forces, the Syrian army are the ones who did this attack.

'I deny it utterly and completely.

'There is no country in the world who would use an ultimate destruction weapon against his own people'.


Speaking about the threat of attack by Britain or America he added: 'If the purpose of a possible (foreign) military strike is to achieve a balance of power ... it's delusional and not at all possible,'

Mr Muallem claimed that the regime had not attempted to obstruct weapons inspectors from visiting the site while evidence was still fresh.





The Russian Air Force acrobatics demonstration teams 'Russian Knights' and 'Swifts' perform during the opening of the International Aviation and Space salon MAKS 2013








Russia has delivered aid to the region and began evacuating some of its citizens. Picture shows the Russian Air Force acrobatics demonstration teams


'We didn't argue about the site they wanted to go to. We agreed immediately. There's no delay.'

The Prime Minister announced that Parliament will be recalled this week to debate plans by Britain, France and the United States to launch strikes against Syria in retaliation for last week’s barbaric chemical weapons attack.

But despite a growing domestic backlash over the prospect of intervention, it was unclear whether MPs will be given a binding vote.

Russia and Syria both raised the prospect of dire consequences if the West launches attacks without a UN mandate.
US Secretary of State John Kerry called last week’s attack a ‘moral obscenity’, but Syrian tyrant Bashar al-Assad warned: ‘Failure awaits the United States as in all previous wars it has unleashed, starting with Vietnam and up to the present day.’

And experts insisted that any attack could be illegal without UN authorisation – leaving British ministers and military commanders open to war crimes charges.
MPs last night said it was vital that any military action had their backing in a binding Commons vote.




Response: United Nations chemical weapons experts meet residents at one of the sites of an alleged poison gas attack in the south-western Damascus suburb of Mouadamiya



Former Lib Dem leader Sir Menzies Campbell said it was ‘inconceivable’ that any attack would be launched before UN weapons inspectors have reported back and ‘Parliament has met, discussed and voted on the issue’.

In Geneva, U.N. spokeswoman Alessandra Vellucci said the inspection team might need longer than the planned 14 days to complete its work and its priority now is to determine what chemical weapons - reports range from Sarin to industrial gas - might have been used in the August 21 attack.

'This is the first priority,' she said.

Nick Clegg is also believed to back a Commons vote, as does Labour. But some ministers are wary of setting a precedent and insist the Government must have the ‘flexibility’ to respond swiftly to events without recourse to Parliament.

WE HAVE THE LEGAL RIGHT TO ATTACK SYRIA, CLAIMS HAGUE




Britain and the United States could attack Syria without the backing of the United Nations, William Hague claimed yesterday – despite warnings it would breach international law.


The Foreign Secretary said the impasse on the UN Security Council caused by Russia’s support for Syria would not prevent the West retaliating against the use of chemical weapons.
A similar argument was used when Britain and the United States invaded Iraq in 2003.

Attorney-General Dominic Grieve has been asked to draw up a legal case for military strikes, which will be presented at a meeting of the National Security Council tomorrow.

Russia said bypassing the UN to attack Syria would be a ‘grave violation of international law’. And legal experts warned that intervening without a UN mandate would be ‘very difficult’.

But Mr Hague insisted any action would be legal. He said: ‘Whatever we do will be in accordance with international law and will be based on legal advice to the National Security Council and to the Cabinet.

'So, is it possible to act on chemical weapons, is it possible to respond to chemical weapons without complete unity on the UN Security Council? I would argue, yes, it is.

'It is possible to take action based on great humanitarian need and humanitarian distress – it’s possible to do that under many different scenarios.’

But others disagreed. Former ambassador Oliver Miles said he ‘did not understand’ Mr Hague’s argument, adding: ‘There is not any legal basis that I am aware of, apart from self-defence – and this clearly is not that.’

Michael Caplan, a solicitor QC specialising in international law, said it was ‘very difficult’ to make a legal case for intervention without a UN mandate.
‘There is no threat to the security of this country or the United States so on what basis could we intervene?’

With polls showing the public is wary of any intervention in Syria’s bloody civil war, many Tory MPs also demanded a vote.

Tory Andrew Bridgen, who co-ordinated a letter to Mr Cameron signed by 81 Conservative MPs demanding a say on Syria, said MPs had previously been assured they would get ‘a debate and a substantive vote’ before action is taken.
He said ministers should now honour their promise, adding: ‘We live in a parliamentary democracy, not a brutal dictatorship. The letter was specifically about arming the rebels but also about any further escalation of the crisis.’

Tory MP Sarah Wollaston said a debate and vote were essential to air widespread public concerns about intervention in Syria.
She added: ‘I sense that we are on a headlong rush into escalating this conflict and I think Parliament can act as a natural brake to that.’
Fellow Tory Douglas Carswell also said it would be ‘unacceptable’ for Mr Cameron to launch military action without the approval of Parliament.
Mr Carswell pointed out that in opposition Mr Cameron had called for curbs on the power of the prime minister to prevent military action without Parliamentary approval.
He added: ‘If the case for military involvement in Syria is as strong as those at the top of this Government seem to believe, they will have no difficulty in coming to the House of Commons and making their case.’

Shadow foreign secretary Douglas Alexander said: ‘Both the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister have made commitments to the House of Commons that Parliament would be recalled before a decision about further UK involvement in Syria was taken.
‘While of course I understand the Foreign Secretary’s reluctance to discuss specific military deployments, he and the Prime Minister do need to be open about the objectives, the legal basis, and the anticipated effect of any possible UK military action in Syria.
‘I would fully expect the Prime Minister to make his case to Parliament.’

The calls came as the Prime Minister cut short his holiday to return to London to take charge of the crisis.
Mr Clegg has also cancelled a planned visit to Afghanistan to take part in a crunch meeting of the National Security Council in London tomorrow, at which plans for missile strikes against Syria could be finalised.




Bullet damage: Snipers opened fire at a United Nations vehicle traveling in a convoy carrying a team investigating the alleged use of chemical weapons in Damascus





Guns: Free Syrian Army fighters hold up their weapons as they cheer in Aleppo's Saif al-Dawla district



Quote:
'Failure awaits the United States as in all previous wars it has unleashed, starting with Vietnam and up to the present day'
Bashar al-Assad, Syrian President
Foreign Secretary William Hague said the US was signed up to plans to deliver a ‘strong response’ – thought to involve missile strikes against key regime targets.

He added: ‘We, the United States, many other countries, including France, are very clear that we can’t allow the idea in the 21st century that chemical weapons can be used with impunity.’
Government sources confirmed that military planners were finalising potential targets for a missile attack that is likely to take place within the next ten days.

A source said any attack would be designed to ‘deter further outrages’ by Assad and send a message to other tyrants that the use of chemical weapons remained taboo.




Arsenal: A member of the 'Free Men of Syria' (Ahrar Suriya) brigade, operating under the Free Syrian Army, works to make improvised weapons as homemade rockets are seen in the foreground at a factory in Aleppo





Wreckage: Black columns of smoke rise from heavy shelling in the Jobar neighborhood, east of Damascus, Syria



But the source stressed that any military strike would not signal wider involvement in Syria’s civil war, which has already left more than 100,000 dead.


Quote:
'We, the United States, many other countries, including France, are very clear that we can’t allow the idea in the 21st century that chemical weapons can be used with impunity'
William Hague, Foreign Secretary
Mr Cameron last night held a strained telephone conversation with President Putin, in which the Russian leader repeated his claim that there was still no independent evidence that chemical weapons had been used or that the Assad regime was behind any attack.
The Prime Minister told him that the UK believed there was ‘little doubt’ that the atrocity was carried out by the Syrian regime.
He is expected to hold a second telephone call with President Obama within the next 48 hours to finalise plans for military action


As Britain, America and France threaten to launch missile strikes against Syria, IAN DRURY asks some of Britain’s leading military experts what the West should do...

Don't Start What You Can't Finish, Warn the top Brass-
Britain's Leading Military Experts Explain How the West Should React to Syria
:





LORD WEST OF SPITHEAD

Former First Sea Lord and security adviser in Gordon Brown’s Labour government:

‘We have to be absolutely crystal clear in our own minds that the use of chemical weapons was by the regime. If it was, then I think we can persuade Russia to sign a UN resolution that condemns a head of state for using them against their own people. That seems to be the first move.

‘I’m very wary of military action, even if it is a limited missile strike. What do we hope to achieve? Where will it lead?

‘What if Assad says, “get lost”, and uses chemical weapons again? Are we going to escalate military action? I have a horrible feeling that one strike would quickly become more.

‘The region is a powder keg. We simply can’t predict which way military action will go and whether it would draw us, unwillingly, further into a conflict.’


LORD KING OF BRIDGWATER

Defence Secretary during the First Gulf War:



‘There are no good options, only the least worst ones. I’m very wary of getting involved militarily in the teeth of a major sectarian Sunni-Shia bust-up that could affect the whole region. That’s why it’s so urgent that we get around the table to find a diplomatic and political solution.

‘I’m all in favour of getting Iran [the world’s largest Shia nation] involved because it is vital not to rub them up the wrong way. It’s also important that the Russians are involved: they must not feel as though they’ve been pushed back into a corner.

‘It is imperative to find a solution, and it mustn’t be military. This is turning into such a conflagration that it’s becoming extremely dangerous. I am appalled by the idea that the regime, if that is the case as it appears, would use chemicals against its own people. But the difficulties in how we respond do not become any easier.

‘The idea of a military strike to express disapproval is fraught with problems. We would have to avoid hitting civilians, and if we attacked the chemical plants there is the danger of dispersal of those chemicals into the air. It is hugely important that the UN does show some leadership here.’


MAJOR GENERAL JULIAN THOMPSON

Ex-Royal Marines officer who led 3 Commando Brigade during Falklands War:



‘The attack in Damascus last week has altered the conflict dramatically because it has aroused a considerable amount of odium around the world. It was a stupid thing to do because Assad has fired up people who, on the whole, were not inclined to do anything about him.

‘If we are going to retaliate – which I don’t think we should – then an attack by a submarine using cruise missiles is the favoured solution because you don’t have
to put troops on the ground and you don’t fly aeroplanes against Syria’s
well-armed air defences.

‘It is risk-free, but we have to get our targeting right because we don’t want to kill civilians. The problem is we don’t know what the consequences will be. Russia is certainly against it, as is China.

‘There is a perception that Assad is poking us in the eye; if we let him get away with this chemical attack, what will he try next? But I’m wary of acting if we don’t know what the consequences will be.’


VICE-ADMIRAL SIR JEREMY BLACKHAM

Former Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff in 1999:




‘I strongly condemn the use of chemical weapons, which is illegal, and the idea of
a punishment strike is not at all unreasonable: how else is international law to be upheld?

‘Ideally this should have support, or a mandate, from the UN or the International Court of Justice.

‘However, it would be most imprudent to do it without careful consideration of, and proper preparation for, the range of consequences which might follow. This is not
a very nice dilemma and the answer is not at all obvious.’


COLONEL RICHARD KEMP

Former Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan:



‘If the Syrian regime carried out a nerve agent attack, then a limited but
devastating surgical air strike is not only justified but necessary in order to send
a clear message to Assad.

‘It is essential that the US and UK base their decision on the best possible
chemical analysis, backed up by firm intelligence to confirm who was responsible.

‘Of course our governments will need to be prepared to follow up with a second, more severe, wave of attacks if Assad responds with another chemical strike or some other outrage. But we must not be drawn into a protracted campaign, either in the air or on the ground. It would not be long before all sides turned against us.

‘And while it will be possible – under the table – to square a swift and limited intervention with Russia, a wider operation would be much more likely to develop into a proxy war or worse.

‘Nor should we supply rebel fighters dominated by Islamist extremists with anti-aircraft or anti-armour missiles: they are sworn enemies of the West.’


GENERAL SIR MICHAEL ROSE

Former SAS commander and leader of United Nations Protection Force in Bosnia in 1994-95:



‘The credibility of America hinges on Obama doing something after he said use of chemical weapons was a “red line” that couldn’t be crossed.

‘I am not against a military strike, but the intelligence has got to be good and the target has got to be very specific; so specific that it identifies the unit that carried out the attacks.

‘If not, we will be seen to be siding with the rebels – and that should not be the business of the Western powers. We don’t know what the outcome is going to be, and we could end up with people in power who are worse even than Assad.

‘We need to be imposing an arms embargo and a no-fly zone, which would reduce the level of the violence. This is a total lose-lose situation for the people of Syria. But however terrible their suffering is with Assad and his brutal ways, the end result of an escalating arms race will be to make things worse. The suffering will only be greater.’
__________________
PUTIN TRUMP & Netanyahu Will Meet in HELL










TRUMP WARNS; 'There'll Be a Bloodbath If I Don't Get Elected'


PLEASE HELP THIS SITE..Click DONATE
& Thanks to ALL Members of ... 1..

THIS SITE IS MORE THAN JUST WAREZ...& TO STOP SPAM-IF YOU WANT TO POST, YOUR FIRST POST MUST BE IN WELCOMES
Ladybbird is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Ladybbird For This Useful Post:
FreaknDavid (28-08-13)