Itv Extensive Coverage Of The Suffering Of The Innocent People Of Syria.

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-10-03/why-aleppo-matters-in-syrias-war-awash-with-the-blood-of-hundreds-of-thousands/

As we switch on our Televisions to watch the ITV news we are constantly bombarded with the horrific scenes that are happening in Syria, specifically in the city of Aleppo, ITV have even started to announce the names of some of the children killed in the bombings.

One has to ask why?

Yes it is horrific and atrocious, but what can the ordinary viewer do about this appalling situation?

How much longer are these innocent people expected to endure this suffering, why don't their 'rebel' leaders hold up their hands and surrender to the overwhelming might of Russia and the Syrian forces?

[Gromit]

The UK are part of this bombing campaign. It is a conflict we have chosen to involve ourselves in.

Do you not think we should be informed about conflicts we are currently fighting, and costing UK taxpayers £millions?

[Gromit]

// MPs have overwhelmingly backed UK air strikes against so-called Islamic State in Syria, by 397 votes to 223, after an impassioned 10-hour Commons debate.
A total of 66 Labour MPs sided with the government as David Cameron secured a larger than expected Commons majority.
The PM said they had "taken the right decision to keep the country safe".
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn had said the case for war did "not stack up" but shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn had urged MPs to "confront this evil". //

[andy-hughes]

I am all for 'confronting evil' as Mr Benn puts it, I absolutely don't agree that military action is the way to do it.

I can see your point AOG - I also believe that constant images of death and destruction are not good for people - one reason why I don't watch TV news very much.

[mushroom25]

if sufficient of the uk population feel that military action is not the answer in syria (and elsewhere), would this convert into an election win for the corbynistas?

[naomi24]

I'd like to see Corbyn - or anyone - attempt to remedy this over a nice cup of tea.

[anotheoldgit]

Could be that a ground assault is imminent.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/01/john-kerry-suggests-syrian-elections-include-assad-as-hospitals/

[Gromit]

The cease fire last month was broken when a British/US attacked targeted Assad Government troops killing 20 soldiers. So the fighting, and the suffering of the Syrian people was resumed, because of our actions.

Parliament gave the go ahead for airstikes against IS, but mission creep now means we attacking Assad and helping IS instead.

[dannyk13]

Andy.
///I am all for 'confronting evil' as Mr Benn puts it, I absolutely don't agree that military action is the way to do it.///
Now that all hopes of reaching a diplomatic solution have disappeared, what do you suggest?

[andy-hughes]

mushroom - //
mushroom25

if sufficient of the uk population feel that military action is not the answer in syria (and elsewhere), would this convert into an election win for the corbynistas? //

I seriously doubt it.

I am as opposed to military action as anyone, but it would not induce me to vote for Jeremy Corbyn - I wouldn't trust him to walk my dog round the block!!!


(I don't even have a dog!!!!)

[naomi24]

//I am as opposed to military action as anyone//

Idealism doesn't work when there is no alternative.

[andy-hughes]

dannyk13 - //Andy.
///I am all for 'confronting evil' as Mr Benn puts it, I absolutely don't agree that military action is the way to do it.///
Now that all hopes of reaching a diplomatic solution have disappeared, what do you suggest? //

I don't believe they have disappeared, I think the allies are far to quick to send in troops and airstrikes, even though their efficacy is seriously doubtful.

The only sure thing that military action will bring is the death of thousands of innocent civilians, and a hardening(if that were possible!) of the hatred of IS towards the West.

IS are convinced that the West is a corrupt power intent on destroying Islam - why are we so keen constantly to prove them right?

[naomi24]

//IS are convinced that the West is a corrupt power intent on destroying Islam //

That's incorrect. They hate anything that doesn't align with their philosophy.

[dannyk13]

///I don't believe they have disappeared///
As the US have walked out on the talks with Russia, then I would not hold out much hope of a solution.

[naomi24]

If there is any talking it won't be IS doing it. The only peace they're seeking is peace on their terms - and no one with any sense will ever agree to that.

[Gromit]

For 6 years we have had a stalemate. For the suffering to stop we need a winner and a loser. The Syrian Rebels were never a match for Assads Government Forces on their own. So every Sunni Islamic nutjob from across Arabia and North Africa were encouraged to fight against Assad. They were aided by US and belatedly UK air support and were able to capture Aleppo.
The Russians joined the conflict a year ago, and it now looks like the Jihadists will finally be defeated.

[Gromit]

The US have broken off Peace Talks as they euphemistically call them, not because of the suffering of the poor Syrian people, but because the US is beaten. They have been supporting Islamic State, Al Nursa, the Kurds, anyone against Assad, but with Russian help, (and Hezbollah and Iranians), the Syrian Government is recapturing much of the territory it lost. The US backed terrorists are in full retreat, and with them go any hope of removing Assad.

[andy-hughes]

Gromit - //The Russians joined the conflict a year ago, and it now looks like the Jihadists will finally be defeated. //

I do hope you are right.

As far as the debate about military action, I am dipping out of that because I simply re-state my case, and people line up on here to call me naïve / uneducated / simple minded / 'liberal', and so on ad nauseum, so there is no point going down that cul de sac again.

I will stick to debating the OP - hopefully others will do the same.

[fiction-factory]

It isn't easy to see what our strategy is here as we seem to be trying to stop IS whilst supporting other rebels against Assad. Whilst I am not sure even Jeremy Corbyn is suggesting we try to resolve it over a nice cup of tea I think that sometimes it's better to do nothing in these situations rather than be unclear about your strategy and risk making matters worse. Will this be another situation like Iraq and Libya where we look back and wonder whether things should have been done differently.

[andy-hughes]

fiction-factory - //Will this be another situation like Iraq and Libya where we look back and wonder whether things should have been done differently. //

Given successive British governments' willingness to be talked into military action with no clear planned objective, and less than no plan for what happens next - that is more than probable.

[anotheoldgit]

It seems to me that the rebels are not concerned about all those innocents that the West is always showing concern for.

As I have previously suggested why don't they just hold their hands up and surrender to a superior force?

And if the West is all that concerned why don't we side with Russia and Syria and make sure these rebels surrender?

Even the evil Nazis had to surrender in the end.