1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Theresa May takes the UK to war

Discussion in 'Personal' started by Vince_Ulam, Apr 14, 2018.

  1. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    Watching her behaviour during the Q&A I feel sorry for her. I believe she has a conscience but feels she has no option but to do as she has been told. She must be very scared.
     
    BetterNow and Scintillant like this.
  2. kibosh

    kibosh Star commenter

    Anymore than usual?

    If T34's premiss is correct, the US will have sold this to her as her best glittery chance to shine, away from the mountainous, slow moving muck of Brexit.
     
  3. oldsomeman

    oldsomeman Star commenter

    The chattering masses and conspiricay theories! Would you like to have the Syrians use of leathal or disabilitating gas upon its civilians?
    If Corbyn had the choice we would still be discussing long after an evil event is over.
     
    border_walker and woollani like this.
  4. T34

    T34 Established commenter

    We pay our leaders to conspire - on our behalf. Aren't you interested in keeping an eye on what they are up to?
    No. How do you know they have?

    To which evil event do you refer? The alleged chemical attack in Ghoutta or the West's undoubted bombing of Damascus?
     
    monicabilongame likes this.
  5. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    It is illegal to use against civilians. Falujah of course had civilians in it. WP was also dropped over densely populated areas of Mosul and Raqqa by the US in much more recent times and was therefore illegal.

    It has also been used in Gaza in what has been described as an "indiscriminate" way and has killed civilians

    But those cases, will of course, be different
     
    monicabilongame likes this.
  6. lanokia

    lanokia Star commenter

    I think the most bizarre part of all this was our UN ambassador using Karl Marx to reprimand Russia...

    Something along the lines of ''Marx would be turning in his grave seeing the country built on many of his ideas supporting the use of chemical weapons''.

    I mean no-one would berate Germany for ignore the teachings of *insert leading fascist thinker here*. What was she thinking?
     
  7. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    Apparently, she said:

    With respect to Karl #Marx, I think he must be turning in his grave to see what has become of his country… in its defense of the use of chemical weapons against the innocent

    Marx isn't Russian of course.
     
    Startedin82 likes this.
  8. MAGAorMIGA

    MAGAorMIGA Star commenter

    I admire your certainty that it was indeed the Syrian Government responsible for the atrocity. Most of us aren't sure that we have been presented with compelling evidence.
     
  9. Oscillatingass

    Oscillatingass Star commenter

    Well he sounds a bit foreign, could be Russian or something...... (irony alert).
     
  10. Jude Fawley

    Jude Fawley Star commenter

    Why didn't he say Puskin?
     
  11. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    Because he was a she...

    #walkonthewildside #casualsexism
     
  12. red_observer

    red_observer Star commenter

    She is a disgusting advert for a world statesman. No morals, hypocrite and make Thatcher look righteous. I’m ashamed to have a British passport today.
     
    Laphroig likes this.
  13. artboyusa

    artboyusa Lead commenter

    Of course - the pipelines! It's always because of the pipelines! I remember the Afghanistan invasion was because of the imaginary pipelines. Michael Moore told me so. And Iraq too.
    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2004/06/unfairenheit_911.html
    And even though the US is now (thank God) energy independent I guess we still need that imaginary pipeline to move the ME oil we don't need to buy anymore.
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2017/11/14/is-u-s-energy-independence-in-sight/#501946fa71a6
    http://theconversation.com/what-tru...us-would-mean-for-the-rest-of-the-world-69182
     
  14. smoothnewt

    smoothnewt Star commenter

    Some pretty disgusting victim accounts in today's Sunday Times - although I suspect many on here will suggest that's just made up stuff, as well.

    :(
     
    border_walker likes this.
  15. MAGAorMIGA

    MAGAorMIGA Star commenter

    The use of chemical weapons is an appalling war crime, but aspects of this are disturbing:
    1. Despite what the governments assert, it is NOT absolutely clear that Assad is responsible - indeed there is evidence that this was perpetrated by our "allies" such as Al_Nusra, deliberately to get the West involved.
    2. As others have said, it seems some chemical weapons attacks are so disgusting that there is a moral imperative to answer them and punish the perpetrators; and others where we turn a blind eye (often having sold them the material in the first place)..
    3. Why the rush to punish Assad before the official inspectors could get there and report? Given our track record in the West of mistakenly intervening without adequate proof, this is a bad mistake. The papers may screech headlines like "A Blow to the Heart of Evil" but I don't think the majority of the British public are at all happy about this action.
     
    kibosh and BetterNow like this.
  16. T34

    T34 Established commenter

    A sign of hope for the future? I've certainly become more aware, but I won't be here much longer.
    What about the youngsters. Do they still believe "official truth".
     
    kibosh likes this.
  17. florian gassmann

    florian gassmann Star commenter

    This week's BMG poll claims that 36% oppose the action while 28% support it. But as always, it depends on what you ask.

    They asked “Do you back UK forces conducting targeted air or missile strikes on Syrian government military targets?

    Had they asked, "Should the UK do nothing about chemical attacks killing children in Syria", the proportions would be very different.

    So you presumably believe the President of France is lying when he says he has proof that the attack was launched by the Syrian government?
     
    needabreak and kibosh like this.
  18. kibosh

    kibosh Star commenter

    I don't know. But I'm an oldster, like you. I hope the youngsters question what they are told by their governments. Truth is often relative, but opinions peddled as absolute truths should always be questioned. Corbyn is correct, I think, to demand incontrovertible facts concerning Salisbury and Douma.

    What I would ask the people who routinely dismiss others as being conspiracy theorists, simply because they are willing to explore alternative narratives to the narrative put forward by the state and state media, is this - would you label a 'free-thinker' from North Korea (i.e. a sceptic of the NK regime) as a conspiracy theorist, if you were also a similarly lied-to North Korean? What about if you were Chinese? What about if you were from the West?
     
    racroesus likes this.
  19. chrisoakey

    chrisoakey Occasional commenter

    Of course we should question what we are told by our government, media, experts. We should also consider other narratives and be aware that manipulations are possible. Yet it seems to me some people will believe any old bull that conspiracy theorists and naysayers put out. We are entering a dangerous world when we don't believe our government and journalists who are held to account by our democratic and journalistic checks and balances, but are willing to believe those with no credentials and no evidence apart from fantasies on the internet and the hard left and alt-right.
    The truth comes out, sometimes slowly, and our PM will go the way of Blair and Cameron if she is wrong on the facts or sexing up the evidence. Corbyn will carry on advocating no action, a convenient position for which he cannot be held to be wrong, even though he is, IMO.
    How anyone can be ashamed or outraged by a surgical strike which appears to have destroyed Assad's ability to launch chemical weapons in the foreseeable future, is a mystery to me. By any measure this is a real positive.
     
    Brunel and needabreak like this.
  20. Scintillant

    Scintillant Star commenter

    It's not like they started a conflict that killed 500,000 people and has now overspilled into Syria and spawned half the 1000 groups of loons we were fighting recently but are now being fought by the man we are now dropping bombs on.

    UK Government let British company export nerve gas chemicals to Syria


    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page