Send a strongly worded letter, stating our dislike of what they are doing and ask them politely to stop.

Then, sit on the fence for a few more years.

What would you do – and would you also do something about all the conflicts FA linked to or just the one that's currently on our TVs?

If you don't think we should interfere in the others, why not? Why would Syria be more 'important' or whatever?

In other words, you haven't a clue what you would do. Right?

Yes. [url=http://viewtopic.php?tsmp=1338382800&p=16930995&sid=aedefe3b2c04d3c9315330d13b0fc12b&tsmp=1338382841#p16930995That's what I said earlier.[/url

I do know, however, what NOT to do.

Are you in favour of us getting into another war, then?

And if so, can you answer the questions I just posted?

We've got a very long history of allowing Middle Eastern dictators to commit atrocities and as Rober Fisk says: [url=http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-the-west-is-horrified-by-childrens-slaughter-now-soon-well-forget-7794149.htmlAl Assad will get away with it and we'll all forget about it[/url

He does not, however, suggest a solution and, indeed, touches on the problems that interference have caused.

I very much suspect many would prefer Assad to remain in power anyway – better the devil you know etc – especially with the growing political power of the Muslim Brotherhood (and others) in Egypt and questions still waiting to be answered about what that will mean.

Fisk is right, but I completely disagree that we are "allowing" anything. In the context of all the various things which are going on in many sovereign states around the globe, saying we are "allowing" all those things is not a fair or correct use of "allowing". They aren't under our control.

Very good point.

I suggest the commencement of air strikes on military targets in Syria, akin to the operations in Libya.



Yese i am all for bombing mass murderers and tyrants.



Iran. Then any other dictatorship.



Generally the interference of nations in the internal politics of other sovereign states has improved the situation: (1) Germany was better once we had de-nazified it, (2) Japan has been more peaceful and friendly since we removed its government in 1945, (3) Eastern Europe is much freer, more prosperous and friendlier since we interfered to undermine the tyranny of the socialists, (4) Afghanistan poses much less of a threat to Western security since we demolished all the Al-Qaeda training camps, (5) Iraq has been much friendlier to the West since we removed Saddam Hussein.

In contrast we have not interfered in Iran - it remains a bitter enemy committed to regional hegemony, nuclear weaponry and the support of terrorist organisations, nor North Korea which continues to post a threat to the stability of the Pacific.



NHS and EU funding.

I bet you got a stiffy just at the thought.



I bet you got a stiffy just at the thought.

Not as big as the one he gets when the GT hits his doormat.

Are we really going to fall for this con trick again?

I mean, Assad is a pretty ty guy but there's nothing new here. Once again the BBC and the usual crop of major domestic news outlets are playing their roles of war propagandists. The Beeb has been running front page, position one stories on Syria for months whilst any number of atrocities are taking place in other parts of the world.

Most likely to have an impact on the west, laudable as it is to be concerned at atrocities being carried out with machetes on some remote border in Africa or South America, it is not hurting our national interests as the politicians see it.

I'm pretty sure he didn't get one at the thought of you.

It would have been more likely to be over you.

Why?

Some further thoughts.

• What you do do is to support, if possible, any opposition that you can find evidence is representative of the bulk of the people. And you do it in terms of what [ithey[/i ask.

So for instance, there are trades unions in Europe that are providing support, as asked for, by Zimbawean unions. These things make a difference. But they're not 'sexy' and headline-making. And they are based on not just responding to anyone asking for anything, but involve groups with provable mass support, and not, say, providing arms. I mentioned Zimbabwe – where the unions and progressive organisations asked for union movement in the UK, and this has been very active (as asked) in supporting the campaign on sanitary protection for women.

Now that in itself might sound really rather strange, but [url=http://www.actsa.org/page-1022-Dignity!%20Period..htmlhere[/url is some more information on this quite specific issue. It might not seem obviously linked to the struggle in that country for real democracy and against Mugabe, but it is.

• You also have to try to be consistent – and to have an ethical approach to foreign policy (as we were promised but never given, by New Labour. So for instance, you don't give bleedin' recruitment gifts to the likes of al-Queda and its ilk by attacking the likes of Iraq (which you previously supported) and ignoring the behaviour of the state of Israel. And to say that Israel has behaved appallingly is NOT a sign of support for Islamic fundamentalism and it is NOT anti-semitism.

• You stop thinking in the shortest term possible. So for instance, the 'threat' in Afghanistan (and elsewhere within the Islamic world) might have been reduced at this point in time, but we have NOT eradicated it; it will almost certainly emerge again. And in the process of reaching this stage, we have wasted countless lives on both sides.

What are our "national interests"?

Nah, contrary to socialists (who get very excited about the prospect of stealing from the rich in order to give to the government - as if David Cameron really needs the extra money) those of us on the political right dont get turned on by specific policies.

Mintball, I just spoke with my girlfriend, who is Ukrainian, about your affinity for dictators and she reckons that if you ever lived under a tyrant, as she and her family have, then perhaps you wouldnt be so blase about their autocratic rule and brutal leadership. She firmly supports action to help any people in the world oppressed by tyrants.

I thought she was Zimbabwean?

It's a bit much to talk about Dally like that, oh well, at least you've all moved out of his house now, eh?

Its one of those johnny-foreigner places that are hard to spell.

But not for me. Mind you any country that renames a noble place like Wankie as Hwange hasn't got a clue.