A weary Kofy Annan was seen on mainstream news reports yesterday, his despair over the problem that is Syria was easy to see. As the International envoy of the UN Mr Annan has had a busy time of it of late. Sadly it has been a fruitless and thankless task more often than not. When diplomacy does not work world leaders move on in stages through tried and tested means of bringing a country into line. Sometimes the tactics work but often they do not. Such is the current state of Syria.
The country appears to be getting blown apart in every sense of the word. Apart form the bombing and murders the country's population is in danger of splitting into many uncontrollable factions.
If President Assad of Syria is to be believed the problems all stem from terrorists or rebels. However you have to wonder what he has to hide, by imposing a ban on all foreign press from reporting from Syria. A more open approach could leave the West with a more favourable opinion but that is doubtful. Most leaders in the West want an end to the Syrian rule of Bashir Assad. So do some Syrians but just how many is unclear. Again if the regime is to be believed it is a minority of the population.
How to go firward is proving difficult especially as Russia and China continue to use their veto. Without their approval a full scale onslaught by the West is unlikely if not impossible.
There are mmany people around the World who belive that the Syrian rebels are being helped by outside forces. Could the CIA be pushing for change more than the people of Syria? President Obama has ruled out arming the rebels of Syria but his opposition for the role of US President, Mitt Romney, would not be so reticent. That must surely be a worry for the World?
Romney's stance may appeal to the bravado brigade in the US and even US followers in Israel but the world must see what a terrible step that could prove to be. We know the West has done this before but interfering in what is by and large a civil war is playing a dangerous game. It is a step too far.
With Syrian allies such as Russia and China it could easily lead to global conflict. Romney may care not for destroying other countries across the world but surely Americans have more sense than that? With their economy still fragile do they want to spend time, money and manpower in another conflict? One that could prove to be lengthy? One that could end up pointless. Afghanistan is starting to look unwinnable surely Syria could prove the same.
Images filtering out of Syria appear to show mass killings and more. The footage has been hard to date. Hard also to authenticate. Even if it is current and authentic just who were the perpetrators remains unclear,
Perhaps Mitt Romney is urging President Obama to arm the Syria rebels for his own reasons. Could it be electioneering plain and simple? Could he have a vested interest in another war? Could he have financial backers interested in conflict?
It is easy when you not the actual person in charge to make wild suggestions. If Romney was the President would he be pushing for the arming of rebels. If the answer is yes then surely the man is not fit to be President of the USA. For at the crux of the matter is just who these rebels are and if they are capable of rebuilding Syria.
Currently they are an unknown quantity so why would you arm such a rag tag brigade, that is unless you know who they are because you are pulling the strings.
According to a report in boston.com the US army is good to go. They are waiting for the President's say so before they go storming in to yet another country. Interfering rather than resolving, once again. Is this what people want? We do not think so.
Shame on you Mitt Romney
The country appears to be getting blown apart in every sense of the word. Apart form the bombing and murders the country's population is in danger of splitting into many uncontrollable factions.
If President Assad of Syria is to be believed the problems all stem from terrorists or rebels. However you have to wonder what he has to hide, by imposing a ban on all foreign press from reporting from Syria. A more open approach could leave the West with a more favourable opinion but that is doubtful. Most leaders in the West want an end to the Syrian rule of Bashir Assad. So do some Syrians but just how many is unclear. Again if the regime is to be believed it is a minority of the population.
How to go firward is proving difficult especially as Russia and China continue to use their veto. Without their approval a full scale onslaught by the West is unlikely if not impossible.
There are mmany people around the World who belive that the Syrian rebels are being helped by outside forces. Could the CIA be pushing for change more than the people of Syria? President Obama has ruled out arming the rebels of Syria but his opposition for the role of US President, Mitt Romney, would not be so reticent. That must surely be a worry for the World?
Romney's stance may appeal to the bravado brigade in the US and even US followers in Israel but the world must see what a terrible step that could prove to be. We know the West has done this before but interfering in what is by and large a civil war is playing a dangerous game. It is a step too far.
With Syrian allies such as Russia and China it could easily lead to global conflict. Romney may care not for destroying other countries across the world but surely Americans have more sense than that? With their economy still fragile do they want to spend time, money and manpower in another conflict? One that could prove to be lengthy? One that could end up pointless. Afghanistan is starting to look unwinnable surely Syria could prove the same.
Images filtering out of Syria appear to show mass killings and more. The footage has been hard to date. Hard also to authenticate. Even if it is current and authentic just who were the perpetrators remains unclear,
Perhaps Mitt Romney is urging President Obama to arm the Syria rebels for his own reasons. Could it be electioneering plain and simple? Could he have a vested interest in another war? Could he have financial backers interested in conflict?
It is easy when you not the actual person in charge to make wild suggestions. If Romney was the President would he be pushing for the arming of rebels. If the answer is yes then surely the man is not fit to be President of the USA. For at the crux of the matter is just who these rebels are and if they are capable of rebuilding Syria.
Currently they are an unknown quantity so why would you arm such a rag tag brigade, that is unless you know who they are because you are pulling the strings.
According to a report in boston.com the US army is good to go. They are waiting for the President's say so before they go storming in to yet another country. Interfering rather than resolving, once again. Is this what people want? We do not think so.
Shame on you Mitt Romney
RSS Feed