The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Bombing in Syria: Is R2P a justification of last resort? > Comments

Bombing in Syria: Is R2P a justification of last resort? : Comments

By Andrew Farran, published 7/9/2015

Two former Labor Foreign Ministers, Evans and Carr, have in effect stated that if breaches of sovereignty cannot be excused any other way there is always the 'Responsibility to Protect' (R2P) doctrine to fall back on.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All
200,000 deaths at the hands of its government...
Are you really that stupid or do you think we are that stupid?
Probably a mix of both...

The War on Terror is a BIG FAT LIE.
A classic case of the blind leading the blind.

None of you will look up the documents so now I'll post them.
The author is an ex diplomat, he's supposed to be honest and tell people the truth.

The Zionist Plan for the Middle East 1982
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/The%20Zionist%20Plan%20for%20the%20Middle%20East.pdf
Quote Pages 2&3 "The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must 1) become an imperial regional power, and 2) must effect the division of the whole area [Greater Israel] into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states." and further "This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units has been a recurrent theme."

Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm 1996
Found here - http://www.dougfeith.com/cleanbreak.html

Quote "Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions."

It further states "Most important, it is understandable that Israel has an interest supporting diplomatically, militarily and operationally Turkey’s and Jordan’s actions against Syria, such as securing tribal alliances with Arab tribes that cross into Syrian territory and are hostile to the Syrian ruling elite."

THIS MIRRORS CURRENT EVENTS AND MEANS ISRAEL SUPPORTS USING ARAB PROXY (ISIS) TO REMOVE ASSAD
Posted by Armchair Critic, Monday, 7 September 2015 10:10:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Neoconservative Group Calls on US to Help Overthrow Hussein 1998

The Committee for Peace and Security in the Gulf (CPSG), a bipartisan group made up largely of foreign policy specialists, sends an “Open Letter to the President” calling for President Clinton to use the US military to use the US military to help Iraqi opposition groups overthrow Saddam Hussein and replace him with a US-friendly government.

Found here
http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a0900paxamericana
http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=complete_timeline_of_the_2003_invasion_of_iraq_75#complete_timeline_of_the_2003_invasion_of_iraq_75

IRAQ NEVER HAD WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION ALL THIS WAS PLANNED BEFOREHAND.

PNAC Rebuilding Americas Defences 2000
www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

THESE ARE THE PEOPLE BEHIND BUSHS ADMINISTRATION AND THIS IS WHAT WAS SAID PRIOR TO 911

Page 51 "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."

Then you have this stuff...

Wesley Clark 7 Wars in 5 Years
http://youtu.be/nUCwCgthp_E
NATIONS LISTED IN 'SO-CALLED' ARAB SPRING

Hiliary Clinton - We Came, We Saw, He Died - Ghaddifi
http://youtu.be/FmIRYvJQeHM
DOES THIS SOUND LIKE A HOME GROWN ARAB SPRING? - THATS COMPLICITY.

Gordon Duff - Syria
http://youtu.be/73yVu8UQrfM
FALSE FLAG CHEMICAL ATTACK AND US GOVERNMENT

Vladimir Putin at Valdai
http://youtu.be/9F9pQcqPdKo at 1:57:00
AKNOWLEDGES M/E FIGHTERS ARE PAID MERCENARIES

Then there's the 2012 Defense Intelligence Agency report that the West will facilitate rise of Islamic State “in order to isolate the Syrian regime”
http://levantreport.com/2015/05/19/2012-defense-intelligence-agency-document-west-will-facilitate-rise-of-islamic-state-in-order-to-isolate-the-syrian-regime/

...And thats before I even start on the daily news stories.

Russia and China denounced the objective of "Regime Change" for numerous reasons.
One of which might be that the US is conducting destabilisation agendas in Russia and China.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-03/washingtons-fifth-columns-inside-russia-and-china

From what I can see, it's Israel and the Wests fault for all these wars, and the 'regime-change' refugees.
I support Russia's initiative to form a international coalition to fight ISIS.
Posted by Armchair Critic, Monday, 7 September 2015 10:13:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No Australian involvement in Syria. Let them slug it out themselves. Every time we get involved in another country's affairs, we have half the population wanting to live in Australian. Vietnam. Iraq. Afghanistan.
Posted by ttbn, Monday, 7 September 2015 10:20:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is a useful article as far as it goes. The problem is that it does not go nearly far enough. It is clear that the media ground is being prepared for Australia to become involved in bombing Syria. One should say "officially involve do" because there is no doubt that Australia is already involved in military operations in that country.

The government has made vague promises to consider the legal issues involved. Do not believe this. The decision has been made and any legal justification will be the same fig leaf of fake legal advice that accompanied the participation in the Iraq war. We all know how that turned out.

The legal basis for armed intervention is very well known and tightly circumscribed. Suffice to say here in the limitations of a brief comment that none of the very limited grounds are applicable here. Any suggestion to the contrary is nonsense.
The real reasons for Australia becoming involved in Syria in the manner suggested have more to do with Abbott perceiving an electoral advantage, trumpeting "national security" and other substitutes for rational debate on the one hand, and a continuation of the frankly insane foreign policy imperatives of responding to every Ill-conceived foreign adventure the U.S. chooses to embark upon.

Abbott's latest error will have the same disastrous consequences as the previous ones. The current refugee crisis enveloping Europe is as clear an illustration of blowback as one is likely to find. The tragedy for Australia is that we are doomed to repeat those errors unless and until there is a radical change in our foreign policy posture.
Posted by James O'Neill, Monday, 7 September 2015 2:59:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
R2P has been invoked in dozens of UN Security Council resolutions since Libya. It is far from a "dead letter."
Posted by Keith Porter, Tuesday, 8 September 2015 12:19:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Actually Keith, there have been 25 Security Council resolutions on R2P since 2006 (which predates Libya). Not quite "dozens". That is in any case beside the point. The adoption of the R2P principle, unanimously, in 2005 at the so-called World Summit, was an adoption of principles. The catch comes in how they might be implemented. Libya is a classic example of how a limited form of resolution was arbitrarily expanded by a group of nations, including France and the UK, with American support. The result was the destruction of a civil society, the most advanced in Africa. The consequences of that enormous blunder are with us today.

Of the three principles applicable to R2P, only the third invokes the responsibility of third parties to have an R2P role. The primary role is one of "assistance." A common error is to assume that R2P replaces other obligations under the UN Charter. That is not the case. Article 51 of the Charter is still of paramount importance and R2P is not and cannot be a backdoor means of avoiding Charter obligations.

I have requested a copy of the legal advice upon which the Abbott government is purporting to rely in its planned attack on Syrian territory. Should they release it, by no means a certainty, it will at the very least make interesting reading.
Posted by James O'Neill, Tuesday, 8 September 2015 10:18:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy