Airlines warned over danger from possible airstrikes on Syria

[josef k]

I don't blame the tabloids. They are beyond hope. I blame the idiots who read them.

[Kili01]

The Daily Mail reporting is slightly better than some other tabloids. I think that Putin is v angry that whoever carried out the Salisbury toxic nerve agent attack on the former double agent and his daughter was a) unsuccessful at klling them, b) he is really unable to find another country / indvdual/ organisation who he can hold responsble. He is displeased with the UK’s seemingly v thorough investigation which comes back on Russia... He wants no interferrence in Syria with plans there. He is mad about the successful allied air strike which seems to have raized the toxic chemical producing company + its assets to the ground. So now he is threatening cataclysmic action to any foreign power who tries to interevene in Syria.
Its a bad situation all round. I hope that we’ll now stay out if it having achieved our objective.
Hopefully tourists will not be put off from coming to this sunny isle. The FCO have not revised their Cyprus country entry and the warnings about travel here and what to expect have not changed. Cyprus is safer than the UK in many respects.
Dee

[Jimgward]

I’d have to sign you, Hudswell, how,you’d define state led terrorist attack? In this case th estate would be Syria. Is it a terrorist attack? Or just an attack? Was our attack on Syria, a terrorist attack?

terrorist
ˈtɛrərɪst/Submit
noun
1.
a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
"four commercial aircraft were hijacked by terrorists"

So, an attack on a SBA, where military personnel were seen to be valid targets of a lawful regime, who in their defence had been attacked by a force fro that SBA, would be a lawful attack....

The definition of terrrrorist is my issue here. I find any attack in these contexts, unethical.... a chemical attack (IF) it is proven to have happened.... A bombing of a foreign lawful state, in a questionably lawful manner.....

I cannot work out why we, the UK, still feel we are some kind of world administrator of punishment.... along with the US and France, in this case....

Are missiles really that much better than chemicals if all are deigned to kill? Obviously if one is targetted at civilians, then it is unethical and wrong. However, when we bombed Iraq, we killed many civilians and many hundreds of thousands have died since and I don’t believe the country has benefitted in the slightest....

I know you will try to do the usual military justification of all this, but I am a growing breed of civilian appalled that lambs/lemmings/automatons in the military are being sent to slaughter, in the name of politics.

[Kili01]

The RAF’s mission was to destroy the chemical factory and its ancillary parts. This seems to have been done well. These days the use of very sophisticated and accurate weapons as used in this case seems to have razed the whole factory to the ground which must be good since now the easily obtaned chemical nerve gasses previously used by Assad’s forces randomly agains his own people will be harder to obtain.
Significantly no civilians were killed and damage was limited to the immediate area. This is totally unlike the vicious carpet bombing which is done by the Syrian and Russian forces.

Hopefully this single targetted sttack will be a one off action which will have no effect on Cyprus and the numbers of foreign tourists coming here this summer.
Dee

[WHL]

Talking about being proud of the UKs actions.....Anyone found the War criminal Blairs stash of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction yet?....this criminal along with Bush have killed more innocents then a dozen Assads.

[Jimgward]

Jim, I do not think either Syria or Russia will overtly attack the UK, the USA or France for its action against Assad's Chemical weapons facilities but it would not surprise me at all to see a "sponsored" Attack, as the Russian State has done in the use of Nerve Agent in the UK. And I think Mrs May has laid out her reasoning for attacking the Syrian Chemical plants succinctly and those actions were entirely justified. We will never agree Jim, we are poles apart, and I will never accept that standing by whilst evil is allowed to grow unfettered is morally right, and am proud of the actions of the UK.

We are poles apart. If we agreed, you would mention Yemen, the Congo and many other nations were worse things than this are happening to their people and the UK and others say nothing. Or our part in arming Saudi, the true supported of ISIS and the cause or unrest in the entire Middle East, or Israels appalling treatment of Palestinians, such as the execution of a young lad last week, by an IDA soldier who filmed blowing someone’s head off and laughed, then was praised by their defence minister.... or..... I could continue.

I’m afraid when we, as a country, are morally inept, when we supposedlyhold ourselves up as some moral judge. Thank God the world isn’t filled with such politicians as Trump, May, Bush, Blair, Putin and Assad.

[I’ve edited this from last evening, as I was a tad unfair on Hudswell - apologies]

[PaphosAL]

Most of the UKs gov led military adventures oveseas are surely designed to showcase our current state of the art high tech military fighting forces from the likes of BAE Systems and Cobham, in order to export them to the likes of Saudi Arabia etc, in competition with France and so on, surely?

Remember back to the Falklands, when French Exorcet missiles fired from Argentinian craft were destroying British naval ships... Sad, but true!

AL