India to back UN on action against Syria

[EMERCOM]

There are no good solutions here.

On one side you have AQ affiliated Sunni terrorists who will massacre the Shia if they win, on the other side you have a regime that is likely using chemicals on its own people to kill them on a mass scale.

Any side winning outright means a likely genocide of the others sects. The rebels winning would mean a base for the AQ terrorists.

There are no good solutions here.

On one side you have AQ affiliated Sunni terrorists who will massacre the Shia if they win, on the other side you have a regime that is likely using chemicals on its own people to kill them on a mass scale.

Any side winning outright means a likely genocide of the others sects. The rebels winning would mean a base for the AQ terrorists.

please provide evidence that regime has used chemicals.You will only find claims from al qaeda 'activists' and USA which has no concrete evidence.


Hackers had a false flag operation by Britam defense ..... check it.

Hacked email reveals Qatar's devious plans to smuggle chemical weapons in Syria - daily.bhaskar.com

 

[jaunty]

This is nothing unexpected and another way of saying that we are not going to back any attack on Syria. As long as Russia is there, they are going to veto any military action against Syria in the UNSC.

Iran shall love it.

Can you elaborate on that? I failed to understand what you meant.

 

[jaunty]

This is bullshit..........india is now officially the stooge of US

You surely didn't read the news.

 

[Indo-guy]

This is really much ado about nothing. India usually finds away to keep itself clean during these decisions. I think this has been good for India in the past but soon it is going to have to take sides every now and then and take a stance and have a voice. Appeasing all sides are not the actions of a rising power.


If Indian fighter jets were to take part in strikes against Syria THEN this would be news.

Actually I do not see whether India has got any better options. Given the thrust of its Foreign policy , this is the best option India has got !

WE SHOULD SIMPLY ABSTAIN...............i TOLD THE SAME IN UPPER POST

ITS THE BEST SOLUTION

India is responsible member of an international community. And is under obligation to stand-by and uphold various International treaties . India just can't abstain on this issue where Chemical weapons have been allegedly used . India's decision to support UN approved action is the best option commensurate with its polity and international standing !!!

 

[he-man]

Actually I do not see whether India has got any better options. Given the thrust of its Foreign policy , this is the best option India has got !



India is responsible member of an international community. And is under obligation to stand-by and uphold various International treaties . India just can't abstain on this issue where Chemical weapons have been allegedly used . India's decision to support UN approved action is the best option commensurate with its polity and international standing !!!

there is zero evidence just like wmd claims of iraq

You surely didn't read the news.

i read it.........it says we will go with UN

 

[Indo-guy]

we recently took wrong sides in case of

1)iran

2)sri lanka

I am afraid foreign policy decisions are not as simple as you put them.
Regarding Iran I personally believe we should have abstained . I admit we voted under US pressure . We behaved like opportunist to turn back on old friend like Iran to get 123 agreement going in US senate .
But regarding Sri Lanka we could not have just sided with regime which perpetrated genocide against minority .
Domestic political concerns weighed heavily too . But our stand on Sri Lanka as well as Iran has been well articulated . We have not just sided with US views despite our voting .

It's imperative for country like India to make stand based on principles that is also commensurate with its own long tem interests !

 

[he-man]

This is nothing unexpected and another way of saying that we are not going to back any attack on Syria. As long as Russia is there, they are going to veto any military action against Syria in the UNSC.



Can you elaborate on that? I failed to understand what you meant.

SECURITY COUNCIL WAS BYPASSED DURING IRAQ ATTACK TOO

IT WILL HAPPEN AGAIN

This is nothing unexpected and another way of saying that we are not going to back any attack on Syria. As long as Russia is there, they are going to veto any military action against Syria in the UNSC.



Can you elaborate on that? I failed to understand what you meant.

iran and assad are allies as both are shia!!

 

[Indo-guy]

there is zero evidence just like wmd claims of iraq



i read it.........it says we will go with UN

Exactly ...we didn't say that we will go with US..we said we will go with UN ! there is great difference in that




You just can't compare Iraq and Syria .

the alleged evidence for WMD was based on CIA reports. As far as Syria is concerned it's UN that is investigating Chemical weapons attack. You just can't equal UN and CIA ....Do you think Un is also US stooge ?

 

[livingdead]

I dont see anything wrong with the approach.. we support UN intervention if necessary not american.

 

[Vinod2070]

Can you elaborate on that? I failed to understand what you meant

It's a weird kind of thinking.

People dream of earning cheap browny points when they should supposedly be worrying about what is happening to innocents belonging to their own Ummah!

 

[Abingdonboy]

there is zero evidence just like wmd claims of iraq



i read it.........it says we will go with UN

Before the UN weapon inspectors have even submitted their report how can you possibly say there is NO evidence?? And at the very least did you see the pictures from earlier this week? The world can't sit back and polticise the entire thing.

 

[he-man]

Before the UN weapon inspectors have even submitted their report how can you possibly say there is NO evidence?? And at the very least did you see the pictures from earlier this week? The world can't sit back and polticise the entire thing.

because they have been ordered to come back before proper investigation could occur.............these are ominous signs

Before the UN weapon inspectors have even submitted their report how can you possibly say there is NO evidence?? And at the very least did you see the pictures from earlier this week? The world can't sit back and polticise the entire thing.

the question is not whether attack occured


but who did it!!

I am afraid foreign policy decisions are not as simple as you put them.
Regarding Iran I personally believe we should have abstained . I admit we voted under US pressure . We behaved like opportunist to turn back on old friend like Iran to get 123 agreement going in US senate .
But regarding Sri Lanka we could not have just sided with regime which perpetrated genocide against minority .
Domestic political concerns weighed heavily too . But our stand on Sri Lanka as well as Iran has been well articulated . We have not just sided with US views despite our voting .

It's imperative for country like India to make stand based on principles that is also commensurate with its own long tem interests !

we screwed up in case of sri lanka as

1)they were fighting ltte as we are fighting let and maoists
2)ltte killed rajiv gandhi
3)they killed hundreds of members of indian peace keeping force sent there in 89
4)we pushed them into the hands of china and pakistan with this decision.............................and it was a bad one


we cannot let indivisual state matters to complicate our international strategy

now china has an established naval base in sri lanka!!!

 

[IBRIS]

Congress is full of fools, Assad's regime is better than the terrorists propped up by CIA and M16. Damn turks are going to regret this mistake after Assad's regime is brought down. All civilians will line up to cross the modern turkey land.

 

[he-man]

Congress is full of fools, Assad's regime is better than the terrorists propped up by CIA and M16. Damn turks are going to regret this mistake after Assad's regime is brought down. All civilians will line up to cross the modern turkey land.

totally agree and there will be an attack on iran soon followed by this

 

[IBRIS]

totally agree and there will be an attack on iran soon followed by this

Iran is not going to sit idle if Syria is attacked. U.S cannot attack 2 countries at the same time, Iran will turn their happy horse waggon into hill billy madness by launching missiles into Israel and other Arab collaborators. This conflict will ensue for a long period of time, neither Syria is Afghanistan and nor Iraq is Iran. RasPutin is sharing(following) intelligence of Nato's movement at every course they set.