Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Send medicine to Syria, not guns or soldiers Reports of a deadly gas attack in Damascus this week have triggered some of the strongest indications yet that Western powers may take direct military action in the two and a half year-old Syrian conflict. P.M. David Cameron and U.S. President Barack Obama have threatened a “serious response” if allegations are proven true that the Syrian government, led by President Bashar Al-Assad, carried out the attacks, and already U.K. and U.S. military planners are reportedly looking at potential targets for missile strikes. However, new YouGov research for the Sunday Times conducted after the latest chemical weapons incident shows that the public remains largely opposed to British military involvement of any kind. 77% of the British public support sending “food, medicine and other humanitarian supplies” to Syria. However, only 9% support sending British troops, while 74% oppose the action. Support is equally minor (10%) for sending full-scale military supplies or even small arms (16%) to the Anti-Assad troops. Thinking about the conflict in Syria, here are some things Britain could do.

Would you support or oppose each of the following?	Support	Oppose
Humanitarian supplies to civilians	77	12
Protective clothing to Anti-Assad troops	41	33
Defensive military supplies to anti-Assad troops	19	53
Small arms to anti-Assad troops	16	58
Full-scale military supplies to Anti-Assad troops	10	66
British troops to fight	9	74

Moreover, support for various possible actions in Syria has hardly changed over the past few months – and in some cases appears to have even deteriorated – amid mounting evidence that chemical weapons have been used repeatedly by the Syrian government and even possibly by rebel fighters. In May, 50% of Britons supported sending protective clothing, such as flak jackets and helmets, to the rebels and 28% opposed doing so; now support is at 41% and opposition at 33%. The most recent survey supports findings in a YouGov survey from April, which suggested the use of chemical weapons in Syria would make little if any difference at all to the British public’s disinclination towards greater involvement. Poll Results

keep out of Syria let them sort it out .
liar Cameron keeps telling the voters of the uk it as no money and must
make cuts . yet the liar once to spend millions on another conflict .
we are a tiny island we are not the rulers of the earth .
let Russia iran Saudi turkey and a couple more sort it out
or just let them wipe each other out .
its not our problem Cameron like the yanks lead blair into killing millions in IRAQ
and no weapons found it was all lies by the yanks.

Plateman is right, imo. Why should we worry if they all blow themselves up?

Be interesting to know how British Muslim's voted in that poll , after all there is a lot them.

people in the UK are losing their lives because of cuts to the NHS.
if we can not find money to save our own people then how can we find money to kill people in another country .

aid . their lies the answer to Syria put on free flights to all muslim's to go and fight for their freedom .solved but I doubt we would get many to go

france . retirement age to stop at 62 paid for by the uk tax payers
but the uk will push up retirement age to 67 after next election

TANKER

Have we got the money for the free flight's

The government and most people do not understand the main reason for huge cost.

Foreigners come to this country for FREE treatment and we talk about cutting million pound from one hospital or another and charging these guys £200 a year!!!! RUBBISH

I know an American guy had stroke here, he is still in coma, no insurance. He was in ICU for 40 days (40x£10000/night=£400,000) and in hospital for two months (30x£4000=£120000) SO FAR. Total cost for a single incident has been £520,000 so far and he may stay in coma for a couple of years..

An student came here to "study", his wife had cancer (before even applying to study). treatment cost over £45000. He did not continue studying and left the UK without paying the tuition fees!!!

I heard many with Aids coming here to get free treatment. EVen for delivering babies, Heathrow has special arrangement to get pregnant mums from airplane to hospital (stupid isn't it!!). IT IS FREE for everyone in the world.

Why should we pay for them. Anyone coming to this country should have medical insurance, like every country in the world, and if such problem happens, insurance company should pay. Those who are not insured should buy insurance in one month.


Am I against human right (which is just misused by criminals) saying these!!! Off course criminals hate me.

we will have a collection we will pass the hat round

ahoj well said our gov have no balls .vote UKIP

aldo - it was not me who suggested there were goodies or baddies, but assuredly there are lots and lots of baddies on both sides ..... to my way of thinking, a baddy is part of a group whose interest has nothing whatsoever to do with true democratic gov't and stability in syria anbd the rest of m/e, so you have plenty to choose from

seating on the wall with hands up its not me

ahoj - post 28239 - this would have some credibility if you named the source and the specific cases you mention ..... unsubstantiated and wild accusations are exactly that unless they can be credibly supported

Revealing the names here is not appropriate.

Anyway, those cases are not illegal, they have followed the rules and used our free services. I am sure people in NHS know similar cases. Stroke is an unexpected event.. anyway

Cynic, I am just saying the rules should be like Germany, France, etc where the system charges individuals or the NHS in the UK. They do not pay for our treatment. Why should we pay for their people?

.

Why don't you tell us , if you know were to look for the answer ?

aldwickk

I would rather light the path. It is for you to navigate it for yourself.



Also see New Scientist 22 March 1984 issue 1402 PP 12 to 18 incl.

Alistair Hay wrote the article "At War with Chemistry".

See also 1925 Geneva Protocol and 1972 Biological Weapons Convention and subsequent revisions re international law.


"No Fire, No Thunder" Pluto Press Authors - Hay, Murphy and Rose



Mnam

.