.

Just to clarify from the link early on regarding the Syrian Airforce.  their most up to date fighter is the Mig29, developed in the 1970's, their most up to date attack aircarft is the Su24 which first flew in 1967. Whilst the pictures look impressive these planes are old and totaly obsolete by our standards and would offer little if any defence.

---

@not-another-one wrote:

Just to clarify from the link early on regarding the Syrian Airforce.  their most up to date fighter is the Mig29, developed in the 1970's, their most up to date attack aircarft is the Su24 which first flew in 1967. Whilst the pictures look impressive these planes are old and totaly obsolete by our standards and would offer little if any defence.

---

Syrian prime minister Wael al-Halqi responded to the threat of military intervention by warning his war-torn country would become a ‘graveyard of the invaders’.

And a Syrian army officer has claimed Assad could use kamikaze pilots to combat Western forces. 

The unnamed officer told the Guardian that, in the event of an attack by the US and Britain, the Syrian army had 8,000 ‘suicide martyrs’ who would give their lives to bring down warplanes.

‘I myself am ready to blow myself up against US aircraft carriers to stop them attacking Syria and its people,’ he said.

Paddy Ashdown said he felt "depressed and ashamed that Britain was not to join military action against Syria"

What is it with these people? It should be seen as a victory for democracy and common sense

The U.S. knows it must avoid killing Syrian civilians, because civilian deaths would be a political, legal, and public relations disaster--especially if the UN is sent back in, this time to investigate claims of civilian deaths due to unsanctioned U.S. action.

Syria will probably redeploy some key assets into urban areas, knowing the U.S. will likely avoid attacking them. The Obama administration is literally playing with fire: if a cruise missile overshoots its target by even a short distance and takes out an occupied apartment building, all of President Obama's moral advantage will instantly turn into its opposite.

Ashdown should grab a gun and a plane ticket to Damascas, if he is so passionate about going to war 

I don't see any of our dear leaders risking their own necks. They would send off other peoples sons and daughters to die in a war, while they march in afterwards wiyh their buddies in Big Oil  Big Armaments and scoop up fat contracts afterwards. Directorships (aka corruption) all round.

T.I. I see the dot   message recieved in morse More veggies later, if I can get back.

Oh, two of us were told we must not rant! today   And we must watch our granmama As long as we are sober we stand a chance  for her.  

The Christian loonies, are right behind Obama in this , because this is another 'sign' to them that the End of Times is coming, ending in World conflict and the last battle between ALL the worlds forces at Megiddo (Armageddon) North Israel

Isaiah 17:1-3

Goodone al** ..and the none believers just want to live in peace..  Hope this isnt another... God told me to go to WAR...Thing..

What really got my goat last night was the BBC news going on and on about how Cameron had lost face and our place on the world stage was threatened and our influence would be less and our special relationship with the US would be damaged, etc, etc, etc.  Not one word, not one, about the children killed by nerve agents.  It is all about politicians and their egos.

I think we should have a new law.  Any politician that advocates war should have to move their own family into the war zone for the duration.  That would shut them up. 

There has got to be better ways of going about things than just rushing in killing people to show them that killing each other is not on, for goodness sake.

America and it's 'ALLIES'

John Kerry yesterday   "and with France, our oldest ally"

woe , what about 2003 -

It's time we Americans came to terms with something: France is not just our annoying ally. It is not just our jealous rival. France is becoming our enemy.

If you add up how France behaved in the run-up to the Iraq war (making it impossible for the Security Council to put a real ultimatum to Saddam Hussein that might have avoided a war), and if you look at how France behaved during the war (when its foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, refused to answer the question of whether he wanted Saddam or America to win in Iraq), and if you watch how France is behaving today (demanding some kind of loopy symbolic transfer of Iraqi sovereignty to some kind of hastily thrown together Iraqi provisional government, with the rest of Iraq's transition to democracy to be overseen more by a divided U.N. than by America), then there is only one conclusion one can draw: France wants America to fail in Iraq.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/18/opinion/our-war-with-france.html

Well not a lot of people know this:

Would our staunch American friends come to our aid if we were attacked or would they wait until they are ''Pearl Harboured'''....And by the way, in WW2 the Germans had a better sea force than we did and America initially refused to give us ships to help repel them until Churchill blew some of the French ships out of the water after they dilly-dallied about giving us some of their sea vessels to prevent the Germans taking them.

Oh ... --- ...  ssshhhsssss  no Rants! Allowed without permission from you know who  

Meanwhile in Syria, the brave regime are moving weapons in to civilian areas near to schools and mosques in anticipation of possible US-led strikes.