LJD et al,
You are right; the chemical weapons issue is enormously
complicated. There are a lot of speculations on who did it and who could have
done it. Why are the U.S and its allies trying to take military actions against
Assad’s regime in the absence of U.N mandate? What rights does U.S have to
impose punishment on the Assad regime? What difference would a military action
make in an already troubled region.
These are all legitimate concerns and I am certain it is in
the forefront of the minds of those lawmakers faced with making these difficult
decisions. Some of whose legacy hangs on the many daily decisions they make.
The easiest thing I found out is being a critic. I could be one of those. The
most difficult thing is being a leader at such times. I have to admit, I
thought it would be easy and enjoyable to lead on a large scale, but one of the
hardest things I have ever done so far in my life.
Lets look at the facts: it is indisputable that intelligence
sources prove chemical weapons were use in Syria. We also know for a fact that
the Assad regime is in possession of chemical weapons. As to the possibility of
tracking the origin used in Syria; there are ways to determine that. Conclusive
tests will determine what forms of chemicals were used.
To determine who used them, I think will be the issue or at
least needs more convincing. Here is my take: I believe that looking at the
weapon systems and platforms used for delivery can give us the answer. For
instance, the rebels may not have access to 155mm canon shells or the rocket
launchers capable to deliver at a precise accuracy on targets. What level
command and control (C2) is required to run those tactical operations and what
is the required storage and preservation for the chemicals.
I can see the U.S. unilaterally striking Syria within the
next two weeks and I support that. Here is my reason. We all see the effects of
chemical weapons attack on human kind. At this point, if Assad didn’t use it
then he needs to be upfront working with the international agencies to determine responsibility
and reason and if he did well he needs to pay. Either way there are chemical
weapons out there and someone used it. There is no telling when and where they
will use it next. We are all vulnerable.
This region is volatile; we shouldn’t sit by and let these
things go without being addressed. It is the beginning I believe and if they (whoever)
get away with this, lord have mercy on us. Look at the history of dictators;
they always start somewhere and never stop once people start looking the other
way. Before you know it they are full blown grown dictators that know no limit.
The interesting thing about humans is that we can insert so much
emotion and sometimes we detach ourselves from situations base on our interest.
At any of these times we are sure to make our case to justify our stance, by
convincing ourselves and anyone who cares to listen that what we feel, see,
think and or hear is right. Most of the times these are completely selective
and make so much sense in our minds.
At some point of time men and women with conviction will
have to tune off the noise raised by those critics and sideliners and act on what is necessary. These acts sometimes won’t be popular or approved at first
but at the end of the day that’s what separate the men from the boys. Imagine since creation, people sitting around waiting for everybody to concur to do anything. I suppose nothing would have been done.
Khaleel
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:29:31 +0100
From: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [G_L] Obama considers military action against Syria
To: [log in to unmask]
Indeed Demba, and I laugh when even the Professor is accused by knowledgeable commentators of committing genocide in The Gambia. Genocide is an international law concept, and it has a very specific meaning.
I came to law through history, the queen of the social sciences. I entertain no doubt about your sincerity in opposing human suffering, but a casual survey of history would conclusively demonstrate that suffering is the permanent condition of humanity. Much as it galls, "every indication ... that innocent children are being massacred in the pretext of a civil war (government machinery against innocent civilians)..." will remain a state of affairs to grapple with for a long time to come. There are no quick fixes, and the US went through a devastating civil war itself. If that war was won by the Southern States, I don't know if you would be running GON from the USA today.
Lest I forget again, I recommend David Halberstam's The Best and the Brightest on the US involvement in Vietnam. The propaganda, the incompetence and the lies from the beltway operators, i.e., the White House, Congress, and influential media houses, and opinion leaders was quite instructive.
During the Commons debate, Cameron said chemical weapons were outlawed one hundred years ago. Well, the US itself used napalm bombs in Vietnam in the 1970s. Napalm is
a chemical weapon! Propaganda? Absolutely!
LJDarbo
From: Demba Baldeh <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thursday, 29 August 2013, 21:36
Subject: Re: [G_L] Obama considers military action against Syria
Lamin,
As always thanks for the sober observations. Unfortunately, Gambia doesn't have the strategic interest to the world and so was Rwanda... I wish
that wasn't the main criteria for international intervention... That innocent human lives in thousands was enough to warrant intervention. I hope the world get to that at some point...
Unfortunately, Am really not sure if it makes sense for the world to wait for conclusive evidence of use the use of Chemical weapons before they should act to stop the killings. I should probably stay away from using legal jargon such as genocide which is outside of my purview -- but every indication is that innocent children are being massacred in the pretext of a civil war (government machinery against innocent civilians)...
Really we will have time to deal with the endless legal processes but I think the immediate interest of the world should be to stop the senseless killings. It appears Assad is not willing to negotiate for anything less than his unquestionable defeat of his enemies.
Ouman I can understand Obama's reluctance in using all out war. I think again the idea is to halt the massacres and put enough pressure on Assad to either apprehend him and or force both sides to stop the killings... I like his measured response and reluctance unlike George Bush who was determined to wage a war on Saddam as a soft target...
Anyway let's pray that Sanity prevails and War has not become the only option..
Regards
Demba
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Lamin Darbo <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Demba
The charge is not genocide as that was never a central calculation in Assad's behaviour. Interesting your second paragraph as that is exactly what is happening in The Gambia. Why is no one coming to our aid, notwithstanding the widows, the widowers, children without parents, breadwinners unlawfully detained, imprisoned sometimes, tortured, and murdered. In broad daylight, and right under the nose of the Ambassadors, and High Commissioners of the key countries ranged against Syria. What is wrong with the international community saying that the evidence must be conclusive. As in domestic public life, the evidence must sanction punishment! In the States, Demba Baldeh will never go to prison without compelling
evidence, and this architecture is built into the UN Charter under whose Chapter VII powers any action in Syria must be taken, but the UK's foreign secretary contends Security Council authorisation is not necessary.
Demba, in international affairs, there are no saints, and much as I love the US, and the UK, I can appreciate the propaganda of, and for war, a mile off. Propaganda is a key component of international public life, and in any major dispute, you must always keep that in mind.
LJDarbo
From: Demba Baldeh <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thursday, 29 August 2013, 18:30
Subject: Re: [G_L] Obama considers military action against Syria
Ousman,
The frustration and disappointments are understandable. However, reality dictates that there is a difference between being a candidate running for office and ACTUALLY governing... There is almost always a contradiction between these two because of the reality...
Now to some of us it really shouldn't matter who used the chemical weapons at this point in the conflict. The situation that created the condition where chemical weapons would be used is the main culprit here. If Assad were to negotiate with his country men and women and device a transition or power sharing the world would probably not have seen the use of these weapons. Certainly two years into the conflict there is no end in sight to the killings of innocent civilians by their own government. The world already have enough of the killings and then the weapons... What is the solution? Sit by and watch little children being massacred.. or engage the tyrant and give the people a chance to rebuilt. I really honestly don't think this is about drumming for war but rather stopping the genocide before we have another Rwanda...............
The jury is out but the world has a responsibility to stop this carnage just like we are calling for in Gambia...
Thanks
Demba
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Ousman Ceesay <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Candidate Obama will be critical of President Obama. This saber rattling against other countries without the consent of congress or the international community is one the things he used against his strongest opponent in 2008. If you don't believe most of the progressive community supported his candidacy because of the Iraq debacle, then I have the Kerewan bridge on the market for the highest bidder. What a change Washington does to some politicians. The same characters that advocated for invading every middle eastern country and never paid a price for it are signing letters and appearing on television telling us to strike another country based on flimsy evidence. In a civil war, such as we have in Syria, who is to say the opposition didn't use the chemical weapons to get an edge? isn't that what the united nations is investigating?
Most of humanity is waiting for some evidence before even contemplating another adventure into war theater, not the sages in Washington. They are all hanged up on this nonsense that once the president drew an imaginary red line, there should be consequences, evidence be damn. I am so tired of seeing liberals who were seething with rage when Bush defied the UN and invade Iraq make ridiculous excuses for Obama.
As of this writing ...Thursday morning, some Syrians will pay with their lives because America's president want to send a symbolic message. That is as outrageous as the one he purports to answer.
From: Malanding Jaiteh <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 8:13 AM
Subject: Re: [G_L] Obama considers military action against Syria
For much of the world and I believe
many in the US its not about how bad Assad have acted over the
past 2 yrs but what authority do we (the US and the rest of the
world) have to "punish" him? Will "punishing" stop further
bloodshed?
Malanding
On 8/29/2013 11:02 AM, Husainou wrote:
Sir LBD I profoundly honor your opinion but from I read and
heard the weapon used against those people was nothing more than
chemical weapon.
Hous
On Aug 29, 2013, at 9:09 AM, Lamin Darbo <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
Hous
I don't know what was used against "those poor
defenceless civilians", and so I await the informed
verdict of UN mandated investigators.
LJDarbo
From:
Husainou <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent:
Thursday, 29 August 2013, 14:04
Subject:
Re: [G_L] Obama considers military action against
Syria
Well somebody used chemical weapon against
those poor defenseless civilians. All fingers
are pointing at Assad's regime who is among few
nations that still have stockpiles of such
deadly weapons.Those rebels don't have the
resources to maintain chemical weapons . Right
now Assad is desperate , he will do anything to
keep him in power.
Hous
On Aug 29, 2013, at 8:22 AM, Lamin Darbo <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
Saiks, and Alieu
Your short reactions are not
doing justice to the topic, but I am
with you for there is something quite
profound in your takes. If time permits,
you should consider full length essays
on this crucial topic.
The geopolitical calculations
over this region are immense, and so
far, there is no convincing evidence
that Assad indeed used the alleged
chemical weapons. A CNN anchor suggested
to a so-called political science
professor (Arab national) out of
Dubai that it is indeed plausible for
the chemical weapons to be supplied by
countries such as Saudi Arabia, and
others opposed to Assad. His response
was that the rebels would not use such
weapons against their own people. And he
calls himself a political science
professor!
The chemical weapons issue is
quite complicated and there are a number
of possibilities over who could have
been behind its alleged use. If chemical
weapons are like bullets, I wonder if it
is possible to track the origin of the
type used in this alleged attack in
Syria. Any views, Kejau, and Khaleel?
More fundamentally, another issue
for me is why so much emphasis on the
alleged use of a weapon that killed 2000
max in a war where an estimated 100,000
perished. Is this not baffling, and why
the huge global arsenal of chemical and
nuclear weapons?
I'm glad the democratic system in
the UK forced a climb down by David
Cameron yesterday.
In the domestic arena, there is
no question whatsoever that the US and
the UK are among the preeminent
democracies of modern times, with
governmental systems based on restraint
grounded in the rule of law
and the separation of powers. There is
no such routine respect for legality
when it comes to international affairs.
Over the past several days, the UK
Foreign Secretary consistently argues
that with or without the authorisation
of the UN Security Council, they will
move against Assad. This is quite
troubling in the sense they set up the
veto and permanent membership system of
the Security Council. It is vital that
they operate within the constraints of
that system, and not use its awesome
powers as a double-edged sword. None of
these leaders would dare contemplate in
the domestic sphere what they are
advocating in international affairs!
At the very least, the prudent
thing to do is wait for the report of
the UN mandated weapons inspectors, and
in the words of the Secretary General,
"give peace a chance" in that process.
If the US goes in today, the UK
will not join in for a few more days, if
at all. I celebrate UK democracy for
insisting on verifiable transparency
LJDarbo
From:
samateh saikou <[log in to unmask]>
To:
[log in to unmask]
Sent:
Thursday, 29 August 2013, 12:20
Subject:
Re: [G_L] Obama considers military
action against Syria
K,
Just droping few Lines,East
Timor and Siera leone conflicts
ended not as result of militAry
intervension likewise Sudan.the
Un has/had a peace mission in
the first two,one of which you
Your self participated with A
full Un mandate not only making
it a legal action,but in world
opinion too very ligitimate.see
i Am not a pasifist ,in my
response to brother khaleel i
will forward the reason given by
Obama as to why he need to act
on Syria
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 12:51:45
+0200
From: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [G_L] Obama
considers military action
against Syria
To: [log in to unmask]
Thanks Saiks.
As brother Demba said,
the results are determined
mainly by the nationals and
not the liberation aiders.
Sierra Leone, East Timor,
Sudan, came to mind as
success stories.
Kejau
Sent from Samsung
Mobile
-------- Original message
--------
From: samateh saikou <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [G_L] Obama
considers military action
against Syria
Brother
Khaleel,thanks,so much sense
in what you said it will be
difficult to respond to you
but I will try later in the
day. Kejau, what for me is
liberation might be very
much different from
yours,which is also ok.One
thing is certain,I dont
believe that it is the duty
and responsibility of one
nation to liberate another
nation,for me there will be
no liberation based on the
desire of the people.There
is no force on earth that
can resist the will of the
people.The mighty fascist
Soviet Union was pulled down
to the ground by people
without guns or bullet,if it
can happen there,it can
happen anywhere on this
earth. I dont believe that
the people of Irag,Libya or
Afghanistan have been
liberated.Let me tell you
one thing,if the US or
Senegal,or any nation offer
me to liberate Gambia with
results of Irag ,Libya or
Afghanistan,I will say no
thanks,let Jammeh rule.
For Freedom
Saiks
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013
07:45:55 +0200
From: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [G_L] Obama
considers military action
against Syria
To: [log in to unmask]
Thank you Khalleel,
Sent from Samsung
Mobile
-------- Original message
--------
From: Khaleel Jameel <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [G_L] Obama
considers military action
against Syria
Saiks,
Asad’s
guilt or innocence
in the recent
chemical attacks
on his own people
could have been
determined from
jump by working
with the
international
agencies to
investigate cause
and responsibility
for that heinous
crime. But of
course who is
going to extend
his/her hands to
shake another if
your hands are
covered with dirt
during a search
for a grave
digger? U.S never
blessed Saddam to
use chemical
weapons back in
1988 or so. It
could be argued
that someone in
that
administration has
to know that they
were going to use
it prior to them
executing that
mission. I would
certainly not
reference
wikilinks in a
serious
conversation, and
of course key word
here is I.
You
are right; I will
never consider war
to be a solution
to any situation.
U.S invasion of
Afghanistan, Libya
and Iraq did not
make those
countries a
developed country
but has arguably
not made them any
worst. Like Demba
mentioned, these
countries were
liberated and
given a chance.
How they choose to
run their country
from that point
have a lot to do
with their
concept,
commitment to
their people and
the rule of law.
I
don’t honestly see
Syria being any
different but
would you rather
the world sit back
and watch the
massacre and
slaughter of
innocent citizens
of Syria? U.S.
is indeed doing a
lot of supporting
of many
organizations
openly and
privately however;
so is many other
countries in the
world. Does that
make it ok? Hell
no. Did you see
how much Saudi
Arabia, Kuwait and
Jordan combined
gave to Egypt?
Ridiculous I’m
thinking.
It
is my believe
that there is no
morality in war.
When one nation
comes to the
conclusion to
fight another
nation for
whatever reason,
humanity and
morality failed
utterly. I
believe that every
war is futile when
compared to the
senseless massacre
of human lives.
U.S however has
lost both money
and lives of their
brave men and
women in defense
of many nations
across the globe
and I commend them
for that. It only
shows their
tenacity for
freedom to prevail
and they
demonstrated time
and time that they
will make the
ultimate sacrifice
for any nation.
Are they always
right; no. Is it
necessary at
times; I will say
yes but don't beat
me up bad.
Khaleel
Date: Wed, 28 Aug
2013 23:47:41 +0200
From: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [G_L]
Obama considers
military action
against Syria
To: [log in to unmask]
Saiks.
I wonder how
you can say the
US invaded those
countries even
after helping
those countries
people to remove
dictatorship.
Do you meant to
say UK also
invaded Sierra
Leone?
Kejau
Sent from
Samsung Mobile
-------- Original
message --------
From: samateh saikou
<[log in to unmask]>
Date:
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [G_L]
Obama considers
military action
against Syria
I
will be happy to
know how one is
certain that
Asad is
responsible
.lets look at
the following
facts too.in may
a un inspector
claimed that it
was the rebels
who did the
c-attact
,which was the
original case,
few days ago we
have been
reading leaks
docs from
weakilinks that
Sadam with the
blessiing of the
US did use
it,Now we all
know what
happened in
Faluja,right,which
means there are
nations who have
no right to talk
about moral
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the
Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
--
"Be the change you want to see in the World"
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
--
"Be the change you want to see in the World"
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
|
