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]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤