Why is the UK poking it's nose into other people's business?

[02GF74]

So the UK is sending troops and equipment over to Syria.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21684105

No doubt we get drawn into another conflict that the country cannot afford.

Why do the politicians think the UK has some god given right to right the world's wrongs? Are the Bolivians sending aid? Are the Belgians? Chinese? Indians?

Is it that we still have the colonial mentiality where we think we can rule the world and go poking our noses into other people's business?

I don't get it.

 

[GIOS]

Why war is necessary?

 

[TVC]

Oil? If you assume the regime will fall eventually, ensure that the revolutionarys are greatfull.

 

[slowmotion]

I think you could argue that it's a humanitarian gesture to stop civilians being slaughtered. Like other interventions of late, I'm afraid that I have a feeling it will end in tears.

 

[Canrider]

Well, China probably sells (or wants to sell) weapons to the regime in charge, and has vetoed (with Russia) sanctions against Syria.
India desperately wants to trade with Syria, so has condemned Syria authorites' atrocities, but then abstained from voting against them.
Belgium's kicked out Syrian diplomats and argued for military intervention.
Bolivia's a funny one--they have nearly the same GDP per capita as Syria does (both about 1/7th that of the UK), not sure why you'd expect them to intervene, much as you'd not expect Syria to intervene where Bolivia was concerned..

Sorry, what was it you wanted again?

 

[Typhon]

Catch 22 for Britain, as always:

Intervene - Get called colonial imperialists meddling in other people's affairs, still think they're the world superpower etc
Don't Intervene- Get called heartless capitalist bastards, immune to the plight of the impoverished and oppressed in the worlds poorest countries who are being butchered by their government.

Syria is only the world's 33rd largest oil producer BTW, way behind the UK in that regard. But obviously all our foreign policy decisions are based on oil. I mean Iraq had oil, isn't that conclusive?! The fact that Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Sierra Leone don't is just a coincidence.

 

[green1]

Syria is only the world's 33rd largest oil producer BTW, way behind the UK in that regard. But obviously all our foreign policy decisions are based on oil. I mean Iraq had oil, isn't that conclusive?! The fact that Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Sierra Leone don't is just a coincidence.

Chances are that Afghanistan does along with huge mineral deposits.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21695037

 

[oldfatfool]

Because the good old US of A told us to?

 

[mickle]

Poking our nose into other people's business? Like the USA did when it bailed us out of WW2?

 

[Globalti]

Syria is a worthwhile trading partner for the UK (my own company has been selling in Syria for 30 years and I've been there on many enjoyable business trips) and sending aid to the likeliest-looking winners is a good little investment in the future of our relations with the country. You'll notice that we held back from doing anything until we were pretty sure which way the wind was blowing.

I write all of this without irony.

 

[Typhon]

Chances are that Afghanistan does along with huge mineral deposits.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21695037

Even if it does that's all hindsight. It's been 12 years since we invaded and they've never produced any oil. There's no doubt in my mind that the US invaded because of 9/11 and the fact that the Taliban refused to stop sheltering Al Qaeda anyway rather than for any mineral gain. We joined them for the same reasons and to preserve our relationship with them.

 

[PK99]

So the UK is sending troops and equipment over to Syria.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21684105

t.

for the sake of accuracy:

No troops are involved only "armoured vehicles and body armour to opposition forces in Syria "to help save lives", Foreign Secretary William Hague has said.
It will offer millions of pounds in "non-lethal" equipment, including search and rescue, communications, and disease-prevention materials.

 

[Fnaar]

...and I've been there on many enjoyable business trips...

I went there once on a work trip for 5 days about 10 years ago (Damascus). I had a really great time during my visit*, and I hate to think what the wonderfully hospitable, polite, entertaining and humorous people I met there might be going through during this conflict.

*I also managed to get pi$$ed in Damascus one evening, which surprised me!

 

[User169]

Even if it does that's all hindsight. It's been 12 years since we invaded and they've never produced any oil. There's no doubt in my mind that the US invaded because of 9/11 and the fact that the Taliban refused to stop sheltering Al Qaeda anyway rather than for any mineral gain. We joined them for the same reasons and to preserve our relationship with them.

It was/is more about getting oil across Afghanistan from the Stans and then into Pakistan. The US deemed this preferable to the alternative exits - Iran and Russia. .

 

[Typhon]

It was/is more about getting oil across Afghanistan from the Stans and then into Pakistan. The US deemed this preferable to the alternative exits - Iran and Russia. .

So you really think that stopping the Taliban & Al Qaeda was all just one big pretext?