BruceVC

I could do that, I ended up using a Peri-Peri sauce that did add flavour but I was looking at a more elegant solution to infuse flavour while the rice is cooking.

QFT, well said. Once again you have made some reasonable and logical points that I challenge anyone to dispute

You seem to enjoy defending them and the cold hostility of Russia seems more suited to your temperament than the sickening politeness of Canada. Malc he has raised a good point, the cold weather of Russia would make you feel right at home?

You have raised a good point and similar laws exist in certain African countries. I was wondering if anyone would bring this up But until those countries try to host an international sports event this social issue won't be discussed and highlighted. That's the main reason Russia is in the spotlight, they have only recently passed these new laws that discriminate against gay people and they are hosting the Winter Olympics next year But trust me the 2022 FIFA world cup is in Qatar and there will be massive debates around certain laws they have implemented

What do you guys do to spice up your rice? I enjoyed my dinner but the rice was lacking in flavour

Why are you so butthurt about some homos being killed and beaten up on the other side of the planet? This seems like a pretty lazy troll attempt. I mean there is no way Cultist wrote this and thought, yeah, this doesn't make me sound like a terrible person. Agreed, I doubt anyone would intentionally make themselves sound so ignorant and bigoted to ask a question "why care about equality and human rights in other parts of the world" @ Cultist The Russian government does care. They don't like negative publicity as they are trying to position Russia as a viable destination for many international events. They have also stated that there will be no discrimination against any gay athletes.

No That's unfair, outdated and not relevant to how the USA implements foreign policy decisions or military intervention anymore

But why would they need to bomb areas that had already been decimated by the Chemical attack? Its not like there are rebels there anymore fighting back. Trust me on this one the Assad regime is behind the usage of Chemical weapons . The question I want to know is " what is Canada planning to do or say about it" ?

This shouldn't be a surprise Malc, the Assad regime has been trying everything in its power to stop the UN inspectors getting the evidence that they used Chemical weapons. And you know it'd be them and not the various 'rebels' how ? Malc, ,Malc , Malc ....when are you just going to accept I am never wrong when it comes to political debates? The reason that its almost 100 % likely that its the Assad regime behind the Chemical attacks is how they have been behaving since the attack last week Wednesday. Firstly they have been bombing the sites of the attacks for the last few days. Why would you do this unless you wanted to hide evidence. Secondly they have been restricting the UN inspectors from going to the sites. Today they finally had to allow access. If you think of the consequences of either side using any kind of WMD surly if the Assad forces were innocent they would have escorted the UN inspectors there last week immediately after the attack to prove they had nothing to do with it. This would have gained them credibility in there campaign against the rebels who they claim are terrorists. There guilt is obvious by there delaying tactics

This shouldn't be a surprise Malc, the Assad regime has been trying everything in its power to stop the UN inspectors getting the evidence that they used Chemical weapons.

Ah Walsie he caught you out there France and many other countries did indeed sit out the Iraq war But that shouldn't be surprising, despite what people like Oby think most countries can't be forced to participate in wars or invasion just because country x says you must help us. They have to feel its in there national interest to do so. Most of the time this is what determines military involvement, strategic national interest and that's how intervention should occur. That's normal. So why shouldn't the West sit out the Syrian conflict? There are several reasons but for me the main ones are The loss of life in Syria as this interminable conflict drags on. 100,000 or more people have been killed. Millions of people displaced and huge parts of Syria have been destroyed. What about the moral obligation to stop this civil war? The West is aligned with the Sunni dominated countries in the Middle East like Saudi Arabia and Qatar. They want the Assad governments brutal suppression of the rebels to be stopped. The West should help its allies Iran is strongly supporting Assad, they have committed resources and manpower to keep him in power. The West can reduce both the power and influence of Iran by defeating Assad. This can only be a good thing as I believe Iran is a threat to stability in the region Finally the use of Chemical weapons is an unquestionable line that Assad has crossed. Apart from all the other reasons just the fact that Assad has used these weapons should be a strong signal he needs to be removed from power. What next will he use if he is allowed to stay in power ? Biological....

That cracked me up. But the idea makes sense, Russia is such a friendly place where they treat foreigners and people that are different to them really well. It would make sense and Russia has loads of land that they doing nothing with?

Yum, BBQ pulled pork sandwiched sounds delicious I'm having Turkey steak with Rice for supper tonight

That's a good point. I never thought about that. There would have to be some sort of ground force to ensure the WMD don't fall into the wrong hands. This does make it more complicated NATO never played a part in the invasion of Iraq, it was a coalition of willing countries led by the USA.

The USA doesn't need to send ground troops. They could assist in air control and enforce a no-fly zone and provide invaluable logistical support. The French and the UK also seem very keen to intervene so this won't be a USA military operation only, just like in Libya.

Sounds sweet even if it was sugar free

I'm just not sure about it, Bruce. An intervention might end the civil war, but it won't fix the rest of the problems. At least under Assad the extremists were kept in check... democracy in Egypt put the extremists in power. The extremists are worse than any regime. Since the rebels are also these extremists, by supporting them, you're assuring that people like the Muslim Brotherhood will try to drag the country back into the dark ages. That's true to a certain degree, the Free Syrian Army (rebels) do have elements of Al-Qaeda in there units and this is very concerning. But that wasn't always the case in Syria. In the beginning of the conflict the rebels were almost entirely pure Syrian but as the conflict went on foreigners have joined them and so has the Al-Qaeda type influence. If Russia and China hadn't blocked Western involvement through the UN security council this conflict would have been over long ago and we would have seen a very different political landscape to what we would now see if the rebels suddenly win and get to govern Syria. So who knows what the future holds

Some good info in that interview

All countries are ready for Democracy but in the Middle East it won't be the implementation of it that we are use to as Westerners, but that's fine. They need there own version of Democracy Also the Arab League doesn't have a military intervention force so they would need the West or the UN to get involved in Syria.

Its a pity that Assad refused to make any meaningful political changes, Syria is also a vivid reminder of what happens without Western intervention and a civil war is allowed to be dragged on. As I mentioned in the past Libya is a good example of how the West can assist with regime change

You have just made one of the most sagacious and insightful comments I've ever heard on this topic, well said

Yes, the mining industry has already been forced to sell. This new step will now apply to any company and yes its further economic suicide for a country that needs foreign investment

Think about it, soon you won't be saying " my GF" but my "fiancée"

There are other factors that are more important from an investment perspective. But don't underestimate the harm that a governments policies can make in Africa to economic growth. I accept that bribery is almost a way of life in certain industries but I don't have to accept the public and unnecessary statements by African leaders that undermine the overall view of the continent as a viable investment opportunity. Remember its not just Mugabe's bigotry, he also wants to implement what he calls "Indigenisation". Basically every foreign owned business will be forced to sell 51% of the company to the Zimbabwean government. These steps are only going to slow the economic growth down. http://zimbabweelection.com/2013/08/07/ffze-economists-warn-mugabe-indigenisation-will-scare-off-foreign-investors/

I worked last night and I went out on Friday so my meals have been inconsistent and take-away based. Pizza and alcohol But today I'm having Spare Ribs for lunch with potato salad There should be left over from that for supper