Syria- should Parliament be recalled?

And her next: JB on Syria and reasons for staying out.

Joan Bakewell on Twitter: her comment

Actually maybe we are all in a bit of 'shock' this morning that they didn't actually go ahead anyway, regardless what the majority of people thought.

It's an odd feeling, isn't it, feeling that the will of the people has prevailed? Did you see Gove throwing his toys out of the pram?

It certainly wasn't about the will of Milliband, whose rapid volte-face didn't go unnoticed. There's so much spin beng put on the outcome from both sides this morning. At one point I heard Cameron blame the public for not wanting missiles to rain down on Syria, then he re-framed it as 'I've heard you!'

Looks like the will of the people has been listened to for a change .

Soo - democracy can work!

I'm pleased that Cameron didn't get a yes vote, but it seems like the US is going to go ahead anyway so the whole situation is still very volatile and frightening.

No action decided in the vote by MPs! Cameron will be gutted!

They need their heads banging together! Too much testosterone floating around at the top. I saw a female Tory MP being interviewed on BBC News earlier. Obviously been briefed about what she must say, but she dithered several times. I wonder whether she really believed what she was saying i.e. that military intervention can legally go ahead if Cameron decides. She didn't look convinced to me.

As a complete contrast, Nick Clegg was taking a hawkish stance and insists - without sufficient evidence IMO - that Assad was responsible for the chemical weapons attack. Just like Tony Blair...

I really like a politician who is prepared to change his/her mind in the face of new or more complete information, but Ed has had his u-turn without that, just the realisation that the public is strongly opposed to firing missiles at Syria. Is he worried about losing his position?

Yes full credit to Ed Millbrand, the best time to show a bit of mettle. Too many doubts and too many echoes of Iraq.

I am not sure what has motivated Ed M (who always seems a bit of a wet to me) but I am just glad that he has taken a stand.

I am assuming that GB involvement is still an option as the plan is to wait for the weapons inspectors to report - let us hope Ed stands firm.

And what of the lib dems? - I'm not sure what their position is.

Why is it always us that follows the US? The rest of Europe seem to manage to stay out of it.

I plan to email my MP.

It shows that Milliband wasn't convinced about military inervention in the first place, for him to do that quick u-turn in the face of public opposition. Is he easily led, or just doesn't think things through before he knows what he's doing. I hope he goes soon!

Good news indeed Jess.
Radio 4 better listening this morning.
I do wish Ed had taken that stance from the start, though. Seems he will not support the latest motion either! Rock on Ed!
Jeremy Bowen gets to the heart of the matter.... ' support for the 'rebels' may be support for Al Quaida' as it appears one of the 'rebel' groups is comprised of members of that 'organisation'.
Nick Robinson, almost gleefully, saying something along the lines of parliament dictating to Cameron rather than the other way round!
This, hopefully, will mean that Cameron will not be able to 'deliver parliament' as it is claimed Blair did to Bush.

Good news this morning that Ed M has said he won't support a vote for military action and Cameron backed down. But who knows what Obama will do - but he is no Bush when it comes to intervention.

My MP (David Crausby) replied to my email promptly. He said his instincts are against any military involvement, and definitely not without UN sanction. It seems that public opinion, and the views of many MP's reflects those on here.

Mishap re "something should be done" I hear where you are coming from. Maybe humanitarian, not military aid?

I heard a comment on Radio 4 today about it possibly being the rebels behind the attack to try and spark off US involvement, with the inference being that US were behind the attack in some way.

I can't believe this is happening yet again. Blair jumped for Bush, is Cameron asking Obama 'how high'?

These things have a habit of biting back. US supplied Afghanistan with weapons against the Russians? Now look. Those same weapons were used against them.

Another thing that infuriates me is something I read in a BBC news article about Conservative MP's being whipped, i.e. vote yes or your sacked. We are supposed to live in a democracy - telling an MP how to vote is not on - unless you are the electorate.

We all agree that "something should be done" - the question is what.

Bombing another country and causing its already oppressed citizens to flee their homes in terror of the USA and it hangers-on (i.e. us) does not seem a constructive response to me.

No petition from 38 Degrees, but an invitation to join the discussion. Seems there are differing views amongst its membership.

blog.38degrees.org.uk/2013/08/28/syria-crisis-what-do-you-think/

I think we are a long way from knowing whether or not Assad was behind the attack. It could equally well be some group that were trying to provoke an escalation. The electorate remember the WMD argument and the fact that Iraq was invaded without UN agreement.
Let us hope that this time it is only sabre rattling because any aggression by the west is going to inflame the region further.

Meeting violence with more violence will, I believe, only lead to further acts of retribution and mayhem.

Elothean imagine your family killed in this way would you prefer other countries to stand back and do nothing?

Sigh - how can they do this all again? What must be going on in their minds?

We all deplore the atrocities, but our response must be constructive and honourable and above all intelligent with a bit of foresight, having learned from history. Is this too much to ask of our leaders?