Should we bomb De-ash/ISIS in Syria?

family!!

MPs are elected by the public to serve the public- so of course it is essential to let them know how those who elected them feel about any proposed action- and we are all free to do so or not, surely? Why would it be wrong for GNeters to pass information on ways to do this? I don't get it. You could of course chose the opportunity to write to your MP to tell her/him that you think differently.

I truly believe, that just as with Saddam and arms of massive destruction (or whatever they were called) - we should be very careful about the info given- I am sure there is an awful lot we do not know here, and all sorts of vested interests hidden, etc.

WW2 was so 'easy' - one enemy, in a clearly defined area- and despite a lot of civilians killed or maimed in the process who were not Hitler supporters- bombing whole towns and areas were effective. In this case, it is not- and likely to make things worse. I certainly will not go Christmas shopping in London in the near future- and wished my daugther didn't commute via Waterloo into the City every day either.

Why not families ? I think it normal if one is faced with such a decision one would discuss it with families, I am sure Cameron didn't remain silent on the subject when with his wife

I think families are far more likely to concur - it's their constituents they should be consulting.

It is their constituents. I never heard anyone say friends and families.

Frank Gardener - air strikes are not going to win alone , you have to win it on the ground, not only do you need ground force you need support of the local population. The question is if they want to unite, they don't like IS but they don't like Asaad, for the last four four years they have been fighting more against Asaad that IS, there are 110 different factions , getting them to work together is a Herculean task.

The French foreign minister - questioned if air strikes were enough and said Syrian forces could be part of a ground campaign to eradicate IS

He needs to talk to frank gardener in my opinion

Kitty ,you quoted - consult family, friends and constituents

Jess Your DH's letter says what I wanted to say but so much better than I could have managed. I have not written to my MP because I have had extensive face to face discussions with her and many of the SNP MPs, MEPs and MSPs. Roses designates the SNP (3rd largest Party in the Commons) as Sheep because they all follow the Party line but does not realise that the SNP policy on these issues has been arrived at following extensive discussion within the whole party - every member has had the opportunity to discuss these issues on-line, at Branch, Constituency and National Conference over many years and again following recent events.

Everyone now seems to believe that the Iraq war was a disaster and that we were deliberately lied to by the then Prime Minister, and the MSM who repeated the lies as fact, whilst there was full support from Labour and Conservative Parties, and tentative support from the Liberals. Everyone should remember that only the SNP, then led by Alex Salmond, came out, after careful consideration, firmly against the War and was vilified for so doing. I had hoped that, with the benefit of hindsight, people would be more willing to listen to reasoned arguments against military intervention, but I am afraid that many have been caught up in the sabre rattling fervour, where it is considered insulting to the French, veterans, GB's honour to be against bombing.

Perhaps I am influenced by the fact that although my family lost young men as combatants in WW1, in WW11 family casualties were due to being bombed, in their own homes, by bombers off-loading their bombs willy-nilly to lighten their load as they fled back over the N.Atlantic.

Granny23, with respect there was not full support from labour for the Iraq war, 83 voted against their own party's motion, Robin Cook and several others resigned . Yes the SNP voted firmly against , good for them

You are quite right AB - I am guilty of re-writing history and apologise to those whom I have mis-called. How could I forger Robin Cook and his principled stance (and subsequent sudden death). also apologise for N.Atlantic when I should have said North Sea.

In the first Gulf war someone I know was one of Saddam's human shield. He and people he knew were tied to chemical barrels, just waiting for the bomb to come to blow them up.
They were on the plane that was captured after it landed in Kuwait. It should never have landed in Kuwait as the British government knew that Saddam had invaded before it landed.

Some of you on here obviously would think that that is quite acceptable.
I do not.
The first Gulf war often gets forgotten about. Saddam's human shields have not forgotten; neither have the families of those who committed suicide because they could not live with the memories.

Just to repeat something from another thread, drone strikes are not efficient. 90% of those killed by them were not the intended target.

stopwar.org.uk/index.php/news/stop-the-war-s-7-point-rebuttal-of-david-cameron-s-case-for-war-on-syria

Something else for you to get worked up about.
Signed it yesterday, JessM, to show I care.

The report about the Iraq war should have been published by now.
Why hasn't it been?
Is there stuff in it that even the Tories do not want us to know?

Granny23, no guilt, I often make errors, but I had to speak up for Robin, I did admired him for decision, always good to see principles come first

Most odd Jen, surely the PM could get things moving

Good post re. Your dh's letter, jess.

Without becoming embroiled in the 'should we, shouldn't we' argument I'd like to say that it's a good idea to link to ' They work for you ' website, just in case readers are unaware of it. I've used it several times, before and since the election and find it a very effective way to communicate with my MP whatever the subject.
If you disagree with the OP write to your mp and tell them so.
I won't be writing to him right now as I know his opinion and agree with it.
No-one is attempting to curb free speech on GN by posting this link.

I continue to struggle with whether the uk should join its allies aIn Bob,I got Syria. My heart tells me it would be wicked and futile. My head nudges to remind me our allies are involved and tha Daesh is the most evil threat this country and others have faced since Hitler and co.
I'm u nconvinced that the case for bombing has been made. I am convinced that dong nothing isn't an option. I can't see how the uk can justify bombing Syria if it doesn't open the gates to Syrian people fleeing the bombing

Sorry this iPad, meant to type bombing Syria

That's a very good point re those fleeing Syria Iam. Gosh; what a horrible mess this whole situation is .

Not convinced by the arguments for bombing. I agree absolutely that , Daesh is one of the most evil threats we have encountered, and yes, we cannot be seen to be giving in or ignoring them
BUT and this is a big but, As I see it, Blair and Bush convinced their parliaments that we had to get involved in other people's struggles and the resulting chaos in the Middle East has a lot to do with the removal of tyrants and dictators such as Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi. Arab Spring was hailed as a rebirth of democracy and what has resulted? Chaos and the vacuum which allowed Daesh to establish itself. .
If we become directly involved by e.g.bombing Syria we are playing into Daesh's hands by escalating what is essentially a Muslim struggle for power againstother Muslims, the Sunii Muslims in the first place and ultimately the Shia Muslim states, thereby creating a West v Muslim conflict, making it easier and likelier for disaffected and radicalised Muslim young men and women to flock to the cause. We can't make things better and as in Iraq, will certainly make things worse.
It would be more prudent and effective to support countries such as Saudi and what I believe used to be referred to as the Trucial States and help them to deal with Daesh as Muslims against Muslims rather than a 21st century rerun of the crusades. I know Saudi has an appalling human rights record but not half as bad as Daesh . I fear for the consequences if we go blundering in as we/the US did in the first and second Iraq wars .
Blair and Bush have a hell of a lot to answer for.

Maybe the countries of the middle east simply don't want western style democracies foisted on them by us. I'm sure we mean well, but it is a point!!!

"Cameron seems keen to send bombers there,presumably to keep his EU allies happy (given his negotiations...)." (from the OP)

What?!!!

Does the original posterreally believe that the UK government, and many in the opposition parties, are willing to bomb IS just to keep in with our "EU allies"? To what end? Which negotiations is she talking about?

Yes, rather drastic measures just to get a few concessions from the EU...

Yeah. Weird thinking! (sorry jess)

Cameron wanted to bomb Syria in 2013 with America, the house voted against but he sent airmen to America to assist them. He has no answer on what will happen if he wins the vote this time, he will do what America decides , just as Blair did with Bush.