Should we bomb De-ash/ISIS in Syria?

I think any PM has to do what he considers to be in the best interests of the UK. If he goes with the flow or bends in the breeze in order to do well in the popularity stakes of other countries then imo he's pretty worthless, a European poodle instead of an American one!!

I have thought about this a lot. I cannot see that bombing alone will 'fix' Syria, it would need feet on the ground.

I do not want our young mens feet on the ground.

My Grandfather, father, and uncle fought for this country, under terrible conditions.
I feel that all the young Syrians running away should be trained to fight for their own country. A simplistic idea I know.

I sadly can't see an end soon to this civil war

Cameron seems to be lining himself up to be "the PM that took us out of Europe".
He's taken himself to the negotiating table in the EU and promised us a referendum based on the outcome - and the time scale is highly unrealistic, given the slow pace of EU decision making.
Instead of standing up for a free market in which large numbers of Brits can move their dwelling and/employment around the EU, and in which skill shortages in the UK economy can be met by a flexible flow of bright young europeans he has played an anti-immigration card. The result of this (and the more right-wing papers playing along) seems to be that he has annoyed several EU countries and the UK may vote to leave - which is not actually what Cameron wants.
He has further annoyed our allies in EU by refusing to help refugees beyond a couple of token gestures.
So he is going to the negotiating table as an unpopular UK PM to start with. Does he want to make himself even more unpopular by refusing to join France in bombing Syria?
Thus the extended version of my thoughts in the OP re EU allies.

Sorry, wrong thread.

Again we have this claim that people on the "far left" are frightening off other posters.

What is there to be frightened of? All posters are anonymous. You might get your feathers ruffled but you won't get frogmarched out of your home and locked up in a secret prison.

As to the example given of JessM's post, it was quite obvious that she was expressing an opinion. I far prefer that approach to the approach of some posters who feign political neutrality when it is clear that they are anything but neutral.

So what if Jess or anyone else gives a link to a petition or informs people as to how they can easily contact their MP? If you don't agree with the petition or you don't wish to contact your MP you don't have to do so - but for some people these links and information are welcome.

WW2 was so easy- one enemy in a clearly defined area

Sorry, I just can't let that one pass without comment.
That remark may have been made in the heat of the present debate, but it was neither 'easy' nor confined to a single enemy in a defined area.

Try telling that to any veteran, especially those fighting in the Far East as far as Australia and the Pacific islands, or prisoners (including women and children) of the Japanese, people in occupied Europe who remember the fear of their neghbours who were collaborators to add to the fear of the Nazis and their brutality.

Not a justified comparison at all in my opinion.

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.

Yeah. Weird thinking! (sorry jess)

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

"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?

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!!!

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.

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

Sorry this iPad, meant to type bombing Syria

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

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.

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

Most odd Jen, surely the PM could get things moving

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

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?

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.

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.

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

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.

Kitty ,you quoted - consult family, friends and constituents