Should parliament vote before there is an air strike?

With regard to the original question:

Those of you who think that taking this action was the right thing to do, try thinking of it the other way round.
Say there was a left leaning pacifist as Prime Minister, who didn't want to drop bombs, wouldn't you have wanted a vote in parliament then? So that it would be a democratic decision? So that all our representatives could have say?

" Probably too late to find much evidence."

No argument from me with that comment.

OPCW inspectors are (hopefully) about to be allowed in POGS. Probably too late to find much evidence.

www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/04/17/investigators-may-finally-be-allowed-access-to-the-syria-chemical-attack-site-heres-what-theyll-try-to-do/

If there are 2 threads then I for one will post on 2 threads.

Ask GNHQ to combine them.

Because it's dangerous POGS. It would be a good idea if we could keep from posting the same points on 2 threads.

mostly harmless

Why do you think a journalist can freely give reports from Douma and the OPCW delegation are being refused access to their job on 'security grounds'?

I found Fisk’s reports quite shocking. Not just because he didn’t find evidence of chemical weapons having been used in Douma. But an insight into the awful living conditions in Douma.
Whole communities living in underground tunnels! They must have reasons for not wanting to evacuate.

bmacca

" I posted from 2 credible journalists/news sites because I think it is important to seek the truth. You may not"

I think I now understand through your post that you thought my using the term 'horses mouth' meant I was posting in response to your posts that preceded mine to lemon.

It was not!

It was a reply to lemons post of 21.52 where she answered my question had anybody watched Theresa May this afternoon. In other words in Parliament.

As for Fisk you will have your opinion I will hold mine.

As for my not seeking the truth I will not respond in kind .

Statement from CND:

"We strongly condemn the air strikes on Syria, which are in defiance of international law. They will only increase the likelihood of this terrible conflict spilling over into the wider Middle East and potentially beyond that.

We also condemn Theresa May's decision to bypass parliament which demonstrates a contempt for the necessary democratic process. She has also disregarded public opinion in launching these strikes; polls indicate that only 22% of the population support this bombing campaign.

CND works for the prevention and cessation of wars in which nuclear weapons may be used and there can be no clearer example of such a situation than that which we are currently facing. Diplomatic and political solutions must be sought. Nuclear escalation poses consequences too terrible to contemplate."

Indeed, POGS. And if the "horses mouth" is a politician then doesn't that make for political spin?
I posted from 2 credible journalists/news sites because I think it is important to seek the truth. You may not

Whether you love him or hate him, Robert Fisk (who the New York Times described as "probably the most famous foreign correspondent in Britain") is a highly respected journalist with over 40 years' experience, as information gleaned from Wikipedia demonstrates:

Robert Fisk has been Middle East correspondent on various newspapers. Since 1989 he has been correspondent on the Independent. He holds several British and international journalism awards, including being the winner on seven occasion of the Press Awards Foreign Reporter of the Year. He has also published a number of books. He speaks Arabic.

He reported the Northern Ireland troubles in the 1970s, the Portuguese Revolution in 1974, the Lebanese Civil War, the Iranian revolution in 1979, the Soviet war in Afghanistan, the Iran–Iraq War, the Gulf War, the Bosnian War, the Algerian Civil War, the Kosovo War, the 2001 international intervention in Afghanistan, the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Arab Spring in 2011 and continues to report on the ongoing Syrian Civil War.

During the Iran–Iraq War, he suffered partial but permanent hearing loss as a result of being close to Iraqi heavy artillery in the Shatt-al-Arab when covering the early stages of the conflict.

As Fisk has come up on 2 threads I will post twice.

Fisk is Marmite .

bmacca

Watching and listening to anybody can be political spin.

What problem do you have in saying it is good to hear from the horses mouth?

podcasts.spiritradio.ie/robert-fisk-from-douma-syria/

Robert Fisk again

In fact, bmacca, I didn't say he wasn't

it was you who assumed that.
There is a lot of controversy about his views and how impartial he is.

One America News Network (abbreviated as OANN), also referred to as One America News (abbreviated as OAN), is an American conservative cable news television channel launched on July 4, 2013 that is owned by Herring Networks. They are accredited by the White House.

I am only posting information that is freely available on the internet about him just to give a balanced viewpoint.

Jalima, are you actually saying that Robert Fisk isn't reliable? really? A multi award winning journalist. I wonder quite who you would listen to then

YouGov's Poll says that UK wide only 31% of men and 14% of women supported the missile attacks.

Obviously they did't ask Gransnetters

reliable
Of course, reliable is the key word

So listening to reporters is political spin? Perhaps if we've done more of that then Iraq war wouldn't have happened. Asking questions and listening to different accounts from reliable journalists is what we should be doing

It certainly is POGS

lemon

Its good to watch Parliament and listen to the horses mouth not political spin to make our conclusions isn't it.

www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-chemical-attack-gas-douma-robert-fisk-ghouta-damascus-a8307726.html

Robert Fisk report from Doums

Report from One America News network
www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSXwG-901yU&sns=em