Syria

[Heaning Hobbler]

Never voted Labour in my life but totally agree with Corbyn over not bombing Syria.

[Stagger]

I agree HH. Ramdom bombing will solve nothing.

Put the money saved into the NHS.

If we get to bombing we will have a Paris type incident.

[Wheeze]

We seem to be dragged into serial misadventures. This a middle east problem. The UN needs to bring pressure to bear on the likes of Saudi Arabia to sort this out. Problem is the Saudis have got so used to being untouchable because of everyone's dependence on their oil hat so far no one has dared open that particular line of argument.

This is Northern Ireland x 1,000,000

[Witton Park]

I don't agree with the bombing on it's own. I actually don't think Cameron is going to the Commons for that. I would prefer to hear the real reason which I suspect is about Britain's overseas interests and influence.

Britain at the moment would be left behind if we were not stood side by side with our allies and I don't mean the USA, I mean France.
Britain would also find it difficult to have influence on the outcome, through military and/or diplomatic channels if not involved.
Rightly or wrongly I think it is the influence rather than the security. I also think that whether we get involved or not, they will bomb.
I think if we are involved, there is a chance that any bombing will be more carefully managed.

For too long we have let the Middle East fester and one of my earliest memories was the PLO at Munich Olympics. Not a lot has changed since, just the personalities.

It would be great to see a proper plan develop that will involve some safe havens in the short term, some troops on the ground supported from the air to stabilise Syria and then a concerted effort to resolve the Palestinian problem.

[noel]

Nothing says "we are on the side of the Syrian people" better than a bombing campaign. I see it's working well in Iraq too. In fact it's been so successful, perhaps we should extend it to France and Belgium, to help them weed out their terrorists - after all, they are our allies.

[mr brightside]

I think Middle Eastern countries need to assemble a massive land army and, with the aid of as many Western jets and drones as can be found, take the place back in the name of anti-extremism. This will work well i think; the Kurds etc. won't stand for any crap like human sheilds or the old favourite 'how can you prove i'm a terrorist' routine, they'll just get the job done.

[Dave_Mole]

thanks for this,folks, I was beginning to think the world had gone bombing mad.
In the wake of Paris I was thinking "let's just bomb them": you have to stamp on fascists of whatever stripe.
On reflection, and having listened to various arguments I've come down on the "bombing solves nothing" side. As others have pointed out, it hasn't worked in Iraq or elsewhere and is, in fact, what ISIS want us to do. And is also precisely what the Syrians themselves DON'T want us to do. Sadly the possible solutions are difficult, delicate and involve long-term planning. Not what a lot of people want to hear.

On the point of standing side-by-side with allies such as France, there are other things we can do besides bombing, which might actually make a difference. The resolution in front of parliament tomorrow mentions them, but resolves only to drop bombs......

[sbrt]

Glad we agree on something HH.

[Derby Tup]

Not sure what Hilary's dad would make of his stance on the bombing. When are they going to learn?

[Alan Lucker]

Glad we agree on something HH.

A few days after the Paris attacks I remember listening to a serious debate on Radio 2 on weather to nuke Syria. I Still find that an absolutely insane idea. But some rang in to suggest it to be a realistic option!

I agree that bombing isn't a soliution. Diplomatic pressure, and or, an air supported land invasion from nearby countries (Saudi Arabia) is needed. Removing Assad is probably necessary too, he's clearly a fool.