And the missiles have been launched ..

[Coldwaragain]

Oh crap.

To all the people who are saying it's not our problem, do you think the US should have kept its beak out of WW2 or do you think they were wrong to leave it so late before they joined in?

If the accusation is the use of chemical weapons then surely the destruction of those weapons will help ordinary people?

If chemical weapons are destroyed then they can’t be used.

If chemical weapons factories are destroyed then that will be a set-back in the production of chemical weapons.

In addition, retaliation against the use of chemical weapons by specifically targeting those weapons shows that the ban is being enforced.

If somebody can tell me how this will help ordinary Syrians then great. But it won't.
So destroying the factories that are making the chemical weapons wont help Syrians? If I was Syrian I would be pleased to see the end of facilities producing such weapons.
But it isn't just about Syrians, its about enforcing a chemical weapon ban which helps the whole world including Britain.

That is why it is important for us to be involved!

Mother

‘I don't think we should get involved. We can work with the UN to reach a diplomatic solution, along the lines of all the other countries who all agree the actions of Assad are abhorrent’

We have tried this already - the Russians have used their un veto six times to stop progress

I think saying this was just "gesture" is wrong. It wasn't just an 'empty building' it was the chemical weapon factories and storage facilities. By destroying theme, Assad is without chemical weapons and it will cost him many millions to build it up again.

They also do have evidence, some corpses have already been examined.

They have acted previously but they're making such a united front due to the Russian killing on UK soil - May said this herself. It's more about Putin and sending a message to him than it is about helping Syrians.^
^
"I have done so because I judge this action to be in Britain’s national interest. We cannot allow the use of chemical weapons to become normalized — within Syria, on the streets of the U.K., or anywhere else in our world."

Even the guardian - the refuge of the pink and fluffy - approves...

www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/14/trumps-attack-on-syria-is-not-without-risk-but-its-not-world-war-three

I think saying this was just "gesture" is wrong. It wasn't just an 'empty building' it was the chemical weapon factories and storage facilities. By destroying theme, Assad is without chemical weapons and it will cost him many millions to build it up again.

It kind of was to be fair, it needed to be done. But us, France and the US gave fair warning about the strikes and the Russian and Syrian Military will have vacated the area.

We need to send a message to not just Assad but to every other despot or potential despot that chemical weapons are crossing the line.

We need to also send a message to Assad and Russia that we are not completely passive.

This was the right level of action, targeted at chemical weapons infrastructure, to make said point without any major influence on the conflicts outcome or risk of escalation.

Mother

‘I am not convinced that diplomatic efforts would not work, if there was a mind for it.’

I say (again) - This has been tried through the un - the Russians consistently veto progress

I am not convinced that diplomatic efforts would not work, if there was a mind for it.

But there is a mind for it, it keeps getting blocked by Russia, you keep ignoring that crucial part.

Also we have more support for the strikes other than macron and Trump. Unless you can find anyone saying we should not do this?

As @noblegiraffe said, a couple of limited strikes are not comparable to Iraq

Agree.

We can work with the UN to reach a diplomatic solution, along the lines of all the other countries who all agree the actions of Assad are abhorrent.

And if you had followed things over the last few years you'd have seen that this has not worked. Russia's repeated vetoes have rendered the UN useless in this case.

We have time and time again refused to get involved with Syrian refugees who have been coming to Europe for years now. We blame them for everything wrong with the EU. We voted to leave the EU because we don't want those Syrians in our country. (This is not me speaking, but the will of the people, I voted remain)

How very dare we (and the French, and the Italians, and the Hungarians, and the Poles, etc. etc.) not want our borders overwhelmed by millions of people from the ME!

I am not stupid. I just think it is hilarious that you'd all be the first in line to condemn Blair and here you all are waving May on.

This is nothing like Iraq, you are trying to conflate the two.

You keep repeating that we should let the UN take control as though the passed 7 years haven't happened.

*past

Mother - like Jeremy Corbyn you seem confused

Assad is throwing chemical weapons around and the Russians are using their un veto to stymie diplomatic pressure

So what would you do in light of the above?

Start writing strongly worded letters?

Brilliant post heyduggies

May doesn’t have my confidence, nor Trump, but this situation is bigger than party politics and should be examined on its own details, not with fatuous references to Iraq or whinges about Corbyn or May.

So because Assad is a nasty person, we should punish innocent Syrians by sending missiles to their towns? Seriously? This is just a pissing contest between Putin, Trump, and now May and Macron.
Why do the people of Syria have to suffer as a result of this?

Trump doesn't even have a bloody Secretary of State!!!! He has just made one huge, huge mistake.
Now the UK, US and France will have to suffer, too. Russia are not going to just ignore this.
I guess Putin and Trump fell out and are no longer BFF's, Putin has found a new friend-Assad, and between them they will be able to do some colossal damage.