Do you think we have a 'yes' vote to bomb Syria by this evening...?

[rollonthesummer]

Am feeling quite depressed by it all :(

Sadly I agree with most of the comments above.

I despair. Even my DC can see this is not a good idea. And it's them that will be living with the consequences in an even more broken world when old Cameron's retired living in luxury somewhere.

It's going to kill innocent people. And as my 10 yo pointed out, surely the bad guys have watched the news so they aren't going to hang around in Raqqa waiting to be bombed will they?!

No i think we should send in some boots on the ground - so far the US, France, Saudi and Russian's are bombing them with little or no progress. so think a ground attack is the only way back up by the rebals currently supported by us and the US

2 people on my Facebook feed (not close friends but hard to completely unfriend) who are supportive of air strikes but both are also prolific Britain First posters, often post rather stupid comments and are really quite racist at the best of times.

My (Labour) MP is voting NO and I'm really thankful to him for doing so.

But I also think there will be a knee jerk decision to "bomb "them"" whomever and where ever "they" are.

How will bombing Syria help control terrorist attacks in France (or UK for that matter) by nationals of that country?

It is only going to make things worse.

They can't even agree on what to call them. I really despair for the poor innocent civilians. This is a all about being part of the Big Boys' Club, nothing to do with helping Syrians

Yay, war for Christmas

Pathetic posturing. Do they seriously believe that given the televised preparations and debates, ISIS won't just jump into their shiny new jeeps and be long gone by the time our bombs arrive? Just really sad.

Sadly I think the vote will be 'yes'

I don't get this

Won't Isis be predicting a 'yes' vote too and be now legging it out of there before the bombing starts?

And also, every civilian left in Syria that hasn't left with the other refugees, won't they all be leaving too?

Won't it be mass exodus of people leaving?

It feels a bit like The Truman Show (or am I overthinking it?). Everything is staged and nothing is quite as it seems or should be.

On Russia Today yesterday they showed Putin shaking hands with Obama at the Climate Change Conference in Paris, then they unusually zoomed in only on their hands and froze it there for a few seconds. Seemed to be a signal that the handshake looked Masonic.

I feel like the entire government is just doing this "we're going to do what we want, even though people are saying no and protesting, because we know better and we want to, and just neener neener to you all."

I guess that comes across as juvenile, but then so do they.

I'm not a terrorist sympathiser, I just don't think trying to bomb terrorists is the right or helpful way to get rid of them. Just like it wasn't the right way in Iraq. And just like it wouldn't have been right for us to bomb Ireland because of the IRA.

I also don't know anyone in real life- not even my Daily Mail reading Conservative voting friends and family- who think bombing Syria is a good idea.

I have signed the petitions. No point in contacting my MP though as he is a member of the cabinet.

I think they'll vote yes. Against public opinion.

I also don't know anyone in real life- not even my Daily Mail reading Conservative voting friends and family- who think bombing Syria is a good idea

Thats exactly the same in my circle, who are the people wanting us to start bombing if it isnt those who vote Tory

I mean, wtf are they all doing at a climate change conference when they are fighting a war?

'who are the people wanting us to start bombing if it isnt those who vote Tory '

The majority of MPs.

The Daily Mail was against it.

'I mean, wtf are they all doing at a climate change conference when they are fighting a war?'

Fox News has been having a go at Obama about it and laughed when he said that the Climate Change Conference, which most of the Fox News pundits don't believe in, was "a rebuke to the terrorists".

Trump is yet again practically the only voice of reason amongst a sea of puppets.

"Trump: Obama has made us 'fools' with focus on climate change

President Obama has made the United States a global laughingstock by focusing on climate change, GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump said Tuesday.

“We are fools,” he told host Stephen K. Bannon on Sirius XM’s “Breitbart News Daily.”

“All he wants to talk about is climate change,” Trump said of Obama. "We’re like the dummies that everyone laughs at."
“[Obama] thinks that climate change is a far bigger problem than Russia loaded up with nukes, China doing what they’re doing in the [South China Sea] where they’re literally building up islands, building up fortresses,” he continued. "They have no respect for us.

“We have a form of global warming that’s very serious, and it’s called ‘nuclear global warming.' If we don’t get our act together and corral some of these countries that want to get some power, we’re going to be in big trouble.”

Trump said Obama’s push for international climate change cooperation has earned mockery abroad, and that other nations have no intention of following his lead.

[[thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/presidential-races/261619-trump-obama-has-made-us-fools-on-climate-change

The words "Trump" and "voice of reason" do not ever belong in the same sentence.

I'm unsure as what the right thing to do is tbh. It isn't a decision that will be easy for MPs I'm sure.

What certainly isn't helpful is the vitriol that has been aimed to l wards Labour MPs who are or maybe voting yes.

Stella Creasy staff have been abused in the phone apparently so much so she had to leave chambers today to make sure tgey were ok and she hasn't even said yet which way she is voting.

Dan Jarvis has also had disgraceful comments thrown at him after saying he is voting yes. It's included him being told he doesn't not knowing anything about the situation and being a careerist despite being a Major in the Paras and serving in Northern Ireland, Afghanistan, Iraq and Sierra Leonne. so hay what would he know.

Surely it isn't a case of people leaving before the bombing starts. The bombing is already going on, has been for a long time, just not by the UK over Syria. Not sure what difference, if any, the UK joining in would make. I thought it had already been acknowledged that the long standing bombing is not effective in destroying Daesh. It may have some effect in containing territorial spread, but it is no kind of solution. The relevant discussion, whatever it is, surely lies elsewhere and not with whether the
UK makes a probably negligible contribution to a pre existing and inadequate policy.

I think it's the wrong thing to do - because it won't be successful. It has nothing to do with party political association. I think ISIS are an appalling organisation (as are Boko Haram and al Shabab, for that matter) but a bombing campaign alone can't work and will cause civilian casualties. We only have to look at how Hamas manipulated casualty numbers in Gaza last year to see that this would be a further propaganda victory for ISIS, even if we ignore the level of human suffering that would be caused (I am not for a minute suggesting we should: but if a politician was looking at the wider picture and considering what would be an "acceptable level of casualties" they might consider that human suffering is not the main issue to think about, unfortunately).

There is little unified secular opposition to ISIS, apart from Assad - the less-bad-than-ISIS rebels are not acceptable imo: al Nusra only look like moderates by comparison, for example, not because they are. What no-one is prepared to admit is that the only way to stop ISIS is by boots on the ground and arming and propping up the Assad regime. That really is the bottom line- but neither of those are acceptable politically (except to Russia) so Cameron is fulfilling his great leader fantasies by proposing bombing.

I don't think it's acceptable to argue against it because we might face increased attacks here in the UK if we do. I also don't think it's acceptable to argue against it because "we should just talk to Isis and do this peacefully". Both of those responses show an astonishing level of naivety about security, terrorism, ISIS, the wider region and general international relations and diplomacy.

It's also totally unacceptable the amount of bulling in the Labour party that seems to have gone on trying to persuade people to vote with Corbyn: you can't tell people it's a conscience vote and then use all sorts of deeply unpleasant narrative to try to convince them to leave their consciences at the door. (Well, you can - but it's not a move full of integrity, let's say.)

It is notable if you follow US media coverage that the UK or whether they join in doesn't even come up in discussions of what to do about action against Daesh.

The idiots who heckle when others are speaking are a disgrace. You'd not be allowed to behave like that in the classroom or work place. It's just plain rude.

I agree. Some of the BBC news interviews have also been abysmal. I watched an interview on BBC1 either Sunday or Monday night where the BBC interviewing lady (forget her name) spoke over/interrupted/scoffed at and used very aggressive language towards the Labour MP but she practically simpered when interviewing the Tory who was on next. Feeding him sympathetic questions, agreeing with everything he said and letting him finish every sentence. It was very noticeable and frankly pretty unpleasant to watch the difference.

Not sure what difference, if any, the UK joining in would make

We are one of the only countries that has the Brimstone bombs they want to use on ISIS en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brimstone_%28missile%29

Of course, this vote is just for show.

That's what all the scare mongering propaganda has been for.

Fucking sucks.

'Trump is yet again the voice of reason'

Only a year ago, they were voting to bomb the Assaad regime.

There are simply too many unbelievable assumptions about the level of Syrian troops on the ground that are viable for additional token bombing to be effective.

Where are IS getting their oil revenue from? We all know the answer to that, but it's too uncomfortable to peruse this avenue with any great ferocity. Choke off their finances at least first before bombing.