Dec 2, 2015

Members of Parliament are having a vote on it today. What is your opinion though?

Arguments against airstrikes in Syria:

1. The danger that despite efforts to target military positions, Syrian civilians could be killed.
They have already suffered through years of a complex and bloody conflict, could an extension of military activity endanger their lives still further?

2. There's scepticism that the allies would be able to muster the required troops to fill the vacuum, if airstrikes manage to degrade IS in Raqqa.
The Prime Minister says his "experts" have identified 70,000 potential pairs of boots on the ground assembled from moderate opposition fighters, such as the Free Syrian Army, but will they materialise?

3. Are we sowing even more confusion in an already complex battle between competing religions and regional interests?
The United Kingdom has already expressed its determination to rid Syria of the brutal regime of Bashar al Assad, but by hobbling Islamic State, one of his main enemies, would we help him to cling on?

4. France and the US are already bombing Islamic State positions in Syria and although the group is thought to have lost a third of its territory, the extremists are still able to orchestrate or inspire attacks both across Syria and in the West.
Would our contribution change that?

5. Would airstrikes create more homegrown jihadis in revenge for our participation?
The counter argument is that airstrikes are helping Islamic State's international recruitment drive.

6. The spectre of the Iraq War looms large for many opponents.
Does the recent UN resolution 2249 - which gave backing for "all necessary measures" to eradicate IS safe havens - constitute legal backing for airstrikes?

Arguments for airstrikes in Syria

1. After terrorist attacks at home and abroad, the UK needs to show solidarity with NATO members which are already staging airstrikes in Syria.

2. It's strategically inconsistent to target IS positions in Iraq - where the UK is already engaged - but not in Syria.
They don't recognise the boundary so why should we?
Also we have used drones to target individuals who are deemed to represent a threat to Great Britain and are already providing pilot assistance in Syria, so this is the logical next step.

3. Airstrikes could help destroy the infrastructure which is keeping Islamic State awash in cash, which helps the organisation attract volunteers and finance terrorist attacks.

4. The United Nations voted for a resolution which has called on the world to take "all necessary measures" to destroy Islamic State safe havens, so surely that constitutes a legal basis for extending airstrikes to Syria?

5. The British Government has made it clear that the UK faces a real threat from Islamic State inspired terrorism, with seven plots foiled in the last 12 months.
Can we just rely on intelligence to foil these attempts, or should we try to deal with them at source?

6. There is little doubt that IS poses a threat to peace and security in the entire region.
Although the situation is complicated with a mosaic of national interests at play, cutting off the "head of the snake" could help restore some stability in both Iraq and Syria.

 

Dec 2, 2015

Bombs Don't solve anything.

 

Dec 2, 2015

 

Dec 2, 2015

You make yourself a target like this but the UK is already a target and already bombs Iraq so fucc it

 

Dec 2, 2015

They just voted in favour
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34989302

 

Dec 2, 2015

tbh

 

Dec 2, 2015

They should also bomb Romania and Poland

 

Dec 2, 2015

And Norway

 

Dec 2, 2015

and US

 

Dec 2, 2015

Yeah especially THEM^

 

Dec 2, 2015

So what's left then?

 

Dec 2, 2015

Shut up fa----

 

Dec 2, 2015

what's the solution then?

 

Dec 3, 2015

Economically isolate.

 

Dec 3, 2015

Is this a joke? Syria has been under embargo for several years. "Economically isolate", that's the stupidest thing I've heard this week.

 

Dec 3, 2015

Yes

 

Dec 3, 2015

These guys are a bunch of fanatics, they'll k--- themselves trying to k--- you, i don't think ''Economically isolate'' would help.

 

Dec 3, 2015

First they have to run out of money.Stop doing business with Arabia Saudi would be a start.They're too strong right now.
Then we can enter with tanks.

 

Dec 3, 2015

Now i understand you, and i agree with you.

 

Dec 3, 2015

If the U.S. Gets blame for invading Iraq in the first place, then the UK should get blame as well since they also invaded Iraq. I would say that have some sort of obligation to conduct air strikes.