Is Dave Frit ?

[mikey4444]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34706279

It looks as if we are not now going to have the debate and vote on UK air strikes against Islamic State militants in Syria.

What with his recent defeat in the HOL, perhaps that slim majority of 12 is not really enough ?

[Sqad]

What would Labour give for a majority of 12? -;)

Yes, a U-turn mikey and another defeat of he " pushed it."

[ichkeria]

If that is the advice I think it is probably wise
I am not sure I see the point of yet another bombing campaign.
And Russia's increased intervention has raised the stakes. Assad's opponents are being armed to the teeth now (ironically) which is making the whole conflict even worse if that were possible. It would indeed be far better to try to get some peace agreement on the go. Realistically though the fighting will continue until everyone is exhausted

[dannyk13]

Anybody who thinks that a diplomatic deal can be done with ISIS is living on another planet,.

[Svejk]

Things change. 2 years ago he(and you) wanted us to help IS.

[TWR]

How can you negotiate with Murderess scum?

[mikey4444]

Well...he has already been defeated on this issue once before, and I guess he dare not risk another defeat. His backbenchers are revolting ( ! )

For the record, I am tending to come down on the side of military action...as Danny has said, we are never going to get ISIS around a negotiating table.

[ToraToraTora]

unusual to see our left wing colleagues baying for air strikes, still takes all sorts I suppose.

[ichkeria]

It's been mentioned a few million times before, but worth mentioning again:
the conflict in Syria is not the good guys v IS. It's a lot more complicated than that. IS are only one side of several.

[bazwillrun]

well lets take out the lot of them...then theres nobody left to fight each other....

mind you knowing these backward thinking idiots, theyll find something to fight, evewn if its a tree, as long as they can fight they dont care....

[Gromit]

Most MPs and political pundits are aware that the vote 2 years ago, which resulted in us not joining the conflict, was the correct result. We were expected to blindly follow the US (again) into a war where the objectives were unclear, and the expectations of a quick victory were nil.

A couple of years on, the assessment is 10 times worse. The Russian milirary presence, the rise of ISIS, the meddling of the Turks, and the duplicity of the Arabs means this is a war we should keep our noses out of. A most people know that.

A vote in the Commons would certainly fail, so it is unlikely to take place. That is not to say we will keep our noses out. Cameron is determined to meddle, so we will get involved without a Commons vote.

[Khandro]

If you try to confront a complicated problem with a complicated solution, you will only make it more complicated.
The Putin approach makes most sense; Support Assad (for now) as the legitimate leader of the country and oppose ANYONE, so-called ISIS or whoever, attempting his overthrow him. Only this way can you produce a cease-fire, and then political negotiations can begin.

[retrocop]

Why bother.The UK prevaricates and Putin flies straight in and shows the rest how it is done.Let him finish what he started and to the victor goes the spoils.

[Gromit]

To the victor goes the spoils.
Can't think of any spoils we want from Syria?

[ichkeria]

Putin's intervention seems actually to be weakening Assad. The anti govt forces have been boosted massively by outside assistance to the extent that in some cases Assad is on the retreat. Putin is also relying on Iranian troops to do his fighting, an arrangement that is bound to end in a cup de sac seeing Iran's vision for Iraq fundamentally differs from his. We wait to see what excuse will be made for the pull-out :-)

[Gromit]

Ichkeria,
I cannot find anything to verify your assessment. Do you have a link.
The Syrian Army and Russian bombs attacking the white hat rebels have resulted in ISIS making gains over them, not over the Government forces. And those gains will be temporary.

This is a fortnight old, but Robert Fisk is a source I believe.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/with-russias-help-the-syrian-army-is-back-on-its-feet-and-fiercer-than-ever-a6698866.html

[retrocop]

Gromit
Mr Putin would love a Mediterranean Naval base or two.Of course. We have no navy large enough to need one.!

[Gromit]

Retrocop,

The Russians already have a mediterranean naval base, they've had it since 1971. Obviously they don't want to lose it, which is part of their motivation for supporting Assad.

// We have no navy large enough to need one.! //

You must have missed the news that we have just broken ground on HMS Juffair, a new base on Bahrain.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Jufair

[ichkeria]

"I cannot find anything to verify your assessment. Do you have a link.
The Syrian Army and Russian bombs attacking the white hat rebels have resulted in ISIS making gains over them, not over the Government forces. And those gains will be temporary. "

A Times article, I believe. The CIA are supplying one of the group now with highly effective anti-tank weapons. I was referring to Assad v FSA and co, not what is happening with IS, which operated largely in a separate area of the country. The early surge by Assad forces has largely been checked.

[jim360]

The situation in Syria is too complex for anything other than a coordinated international campaign to be successful. If we can't make a deal with Russia/ Iran etc. on what action to be taken then it's understandable that the Commons is reluctant to even discuss this again.

[Svejk]

Did the CIA provide these cages for your heroes, ichi?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3301364/Hundreds-women-locked-cages-act-human-shields-against-Assad-s-air-strikes-Rebels-parade-families-loyal-president-streets-horrifying-deterrent.html

Why would they resort to such behaviour if the Russian/Syrian alliance are as ineffectual as you would have us believe?