Edit
Don't bomb Syria
As the crescendo increases, the pressure on Labour's MPs grows; their party replenished of members, many returning from the last time the issue of war in the middle east was discussed...
- There was a debate last night in the Commons, Cameron presented his case for bombing, let's find Hansard and/or Parliament TV. Meanwhile, here's No 10, with Cameron's reply to the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee.
PM response to FAC report on British military operations in Syria - Publications - GOV.UKThe Prime Minister has responded to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee's (FAC) report on extension of British military operations to Syria.- This should be parliamentlive.tv's report of Cameron's statement on 26th November, their technology is bit proprietary.
Parliamentlive.tvOral Questions to the Attorney General Oral Questions to the Minister for Women and Equalities Statement: Syria: Response to Foreign Affairs Committee Report Business Statement: Leader of the House Backbench Business: Final report of the Airports Commission Oral Questions to the Attorney General Q1.- The Parliamentary debate establishes the principle that, for action to be legal, here must be a path to peace and it would seem that this cannot occur without ground forces and no-one knows who will provide these, particularly given the disruptive roles of Turkey, Russia and Saudi Arabia.
- In kicking off Labour's discussion, Dan Jarvis sets five tests, this reads as if it's written in a hurry; it's not as clear as it needs to be, but this raises the issue of the nature of the action, determines its legality.
My five tests for backing military action in Syria | Dan JarvisWhat heightens our grief and horror over the atrocities in Paris is the knowledge that they could easily have happened to us here in the UK. Our country experienced its own pain a few months ago when 30 British holidaymakers were murdered on the beaches of Tunisia.- I repeat a link to Craig Murray's blog where he shows the heritage of the doctrine of pre-emptive self defence
- Exclusive: I Can Reveal the Legal Advice on Drone Strikes, and How the Establishment WorksThis may be the most important article I ever post, because it reveals perfectly how the Establishment works and how the Red Tories and Blue Tories contrive to give a false impression of democracy. It is information I can only give you because of my experience as an insider.
- Jon Lansman points out Labour's Conference policy, and calls on the Shadow Cabinet to back it. The LF article points at a Chatham House article now behind the paywall arguing that SC 2249 is not sufficient to allow the UK military to bomb Syria.
Labour's shadow cabinet must not split the party over going to warThe shadow cabinet yesterday discussed David Cameron's plan to go to war in Syria. A majority of its members favour backing airstrikes in spite of the four conditions laid down by Labour's conference only two months ago not being met.- Here's the text of the UN Security Council Resolution
Security Council 'Unequivocally' Condemns ISIL Terrorist Attacks, Unanimously Adopting Text that Determines Extremist Group Poses 'Unprecedented' ThreatThe Security Council determined today that the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant/Sham (ISIL/ISIS) constituted an "unprecedented" threat to international peace and security, calling upon Member States with the requisite capacity to take "all necessary measures" to prevent and suppress its terrorist acts on territory under its control in Syria and Iraq.- The European Journal of International Law argues that SC 2249 does not confer legality.
The Constructive Ambiguity of the Security Council's ISIS ResolutionOn Friday, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 2249 (2015), condemning a series of recent terrorist attacks by Islamic State (IS, ISIS or ISIL). The text of the resolution, together with statements of Council members, is available here. This resolution was proposed by France and superseded two competing earlier drafts by Russia.- Simon Jenkins in typical poisonous pen mode, makes some devastating points
Cameron's drive to bomb Syria is macho, foolish and must be stopped | Simon JenkinsJeremy Corbyn's challenge to David Cameron on the bombing of Syria is unanswerable, and every Labour MP knows it. So too is his explanation of his position in his letter to his party. A British prime minister's statement on the eve of war should never be taken at face value.- Peter Hitchens on LBC, on why Cameron is delusional, why the UN Resolution doesn't confer legality, and why the 70,000 moderate fighters are so important; the real military opposition to ISIL is the Syrian National Army, backed by the Russian Air Force, the Kurds and the Iranian backed militias. Hitchens also asks why Assad is so uniquely awful given the government's support for the Chinese, Bahraini and Saudi governments.
- Robert Shrimsley in the FT, has an amusing 43 point rebuttal of Cameron's statement.
Cameron's cunning plan for bombing Isis in Syria - FT.com
David Cameron has announced his intention to seek parliamentary approval for Britain to join the international forces bombing Isis strongholds in Syria. Assuming the prime minister wins that vote, raids will start in the next few weeks. He has- In their editorial, the Guardian proves that people who sit on the fence get splinters up their arse.
The Guardian view on David Cameron's Syria statement: a short but serious debate is required | EditorialThe scale and viciousness of the Islamic State project to reorder the world is becoming clearer every day. It has torn a gaping hole in the fabric of two Middle Eastern countries, dealt terrible blows to the economy and stability of others in that region, and threatens the integrity and the physical safety of European nations as well.- I made a story about the legality of the drone attacks
- Here's a Tornado, from flickr, CC BY-SA Defence Images 2011
- And here's another
