The Commons Have Voted Against War With Syria

[Gromit]

David Cameron's plans for war have been rejected in a House of Commons vote tonight. The Hovernment have lost control of its own foreign policy and Dave has been dealt a humiliating defeat, which will embarrass him abroad.

Common sense prevails?

[grumpy01]

Come on Mikey this is a bit different.Britain had promised to stand by Poland in 1939, in the Middle East we have not promised to stand by anyone.

[LazyGun]

@Slapshot in this instance, when he has been forced to give an assurance to Parliament - then its not so much trust as the the negative publicity should he try and exercise that royal prerogative.

Ed Milliband has effectively denied him that option, were he even considering it.

[naomi24]

Mikey, have you changed your mind - again?

[Gromit]

Youngmafbog
The Daily Mail's coverage of yesterday's events is actually very good, and does not agree with you.

// The humbling of David Cameron: On a momentous night, Tory rebellion forces Prime Minister to rule out military strike against Syria... and plunges him into a deep political crisis.

David Cameron’s authority in Parliament and on the world stage was dealt an unprecedented blow last night as he faced a breathtaking Commons defeat  over plans for missile strikes on Syria.
In an extraordinary assault on the Prime Minister’s authority, 50 coalition MPs voting against a watered-down Government motion supporting the ‘principle’ of military action. //

// PM's authority in Parliament and on world stage dealt unprecedented blow 

Shouts of 'resign' from Labour benches as 285-272 vote was announced

Last time any PM was defeated over issue of war and peace was in 1782

Downing Street source says David Cameron has no intention of resigning

Gove allegedly shouted at Tory rebels outside chamber: 'You're a disgrace' //

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2406208/Syria-conflict-Tory-rebellion-forces-Prime-Minister-David-Cameron-rule-military-strike-country.html#ixzz2dR7X6jOn

[anneasquith]

history in the making last night.............not one of DC finest days :(

[mikey4444]

I haven't changed my mind one little bit ! Parliament has now shut the door on Britain taking any decisive action, no matter what the UN are going to tell us in a few days time. As I say, a good day for democracy but a bad day for innocent children in Syria.

We have now said to Assad that it doesn't matter what he does, Britain will stand by and watch him to commit more atrocities with complete impunity.

I have nothing further to add.

[Slapshot]

....and in 1939 there was a hell of lot more at risk. Anyway...Britain needed to do something after years and years of appeasement allowing Hitler to build Germany into the power it was in 1939

[Gromit]

Youngmafbog


// Perhaps you would have been happy if, like labour (Blair), it was foreced through against the will of the people. //

There seems to be some kind of myth developing that Blair took us to war against our will. That is totally false. People were more evenly divided about our involvement in Iraq, but more crucially, Parliament voted for it with a huge majority despite many Labour MPs voting against the Labour Government. A great many Tories voted for our military involvement in Iraq

The 2003 Commons vote result:

For: 217 
Against: 396 

Majority in favour of military intervention: 179

[grumpy01]

Also Gromit you could have added the last part of Max Hastings article.//Almost the worst part of the fiasco is that one day we shall need to deploy our shrunken armed forces against a real threat from a real foreign enemy.
And because our leaders have so often deceived us in the past, crying wolf amongst their own hubristic delusions and pretensions,the British people will not believe them.
That will indeed be a tragic day,and Mr.Cameron has followed Blair in bringing it upon us.//

[Gromit]

// We have now said to Assad that it doesn't matter what he does, Britain will stand by and watch him to commit more atrocities with complete impunity. //

The Assads have been in power in Syria since 1971. We have stood by and watched for over 40 years.

[naomi24]

Perhaps that indicates that a lot of water has gone under the bridge since then – and lessons have been learned – albeit slowly.

[mikey4444]

Now that Parliament have ruled out taking military action against Assad and his murderous regime, what can be done to persuade him not to use chemical or any other weapons of mass destruction against innocent civilians in the future ?

[Gromit]

Sorry, i have pronted the result of the defeated rebel amendment in 2003, above.

The vote result in favour of intervention in Iraq was:

For: 412
Against: 149
Majority: 263

[jim360]

Why do the deaths of women and children matter any more, or why are they so much more horrific, than those of men? There was a wonderful post about this somewhere else yesterday that amounted to an observation that "women and children" were only more tragic victims because in the past they were unable to defend themselves. But war has moved on -- and men are no more able to defend themselves against a chemical weapon than women are. We should be sad and appalled by people dying, not trapped by some weird idea than if it were only men dying that is somehow OK, or more legitimate, or less horrific, than all the women and children who are also victims.

I''m saddened by the result of the vote, but now that it has been cast I hope or two things: that the result is honoured, and that the decision may be at least reviewed and even changed if circumstances in Syria continue to deteriorate.

[Peter Pedant]

Jim, as above - the hacks are talking about party discipline - in that if the sheep had been correctly trained they would have trooped into the 'aye' lobby.

and i dont think it is -

I think it is about being lied to and people refusing to act on the liar's further advice. OK Cameron has replaced Bliar
but that I think it the main issue.

It is a we-are-where-we-are situation and if Iraq and the lying hadnt occurred there is no doubt we would be somewhere else ( viz Syria).

Oh God as I speak the Beeb Hack doesnt know that the League of Nations was the predecessor of the UN......

[Gromit]

I am certain that MPs last night were condeming Blair as much as Cameron.

The similarities were striking.
- A dodgy dossier
- Inconclusive weapons inspections
- No UN mandate.

Blair could swing it because he had a huge Commons majority. Cameron has no huge majority, and MPs were not in the mood to fall for the same scam.

[LazyGun]

@Mikey The impulse to act to avert human suffering is a worthy one - but I cannot believe that a "limited military strike" of the sort that the US or the UK were envisioning - tomahawk missiles to knock and command and control centres, or even targeted strikes on chemical weapons storage or manufacturing capabilities - will prove a "decisive intervention".

Recent history of interventions tells us exactly the opposite - such incursions almost always result in a greater loss of life in consequence.

Trsgically, a civil war cannot be resolved with a solution from the outside. It has to run its course. We should of course continue with diplomatic efforts via the UN and in discussions with Russia and China and Iran, but if the US wishes to embark upon yet another military adventure without the support of the UN or their closest allies either because of an incautious comment from Obama about "red lines", or for some murky geopolitical reason aimed at bolstering Israel and weakening Iran, we should let them go it alone this time.

[mikey4444]

The principle reason that Cameron lost last nights vote by 14 votes was that 30 or so of his own MPs voted against him. Ed and the LibDems did their bit of course but the quantity of his own rebel MPs was very highly significant. But only 557 MPs turned up. I wonder what would have happened if all 650 MPs had taken part ? I haven't seen the exact voting, MP by MP, nor am I sure where to get the info...can anybody help here ?

I expect Boris has an even bigger smile on his face this morning !

[jomifl]

I can't see how he is embarrassed, I suspect that he actually didn't want to get involved because we don't have the resources. Now he can say to the USA 'sorry I did my best but that's democracy for you'.

[anotheoldgit]

Now that Parliament has come to the correct decision, many are saying that we have lost face with America and France, but who cares.

Now we should show the world that instead of supplying arms or feet on the ground, we can help in other ways, perhaps we should first start by supplying the people of Syria with gas masks.

When we went to war in 1939 we didn't know if the Germans might use gas, so the nation was kitted out with gas masks, but not by the US I might add, but I wonder what their response would have been if gas had been used by the Germans at that time, would they have then rushed to get involved sooner?