NO

we can't add very much to the efforts

we have no idea who we want to run the place - we're just getting into the messiest civil war for a long time

Melchett

If you think that working with JaN/AQ is sustainable you need to do some research on JaN atrocities in this conflict.

They too behead regime soldiers/militia and slaughter Alawites. Yes they've worked with "moderates", but these "moderates" are still Islamists. They've also brokered deals with secular opposition groups, invited them into their HQ, then executed them.

Not an organisation we should be working with.

I'd assume the opposite.

I suspect there's no such formal contingency. I imagine that, should the capability be needed, it will be scraped together late in the game and involve a (relatively) unwitting ground invasion of Syria. Not sure that all the consequences have been thought through. :sad:

No
 

Economic sanctions to starve IS of money, guns, ammo and fuel more effective than a few bombs dropped for political effect.

President Edorgan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and others guilty as charged.

Interesting to see a series of letters in today's Torygraph mirroring this thread even down to objective, ROE etc.

'Bombing' is rather an all-encompassing description.

In fact, surgical use of Brimstone would bring a dimension which no other air force or navy can currently offer. Hellfire is crude in comparison and is far more likely to cause collateral damage than Brimstone.

"not an organisation we should be working with..." That applies to pretty much every player, downsizer

Looks like Jezza is going to give his lot a freebie. Very interesting. They usually only get a freebie if it doesn't matter much.

I'm with BEagle. We will not be bombing Syria. We will be contributing a unique capability to a fight we are already part of but which is currently constrained by a meaningless line on a map. Yes.

Bomb "Syria": no,

Bomb ISIS in Syria (or Iraq or wherever else they present an inviting target): yes.

ISIS will not stop. They cannot stop. A Caliphate has been declared.

Al-Baghdadi is the Caliph, it's not just that he may not want to stop, he is not allowed to.

A Caliph/Caliphate cannot respect borders, a Caliphate covers the whole world. If he does, he is in error and may be deposed. He cannot decide that "that's enough, let's stop here", he is not allowed to. A Caliph is required to make conquest until the whole world is conquered.

This article has its flaws, but does explain neatly why ISIS and Al-Baghdadi will not stop:

What ISIS Really Wants - The Atlantic

To be Caliph, he must have "authority", which is usually held to mean territory. Without authority, there is no Caliphate. Drive Al-Baghdadi off his territory, and there can be no Caliphate.

Wipe them out.

Before we try to give IS a kicking….

Labour MPs to get free vote on Syria - BBC News

I might be wrong but haven't we been bombing ISIS in Iraq, for what seems to be a lifetime, and they are still there. Everyone has seen videos and heard stories of our jets returning with their loads and also the stories of expensively transporting very expensive guided weapons and dropping them on insignificant targets

In fact the 'allied' forces which had been bombing ISIS in Syria for a year inexplicably missed the mile long lines of ISIS oil tankers sitting in the desert which were providing ISIS with the funds to continue their operations. It took the Russian's can-do attitude to actually start taking them out, I'm convinced if it weren't for them the tankers would still be carrying on undeterred.

If the conflict was not so contrived and if there was no doubt that bombing would not creep into a regime changing job I would be more enthusiastic. I still remember what happened in Libya, and the crock of s##t that ended up creating. We did such a bad job no-one dares mention it anymore!

As you can tell, I'm not that hopeful that if we join in it will all end well in a short time.

I agree with BEagle and Genstabler. In addition to Brimstone there is also the RAPTOR capability. Yes.

Yes is winning the debate/
 

I think that's 14 "no" to bombing and 24 "yes" at 18.22 30/11/2015 my local time. But the yes camp clearly ahead.. I think 3 or 4 undecided as yet...Very interesting, wonder if parliament will be closer? I'll try and count it up around when the H of P HOC vote goes down.

A question to all the 'Yes' people here.

Who are the feet on the ground in Syria?

Yes, I am not a politician just my opinion.

No
 

NO.

As an ex Strike/Attack pilot with at least one tour in the Middle East under my belt + time with the MNPKF Lebanon in 1984 I understand a little about the area. Why have I said no?

1. Bombing will not solve this problem.
2. There are sufficient air assets already in the area.
3. To identify targets and be successful in this task we need effective intelligence and post attack info. At present, with no professional forces in that area we don't have that vital data.
4. The BBC today interviewed civilians in the towns and were told that much collateral damage was taking place.
5. I accept that the so-called Islamic State does pose a significant threat to the UK, but there are better ways to protect our island.
6. We do need ground forces in the area, but I cannot envisage the UK, France or the US committing to that.
7. The threat is not solely in Syria, but world wide.

I'm sure that you can think of many more reason why the UK should not bomb in Syria.

100% agree, no-one involved has clean hands.

I like watching shia terrorist organisation killing sunni terrorist organistation, hence why I think we should leave the mess alone.

No - I think we should leave Syria to the Russians and French and we should concentrate on working with the Iraqis and clean out ISIS in Iraq.

No
If we did join in the bombing, whose side are we on ?
Anti Assad..... er No Wasn't that a No decision a couple of months ago
With the Russians and Iranians ? Could be.
70 odd thousand Free Syrian Army ? They could be Cameron's future WMD millstone.
Trouble with Corbyn is that I'm afraid he's right on this one !
Mark me as a No