No vote on Syria , amounts to granting Dictatorial Powers to May.

The Wasting Mule tells us that

The alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria has forced Welsh figures from across the political divide to confront the dilemma of how to respond.
Labour and Plaid Cymru figures have pushed for any proposed military action to be put to Parliament.
Meanwhile, it is understood Prime Minister Theresa May will summon her Cabinet on Thursday to discuss the Government's response to th crisis.
Former Foreign Minister and Labour Rhondda MP Chris Bryant said:

“We need clear tactical and strategic objectives for any military action which should be put to parliament to debate and decide.”

Bryant is hardly a peacenik but he reflects  a view amongst many that if the UK are going to take military action then it should be all our elected representatives in parliament to decide,

For some reason the Mule decided to dig up former  Foreign Minister and ex-Pontypridd Labour MP Kim Howells said it was “not at all clear” that Theresa May “can win a vote if she decides to put it to parliament”.

But Mr Howells said:

“I’m afraid that the awful thing is that if there isn’t some sort of military intervention then it does normalise the use of chemical warfare.”
“I don’t think that there’s any sense of an urgency in the Opposition towards this sort of stuff, so I can’t see Corbyn advising Labour to vote with the Government if indeed she puts the vote to Parliament.”

Mr Howells also doubted the extent of public appetite for an attack, saying: 

I don’t think that the great British public is up for military intervention abroad any longer. The experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan have bred a ‘little Britain’ mentality which I’m afraid allows or helps these murderous dictators to get away with terrible crimes with impunity.
“Who’s going to stop them? The United Nations is really a bust flush as far as taking any action to try and prevent dictators and people like Assad from murdering their own citizens. All it needs is a veto on the Security Council and that’s it, there is no action taken.”

Is Mr Howels reall saying that  although Parliament and indeed public opinion could be opposed to military action , then they should be ignored.

Is he thinking that we should be giving our Prime Minister dictatorial powers ?

 It seem to be a view that is shared by Montgomeryshire Conservative MP Glyn Davies who  did not support a recall of parliament to put the issue to MPs.
He said:

 “My view is that I expect the Prime Minister to take a very serious view of it and not agree to any form of military action unless she thinks it’s the right way to go... I’m not keen on MPs being given the vote...
“I just don’t think MPs are sufficiently informed and qualified and have access to the inevitably confidential information that is needed to make such a decision.”
He said the priority must be to ensure that military action “won’t make the situation worse and it will alleviate some of the unbelievable suffering”.

Well that's not going to happen .


I find the use of Chemical Weapons abhorrent, but also find the constant use of so called conventional weapons to be so.

How many UK manufactured "conventional"weapons have caused civilians deaths not just in Syria  but the rest of the Middle East.

The combatants on all sides (its not even two ) where thre appears to be no "Good Guys" have seem to have no problem in procuring weapons and ammunition'

I say there are no "Good Guys" but the most hopeful group in the conflict have been betrayed bt the West to the mercies of a Fascist Turkish Regime,

Lets have an audit of UK arms sales

• Who were they sold to?
• Have they  been passed or sold on  to another party?
• Have they been used and particularly have they been used against civilian?
• What controls (if any) are in place?

The sheer hypocrisy  of our  government  who appear to believe  that  bombing civilians with conventional weapons is acceptable, but draw the line at chemical weapons

To me Syria is a tragedy  and maybe  for once Monmouth Conservative MP David Davies is right when he said.

 “I think we should be asking ourselves what it is that we’re hoping to achieve and how we get there. That’s the basic question.
“Now, my thought is that we all want the bloodshed to end in Syria, and what is most likely to bring that to an end without causing a threat to the UK?”
He was wary of empowering extremists, arguing that “handing over the place to Isis isn’t going to work”.
The war isn’t going to end until one side has won, so one side has to win in order for the war to end.”

The problem is that the whole of the Middle East s developing into a Proxy War between the USA and Russia as they seek control of the Oil and Gas fields there.

To do this they empower odious groups on both sides and contribute to the deaths of thousands if not millions of civilians.

Escalating   it will not help and giving our Prime Minister to what amounts to dictatorial powers  is not going to aid civilians one iota