Simple, it's nothing to do with us, leave it.

On a mission from God?

So, Call Me Dave and 14 pints were all geared up for their Dr Strangelove moment, Parliament recalled to rubber-stamp their attack on Syria, until a phone conversation with Miliband at 5.15pm. The Labour leader said he would not give carte blanche approval for military intervention until the UN inspectors had at least reported back.



Rug pulled from underneath him, Cameron reverts to type and throws a hissy fit with No 10 and the Foreign Office describing Miliband as [url=http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3854838.ece"a f****** c*** and a copper-bottomed s***"[/url



In one afternoon, Miliband has shown more statesmanship than Cameron has displayed all Summer. Suddenly Cameron goes from his Churchill moment to a sad parody of Anthony Eden





If Ed can keep his head in this afternoon's debate, it should make interesting viewing/listening

Indeed.

We must also remember that there are factions involved who would easily turn upon each other once Assad had been deposed, it's not just one side against another.

e.g. Do we really want to side with or assist Al Quaeda against Assad?

The Speaker of the Syrian Parliament has written to John Bercow to the effect that Syria will sue those responsible in British courts if the UK attacks.



Assad may have no defence to our Cruise missiles, but given that we would be unlikely to have any defence to such a claim (that i can think of) if any strike was not mandated by the UN, that could be a fair few bob for the beleaguered UK taxpayer to find I should think.

If we attack Syria that's the Tory party added to the list of a party I'll never vote for joining Labour and the BNP.

Oh dear Mr. Cameron ! It would be a bit quick though to bomb Syria this quickly and what would they have done afterwards ? Maybe told President Assad to stop being a naughty boy ? It may be a case of can Cameron keep his head this afternoon.

What I find scary is despite the hard lessons of Iraq etc. I get the impression that had it not been for Miliband we and the US would probably have already fired a few squillion quids of gear at the Syrians. To "send a signal".



Wouldn't, say, a fax be both cheaper and clearer?



If it has to be signals, couldn't they do those big flashy light things off the battleships?



Why do our signals need to be a big fukoff bang, inevitably instantly killing and maiming a whole bunch of assorted Syrians in the wrong place at the wrong time?

What a strange idea you have of statesmanship. Egg Moribund had plenty of time to be well been briefed on the intelligence and legality of any proposed action and he firstly went on TV to give his and Labours support. Within 24 hours Egg did a U-turn which can only have been an attempt to gain political points to try and save his embarrasing summer or that he was leaned on by his political masters. Either way it shows muddled thinking and flaky leadership.

Cobblers.



"Intelligence" hasn't told Miliband or Cameron who perpetrated the attack (source : D.Cameron - in Parliament ten minutes ago, he says it's a question of judgement about who did it).

"Intelligence" has yet to determine even what chemical was involved.



The advice on legality has changed from day-to-day, what the UK government had thought on Tuesday night (i.e. it would be legal to strike at the regime) had changed by Wednesday morning (erm, it might not be).



Miliband has said all along that without legality he wouldn't vote for anything.

The Attorney General has made a clear case that the proposed action based on certain provisos to inforce international law is fully legal. Egg Moribund was made aware of the legality and has had an intelligence brief. But alas Egg has so far shown no ability to make sound judgement. So far the Labour party speakers seem hamstrung by guilt over their sorry record regarding Iraq 2003 ... that and an attempt to make political capital rather than national and international interest.

Labour (as well as everyone else) should definitely take lessons from the mistakes over Iraq, that IS sound judgement ... and that includes being careful not to put too much store by so-called intelligence, of which there is precious little anyway.



So far, Miliband's judgement is to wait for the UN team's report.

What's wrong with that?

Isn't that what we should have done before attacking Iraq?



What bothers me is that Miliband might, after getting that report, then agree with Cameron that missile strikes are justified.

I don't see how it is possible to damage one side without thereby assisting the other side.