Military Intervention in Syria

Lord Hylton

The following was sent by email to the Prime Minster on the day before this country took part in combined military attacks in Syria.  A reply will no doubt come in due course: 

“Despite the approval of the Cabinet, I remain opposed to this, after visiting Syria three times since 2015.  If it was wrong to intervene in 2013, what has since changed to make it right now?  Why should the matter be settled without reference to the House of Commons, whose vote in 2013 was decisive?

 

What will be achieved by limited strikes?  Surely not the removal of President Assad, who will only have more support from the Syrian people, in reaction to yet more foreign attacks.

 

I am not convinced that military targets, such as gas production plants, missile and aircraft bases, can be identified sufficiently accurately so as to prevent civilian casualties.

 

Major attacks by aircraft or missiles will cause even more destruction than has already occurred (which is considerable).  A situation could arise, which would call for a major UN Land Force to separate combatants and to provide the conditions for peace-building.  I strongly doubt whether such a force, which would have to be large, could be organized and effectively deployed.

 

I do not think we should be driven by a wish to please the United States, particularly under its current President.  It would be better to heed the advice of Peter Ford and other previous British Ambassadors to Syria.”

 

 

3 comments for “Military Intervention in Syria

  1. maude elwes
    18/04/2018 at 3:42 pm

    It was extraordinary to watch the horrendous response of MP’s in the Commons, after further bombing of Syria last weekend. In fact, it was shocking watching the glee with which they exposed their inadequacy as representatives of our nation.

    How could they cheer when war mongering and war itself is ‘failure.’ No matter what form it takes, war is ‘failure’ not ‘success.’ It is a shameful act. The ignorance of what we are offered as government officials today is a crime against humanity.

    How dare they put our country in a position of possible nuclear war and deny the imbeciles, whom we were stupid enough to vote for, to have a voice ‘before’ they take such drastic action. If that was not illegal then it should be. And if it is illegal, then the only answer has to be to bring back the death penalty for such flagrant criminality. And, I am not for a death penalty, but, Blair got away with lying to his voters to take us to war in Iraq, a horrible crime, and here he is back again. All too ready to rub our noses in it, showing how untouchable he and those willing to do this, are. Do we need more of his evil perpetrated on our people repeatedly this way.

    And here is a link to US clear thinking, not the work of RT at all.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTtAm0OHW24

    Further, to pretend that had government had to seek a vote it would have meant our men in danger, is a farce. Leaders of far more integrity and courage than any we have today, allowed the people of their homeland the knowledge that they had taken them to war, was clear and to the point.

    Heads should hang in shame for this, not gloat like drooling inbreeds.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtJ_zbz1NyY

  2. 18/04/2018 at 8:52 pm

    The UK conservatives are also in malfeasant neglect,
    by not making their leader PM Theresa May consult at least the whole of our two Parliament Houses
    before
    “PM-unilaterally taking us the UK People complicitly into an offshore and foreign-countries’ war” –

    and, shouldn’t the Queen ‘anyway’ also be constitutionally active, as our last-protector ?
    by not approving such ‘dictatorial’ war-making by the PM –
    but by the two Parliament Houses too if their majorities approve such “going-to-war’ * ?
    ——————–
    * Recall the British “constitutionally-legal”
    mono-domineering-adversary Judiciary professional intention
    of its lawyers and solicitors
    expressed in its slogan

    “Let’s you and them fight” –

    at enormous costs in money, labour, suffering, and wastage of all-three
    Time,
    personal human-energies,
    and collectively constructive-peacefulness

    and constitutionally without existentionally legal recourse
    to the peaceful first-resort
    of the participative and faciltatedly-formal
    “No-Lose Method lll Cooperative Problem Solving “ easy 5 or 6-steps ;

    And remember please the words of President John F. Kennedy :
    “Those who are not supporting peaceful revolution are supporting bloody ones”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *