Parliament votes today on whether the United Kingdom should join in bombing ISIS in Syria. I am totally against this.
It will kill yet more wretched, innocent civilians
I don’t think it will work. How many bombing-only military campaigns have been successful? And it is unrealistic relying on the disparate Syrian rebel forces. Yes, a few ISIS leaders may get knocked out. But by now they will have probably scattered, or protected themselves with human shields. Even if ‘ISIS’ as such is weakened, it may pop up under another name or regroup, with the added strength of fighting in the name of freedom against Western imperialist intervention .
How long will it last? How much will it cost? Which unsavoury allies will we end up working with (or inadvertently assisting)? Assad? Putin? Are we trying other, peaceful steps, like pressurising other Middle East countries to stop assisting ISIS? (Or are we too afraid of losing our cheap oil?) Is this a step towards creating the urgently needed Middle East conference – or a step closer to more serious war?
Yes, we can be outraged and saddened by the Paris carnage, but does this give us the right to police the Middle East? We, who have in many ways contributed to the problems by our greedy carving up of the region and interventions since the First World War. (Not to mention exacerbating problems with ghettos of disaffected, unemployed sub-citizens). We are not the world’s policemen. The United Nations are. And don’t think that the Security Council resolution is a green light for bombing.
Britain wants to show solidarity with France. But not by bombing please my view is that France was equally at fault with its quick military riposte. This means war, said Hollande – somebody with his back against the wall and the Front National sniffing at two huge chunks of la Republique
Finally, does joining in the war games make Britons at home safer – or more exposed to hatred, revenge, and lunatic random acts of violence?