Warning against a parliamentary vote on UK air strikes against Islamic State militants in Syria, Tim Farron has commented:
Our Prime Minister should take the lead in constructing a lasting peace with a strategy geared towards rebuilding Syria rather than constantly seeking to build a parliamentary majority for counterproductive military action.
More and more bombs are not the answer. Adding extra war will simply create a bigger stream of refugees justifiably looking to escape. I have seen the consequences in Lesvos: hundreds of thousands of people fleeing their homes, desperate to find safety.
* News Meerkat - keeping a look-out for Liberal Democrat news. Meerkat photo by Paul Walter
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Dominika the roving Braybrooke skunk is found again - in Corby
Starmer kills off Leveson two
Michael's weekly ward surgeries today! #dundeewestend
Bye bye coal: A Net Zero milestone
Helen Dudden
Roland
Suzanne Fletcher
Joseph Bourke
Steve Trevethan
10 Comments
Constructing a lasting peace while ISIS are rampaging through big chunks of Syria is going to be rather difficult. Perhaps Tim could help the worlds leaders and explain how this can be achieved without military action. Better still perhaps we should send all the worlds leaders on a day trip to Lesvos a so they can all become experts on Syria’s problems.
Why when the Iraqi government ask for air support against ISIS to help prevent genocide of Yazidis, mass-murder and rape, it is OK to help them… but when the Syrian government ask for air support against ISIS to help prevent genocide of Alawites, mass-murder and rape it isn’t OK to help them? What’s the logical rationale for refusing the Syrian government’s plea for military help against ISIS?
Does anyone here seriously think that the Syrian government only wants air support if it’s accompanied by “boots on the ground”? In fact, does anyone here seriously think that the Syrian government really wants *any* boots on the ground, given their suspicion of long-term Western motives in the area? The small “l” liberal response to this crisis is becoming an incoherent mess.
On the subject of peace and war – there was a vote on Trident in Holyrood yesterday. Could the Lib Dem voice editors please tell us how and why the four Lib Dem MPS that voted voted in the way they did.
I was annoyed and in a rush at first yesterday, but someone needs to explain why suddenly bombs are bad and apparently only bullets are good. Or is it not to do with weapons and down to multilateralism versus unilateralism?
I used to believe in diplomacy first too, and it should be tried at first, but once I saw Turkey demanding that Assad leaves and Iran and Russia demanding that he stays, against the will of Saudi Arabia too, then it suddenly becomes clear that waiting for consensus can take a very long time (Israel-Palestine?) and in these circumstances we should look out for our national interest, which I think is sanctions on Russia and Iran (plus Assad) and specific airstrikes against ISIS and other direct threats.
I don’t mind people saying it is a regional problem and we should stay our of it, but if you think that then say so, don’t morally judge others who are risking their own safety or come out with quasi-pacifist statements that we aren’t used to and expect us to just go along with it. Regards
Yes all leaders should have a taste of Lesvos. Assad is a man ,he can be removed. Isis is a cruel believe, this is harder to defeat, all resources should be used to defeat this.
The promilitary action commentators ought to reflect on the lessons of Afghanistan and the impact and effect on British servicemen and their families of those killed and wounded. We are no longer an imperial power despite the delusions of the Tory party.
…………………we should look out for our national interest, which I think is sanctions on Russia and Iran (plus Assad) and specific airstrikes against ISIS and other direct threats……………
So, on the one hand, we should weaken Assad and his supporters; which will strengthen ISIS…And, on the other hand, we should weaken ISIS which will strengthen Assad….
You are David Cameron and I claim my £10…
“Adding extra war will simply create a bigger stream of refugees justifiably looking to escape. I have seen the consequences in Lesvos: hundreds of thousands of people fleeing their homes, desperate to find safety.”
The first statement makes no sense; the second is a non-sequitir.
If people feel threatened enough they will become refugees; “extra war” (whatever that is) or not. People in Syria feel threatened by their government and by ISIS.
It would be foolish to add to the confusion already happening in Syria .Or are we all prepared for the consequences of the Turkish shooting down a Russian pilot or the Syrians shooting down an American pilot or worst still friendly fire killing one of our own. This needs diplomacy first not more military intervention .We have a mandate in Iraq because we were invited in .Air cover supported by local troops on the ground to degrade ISIL is a practical proposition .Syria will have to wait until there is an international agreement with the main protagonist US and Russia on how ISIL can be both contained and degraded and then a negotiated peace towards a new transitional government in Syria can be established .
I agree with Tim! There is no legal basis for western airstrikes on ISIS – the legitimate government of Syria doesn’t want us anywhere near his country.