No To Bombing Syria

The storm clouds are once more building as the dogs of war prepare for air strikes on Syria. Cameron was in full throat in the Commons, arguing why it is right to bomb another country, that this is the only way to defeat ISIS and we will make Britain safe by doing so. The rhetoric and sound-bites are the 2731133 31.10.2015 Многофункциональный истребитель-бомбардировщик Воздушно-космических сил РФ Су-34 взлетает с авиабазы "Хмеймим" в Сирии. Дмитрий Виноградов/РИА Новостиeasy option; the difficult option is finding a peace.

No one can feel anything but deep shock at the downing of the Russian passenger jet, killing all 224 people on board; no one will forget the slaughter of 130 human beings enjoying a night out in Paris. But if Cameron believes that bombing yet another country will solve the problem of terrorism then he is delusional. Revenge may be sweet but it is only a pretext used to cover up an absence of any genuine solution.

From the first Iraq war in 1990 western foreign policy has been to bomb a region first and seek a political solution second. Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya were all bombed back to the dark ages and now it is the turn of Syria, on the pretext of eradicating ISIS.

None of the campaigns have achieved any stability; in fact they have only made the situation worse. The current refugee crisis is, on the whole, the creation of western foreign policy and yet they keep making the same mistakes.

Look at the contrast with Iran, long viewed as a rogue “terrorist” state, yet agreement was sought and gained on the vexatious issue of nuclear proliferation. They were not bombed to the table – agreement was gained through negotiation and compromise.

The lies of Cameron hark back to those of Blair. Cameron claimed in Parliament that there were 70,000 members of the Syrian free army who could be called upon to defeat ISIS. This is ludicrous and fails to stand up to scrutiny. The only forces capable of defeating ISIS on the ground are the Syrian Army who support Assad and/or Hezbollah, while the Kurds could have an impact if only Turkey would stop bombing them.

Whether Cameron and his fellow travellers in the Labour Party like it or not, British foreign policy over the last three decades has failed the region. It is time for a new approach, that of diplomacy, that of dialogue. If not, then many more innocents across the world will die needlessly.

The Workers’ Party Twitter Feed

GMB express concern over jobs of 146,000 staff; as Walmart sell Asda to billionaire Issa brothers & a private equity company. Asda is priced at £6.8 billion, Walmart will still hold a minority stake; £4b is to be borrowed.

Liberals & many on the 'left' exaggerate differences between Trump & Biden; click to see what would make a real difference.
There is no effective “freedom” in a society in which working people live in poverty & billionaires live like parasites.

Biden opposed moves to rebuild Afghanistan, advising a policy of fighting terrorism in the country. He also opposed withdrawal of US troops, which Trump carried out.’s-comments-rile-afghans-internationals


@theworkerorguk Which international conflicts has biden spoken more violently than trump on? Evidence please.

Biden's regime will hold on to enclaves in the North East and work alongside Turkish invaders, continuing sanctions against the Syrian government. In general, Biden wants US global leadership, which he sees as being diminished by Trump's inconsistencies.


@theworkerorguk Which international conflicts has biden spoken more violently than trump on? Evidence please.

Biden intends to have tighter sanctions on DPRK, and to have stricter preconditions with respect to engaging on talks. The Democrat's president also intends to strengthen an alliance against North Korea.


@theworkerorguk Which international conflicts has biden spoken more violently than trump on? Evidence please.

Load More...

All text on this site is copyright The Workers' Party of Britain. Established 2006