I was originally going to write this up last night, but I got distracted by FF XIV.
So in case you've been hiding under a rock - The UK held it's impromptu debate and vote in the commons last Thursday. It was a close call, but MPs voted to stay out of Syria.
Now, I'm not completely against military action in Syria. But I personally think leaping in this quickly is just a silly idea.
Yes, there are civilians suffering and getting displaced - but look at this way throwing more troops in there would cause a 3 way clusterfuck
In one corner, the Assad Regime, In the other, the rebels. And in another, the UK. Oh, and maybe the French. Also maybe the US.
Throwing more bombs into an already unstable and suffering country is not going to help in the slightest.
Aid and diplomatic negotiations at this point are the best bet until more evacuations take place.
I got quite mad at a fellow on Sunday Morning Live who was insisting that military intervention is the only way to help Syria, and shooting down any suggestion that aid and diplomatic negotiations would even be slightly useful.
Warmongers like him scare me. Thankfully the UK MPs have saved my opinion of the UK political scene, and they're not all war hungry nutters. Just that quite a few are.
My open question to the UK MPs who voted yes to military intervention in Syria:
Did we not seem to learn anything from Iraq or Afghanistan? Leaping in there before evidence was provided and now, 10 years later, we're still there. It turned out the whole WMD thing was a load of arse and now we're seemingly stuck there.
Do we want the same thing to happen in Syria? Defense budgets are already astronomical and we're spread everywhere, another international war zone is not a good thing. Sure, The West can be a force for good, but one thing we are not is the international police. (Even though the US seems to think it is exactly that)
Yes, we have a responsibility to help when we can, but charging in to an unstable area with guns blazing is not responsible. It's the opposite.