To bomb or not bomb Isis?

Don't Bomb Syria

Don’t Bomb Syria

You should not be walking through the lobbies with Jeremy Corbyn and a bunch of terrorist sympathisers. — David Cameron

David Cameron … knows that opposition to his ill-thought-out rush to war is growing. On planning, strategy, ground troops, diplomacy, the terrorist threat, refugees and civilian casualties, it’s become increasingly clear the prime minister’s proposal simply doesn’t stack up. — Jeremy Corbyn

Cameron’s approach is bomb first, talk later. But instead of adding British bombs to the others now raining down on Syria, what’s needed is an acceleration of the peace talks in Vienna. — Jeremy Corbyn

To bomb or not bomb Isis, that be the question put to British Parliamentarians on Wednesday (tomorrow).

They were given a similar motion two years ago, to bomb or not bomb Syria,  only that time the target was Assad not Isis, and Parliament said no.

The question arises from the Paris atrocities, where one Friday night two and a half weeks ago, innocent people, mainly Parisians, were gunned down, massacred, for no other crime than out on a Friday night enjoying themselves. They were killed in a well orchestrated military-style operation,  Muslim fundamentalist trained by Isis.

Something must be done.

For the French, within days, airstrikes against Isis.

For the British, airstrikes against Isis.

No one pauses to ask the very obvious question, what will airstrikes achieve?

Russia has been bombing Syria since end of September. It has made not a jot of difference.

US has been bombing Isis for over a year. During that period, Isis has expanded the territory they control. American pilots are returning with full payload, they can find nothing to bomb.

Isis is a de-facto state that straddles Iraq and Syria. Except it has no easily identifiable control structures.

In saying there is no border between Iraq and Syria, David Cameron is correct.

Syria and and Iraq no longer exist. They never really did exist, lines on a map drawn by the French and British after the collapse of The Ottoman Empire.

In the north, Kurdistan, a state in all but name.

Isis, straddling what was Iraq and Syria, a state in all but name.

The government in Iraq, does not even control Baghdad.

In Syria, Assad has tenuous control over parts of the country, and even then only through brutal repression.

The illegal war conducted by war criminals Tony Blair and George W Bush destroyed Iraq.  Out of the chaos arose Al-Qaeda, then Isis.

Bombing of Libya has destroyed the country.

Assad has carried out brutal repression of his own people, including bombing them. Into the void has arisen Isis.

Saudi Arabia brutal regime

Saudi Arabia brutal regime

Isis is a brutal regime, but no more brutal than the Corrupt House of Saud, both carry out public be-headings, both bastardise women, both have adopted a perversion of Islam. Saudi Arabia is a brutal barbaric regime that exports terrorism and its perversion of Islam.

Assad has killed more people than Isis.

What will yet more bombing achieve?

Isis has changed tactics, no longer driving around in convoys, no easy targets.

We know it will mean more civilian deaths.  According to the Ceasefire Centre for Civilian Rights and the Minority Rights Group International bombing of Isis in Iraq and Syria has already led to more than 4000 civilians killed this year.

Those who are opposing the bombing, are not friends of Isis or terrorists, they are simply recognising the futility of bombing. They also recognise it will make the situation worse.

Have we learnt nothing from our interventions in the Middle East? Often on a lie as with Iraq, or no intelligent debate as with Libya (and now seems likely with Syria)?

An idiot Tory on the World Tonight, claimed bombing Isis in Iraq had made a difference. Isis still occupies Mosul, they have taken more towns, and were on the verge of taking Baghdad.

David Cameron is correct when he says we are already at risk. Massacre on the beach in Tunisia, downing of a Russian plane in Egypt, massacres in Paris, not to mention the many atrocities in the Middle East.

Bombing Isis will not make us safe, it will make us less safe.  Following the attacks on Iraq, the number of terrorist attacks have increased, and MI5 had to have its budget doubled. Following the Paris attacks, the intelligence agencies have received more funding, as have the police.

Bombing Isis will not destroy Isis, but it will lead to more civilians killed, more terrorist attacks.

Isis most likely already have their fanatics in place, awaiting instructions.

Jeremy Corbyn and Caroline Lucas have argued we should cut off the funding. Yes we should, we should target Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States and Turkey, all supply money, people and weapons. Turkey buys oil from Isis, allows the free flow of money, weapons, people and oil across its border with Syria.

Whilst this is a necessary condition, it is not a sufficient condition. Isis is self-funded. It has plenty of money. It also does not need lots of money to expand. Kalishnikovs,  rocket-propelled grenades, hand-held missile launchers. All are readily available on the black market.

We have to talk. But who to?

Saudi Arabia, Gulf States, Turkey and Iran, have to stop meddling.

Isis will not talk.

The people we can talk to are the tribal groups, the only real power on the ground.

If we wish to defeat Isis we have to send in troops on the ground. Not the mythical forces David Cameron refers to, forces everyone knows do not exist.

But assuming we defeat Isis, what then?

We have to stay and rebuild the region, build democratic structures that have never existed before. The physical structure can be rebuilt by the local people.

None of this is being put forward by David Cameron. Just bomb Isis in the hope it will achieve something, even though all the evidence, all the past experience, tells us it will not.

Jeremy Corbyn has granted his MPs a free vote. Why does David Cameron lack the courage to grant a free vote? If his argument is so strong, why do his MPs have to be bullied into voting to bomb Isis?

Disgraceful comments by David Cameron saying those who join with Jeremy Corbyn and oppose bombing are ‘a bunch of terrorist sympathisers’. What would expect from Murdoch and The Sun. Only shows how low Cameron will stoop.

Whilst MPs debate, events are overtaking them. US has announced a permanent new US “expeditionary” force that would operate independently of local troops in Iraq and Syria for the first time. Until now, American forces have been trainers and advisers.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: