Following David Cameron's shock defeat in the House of Commons, and the Lords, Thursday, allied forces that may launch a military attack on Syria are having an enforced re-think. The USA will still be hell-bent on a military strike against Syria but as BBC News reports Friday "The US has said it will act in its "best interests" in dealing with the Syria crisis, after British MPs rejected military intervention."
At least perhaps that statement is closer to the truth. The Bull about easing the humanitarian crisis in Syria is pushed back as America says any action will be all about the best interests of the USA.
The BBC report continues: In a statement on Thursday, the White House said President Barack Obama's decision-making "will be guided by what is in the best interests of the United States". It stressed that the president "believes that there are core interests at stake for the United States". Well the USA best get busy warmongering then.
Perhaps it was PM Cameron driving the push for military strikes on Syria after all? If it was he badly misjudged the mood of the nation. Maybe taking less extended summer vacations would be a good course of action in the future, especially when he is holding telephone calls with Barack Obama and others about what could be a major conflict. Consulting with government and opposition ministers may have been prudent. Still hindsight is a wonderful thing.
In hindsight would the west have invaded Iraq and Afghanistan? Would America have used Agent Orange in Vietnam. Would they have even been in that country? Would the US have opted to drop two atom bombs on Japan or even one?
Russia Today reports: “Nobody disputes – or hardly anybody disputes – that chemical weapons were used on a large scale in Syria against civilian populations,” US President Barack Obama told a briefing Wednesday. “We have looked at all the evidence, and we do not believe the opposition possessed … chemical weapons of that sort.” Well what sort might they have Mr Obama? The ones your country supplied? The RT report continues comparing attacks by the USA saying:
The obscenity of such attacks is a reality Kerry is all too familiar with, as the decorated war veteran served at a time when the US was engaged in a decade of chemical warfare in Vietnam.
Thursday night Barack Obama and PM Cameron had a lesson in democracy. You know that vague political machine they advocate for the Middle East. Democracy is about the people and as Cameron, gracious in defeat said, "Iget it!". He accepted that the mood of both houses of parliament and the British people was a resounding NO to the prospect of military action at this time.
The west may have to consider each country's national security, and some may see a lack of military action against Syria, as weak or sending the wrong message about the use of chemical weapons. It does not. It sends a message about the burden of proof and a lack of trust in politicians, here and abroad.
Little wonder Obama and the UK establishment are running scared of whistle-blower Edward Snowden. Imagine what revelations may still be to come?
Former Lib Dem leader Paddy Ashdown, also a former member of the British miltary, looked almost ashamed on UK news Friday after the vote defeat. He said there seems little point in the UK having an army if we are not going to join forces and support our allies in conflict.
Foolishly Mr Ashdown we thought or armed forces were in place to protect us and only fight elsewhere in special circumstances. He was sad that as he sees it the UK military role is now stifled. Why? Do we have to be the world's conscience? Time for others to step up to the mark.