SHARE

A British nuclear submarine has reportedly been ordered to move within missile range of Syria, as strikes against the Assad regime are expected as early as Thursday night.

Prime Minister Theresa May said that London will join any punitive strike against the Syrian regime. May added that she will not be seeking a vote in parliament to authorise British participation in any forthcoming strike agianst Syria.

According to the Daily Telegraph:

“The Daily Telegraph has learnt that Mrs May has ordered British submarines to move within missile range of Syria in readiness for strikes against the Assad regime that could begin as early as Thursday night.

The Prime Minister has recalled ministers from their Easter break to attend an emergency Cabinet meeting this afternoon.”

British nuclear submarines of the Trafalgar and Astute class are armed with 1,000 mile range Tomahawk cruise missiles.

The Tomahawk missile allows the Royal Navy’s submarines to strike at targets on land. The missile has been in use with the RN since the late 1990s and has been used in the Kosovo conflict and in the campaigns against the Taliban, Saddam Hussein and in Libya. It is fired from a boat’s torpedo tubes. Once it reaches the surface, a booster rocket ignites to propel the missile skywards. Tomahawk then heads for its target at 550 mph, delivering a 1,000 lb explosive warhead.

The Tomahawk IV is the latest version of the missile. It has a longer range than its predecessors and can be directed at a new target in-flight, and can also beam back images of the battlefield. In British service it is fitted to all Trafalgar and Astute class submarines.

The UK last bought 65 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles in July 2014.

103 COMMENTS

  1. Wow, nothing like telling the enemy what we are up to. What ever happened to be like mum keep stum.
    F-ing ingrates

    • Evening
      No news, papers stating the obvious – we have a sub in med.
      We also have aircraft in Cyprus.
      It what we are going to do with them is going to be the news.

    • To be fair farouk it was predictable.

      Same in the Balkans, Afghanistan and I think Iraq.

      British SSNs joining initial attacks with a token contribution.

      Followed possibly by airstrikes, Voyager and RC 135 assistance, and ISTAR assets.

      Happily all nearby to Troodos and Ayios Nikolios for us to monitor events.

      • A nuclear submarine firing long range missiles at another sovereign state is hardly a “token” act, it is deeply serious.

    • Not nearly as bad as Trump’s idiotic tweet yesterday…

      “Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and “smart! …”

      Nice job you brain-dead moron. In reality Trump is probably too dumb to have grasped what is actually going to happen so his tweet might well be empty rhetoric but if it is true that the upcoming attack is going to use new and presumably previously classified smarter TLAM he’s just let the Russians know that they should move as many intelligence gathering assets as they can into the area to analyse a new US weapon – maximum on-station satellite surveillance, EM and other monitoring capabilities from ships, air and land, more exotic stealth-defeating radar etc.

      Let the Russian data collection begin so that they have a chance to get ten times as much information about a new weapons system than they would have otherwise got. Thanks Trump.

      • Hi Julian
        I feel for the intern that has to monitor his tweets through the night, imagine the phone call to the Sec Def “hi Sir, ummm – the president has been tweeting again and ummm, you may want to wake up the Joint Chiefs”

    • nothing new here, with international tensions as they are, i’d have expected we’d have one there anyway and another in the gulf

    • Sadly, it appears that all is not what it seems in the (Newsnight) Kremlin? Will a Russian entanglement in any hostile exchange with the West, be an acceptable risk to all government parties? One other question, does Putin have the ultimate power to sanction such an engagement? There are some doubts about who really pulls the strings!

      I’m sure diplomatic activity is at play big-time behind the scenes; as there is too much at stake on both sides. However, to allow any slackening on chemical engagement would throw the whole weapons balance into a spin.

  2. Evening all
    Busy night ahead for some.
    The next couple of hours should be interesting.
    PM does not need parliament approval, government has a mandate to govern.

    • Quite right too.

      I was pleased she rejected Corbyn’s demands.
      Royal prerogative as the PM to deploy our forces as she sees fit.

        • Dean that is nonsense. The government, that being the PM and Cabinet, make decisions not Corbyn and Parliament in these circumstances.

          As for your second sentence, if you think we all live happily ever after by lying on our backs and sticking our heads in the sand to avoid trouble you’re in for a few rude surprises in life.

          Speak Softly, and carry a big stick.

    • She’s not even a legitimate PM. Her Government is being propped up by the hard right terrorist supporting DUP.

    • she still has to run it past her majesty though as she is the head of the armed forces and has a very big say in approving or not…

      • No monarch has the authority to impede on a decision by an elected representative. Tbf, they can, but it would blow up in their face because the public do not want to live in a monarchy.

      • The queen would always agree to anything proposed to her by the PM. She knows the PM has a mandate from the people to govern and won’t try to hinder that. Its why were a constitutional, not an absolute, monarchy.

    • Lee H – you have absolutely no understanding of representative democracy and you certainly haven’t been paying much attention over the last twenty years while the ‘executive’ has been sucking up power from Parliament. A most Bristish coup!

      • I would rather say Parliament has committed hara kiri by delegating the EU Brexit decision to a referendum. The post war German constitution does not allow referenda. They learned their lesson from the 1930s. It is easy to wind people up. Once you have given up your responsibilities it is hard to recover. It is easy if you know how for a determined lobby group to work Westminster and get what you want.

      • Hi Jo
        The power to commit troops in armed conflict is one of the remaining Royal Prerogatives – that is powers that are derived from the Crown rather than conferred on them by Parliament. There is no codified parliamentary procedure that formally requires the Government to seek approval before taking military action. The Prime Minister and Cabinet retain the constitutional right to decide when and where to authorise action.

        Sorry to burst the bubble
        What power has the executive been “sucking up”
        British Coup? From whom exactly?

    • I agree it’s not ideal.

      Do you think we should ignore what happened in Syria?

      Or do you suspect it was not Assad at all, maybe Israel to get the USA to do their work for them?

      • No I fully believe it was assad. I just can’t see how creating a nuclear war, due to a chemical attack makes much sense.

      • Do you have actual evidence it was Assad Daniele?

        Tell me why Assad, after having constant military success in taking back control of large parts of Syria, and after attacking Eastern Ghouta, which was split in 3 parts the Syrian rebels facing certain defeat have left 2 of the parts and headed north, the last part left is where this chemical weapons attack happened, the Syrian army have the area surrounded and its just a matter of time before they advance, would drop a gas canister through a roof from a helicopter onto civilians? do you not think it’s the slightest bit strange?

        • Sole I was not stating one belief or another i was asking Nigel his opinion.

          I’ve no idea who it was, and I hope NATO does.

          Do you suspect Israel?

          My point to Nigel was what to do? To leave as is and show whoever did it they can use these weapons with impunity?

          • Israel ? No but the terrorists have a proven history of using chlorine gas and other chemical weapons.

          • Too crude for Israel Daniel

            I think it was the white helmets, the group that are like magic always there 30 seconds after any attack with a video camera, the same group who’s members have been identified as being in ISIS decapitation pictures.

            Farouks link below, 3/4 down there is a video, the still is a mobile phone, if you press play and watch the video there is footage of the hole in the roof and the canister itself, now this is where it gets absurd, apparently the Syrian army flew a helicopter deep into enemy territory, a single helicopter flying low, hovered over a random building and literally dropped a gas canister through a roof, they must of been all wearing gas masks in the chopper because this isn’t state of the art technology its an actual gas canister that needs unscrewed or whatever it is you do, its like a boc canister.

            Even more strange is the canister, after falling from a helicopter and smashing through a roof, is lying perfectly on top of a wooden bed that’s undamaged.

            Also even though a Syrian Army helicopter was flying low and hovering above, there is not one single piece of footage, the white helmets with cameras in tow must of been there because there is footage of people leaving the building.

            Have a look under the white helmets tweets, most people are calling this for what it is and pointing out these things asking them to explain.

          • Just to add to Stevens comment, the Syrian rebels have been found with Sarin gas canisters and in 2013 a UN investigation accused the rebel of using gas.

        • Evening
          What is likely is that a chemical attack was launched against a suburb of Damascus.
          What is also likely is that this attack was launched from the air utilising a crude deployment method, more than likely by helicopter.
          Only two nations currently deploy helicopters in the Damascus region of Syria.
          I doubt very much that the Russians deployed or supported the deployment of this type of weapon.
          I doubt very much that the central Syrian government sanctioned the deployment of chemical weapons so close to its own centre of gravity.
          I would suggest that these weapons were deployed by Syrian/Iranian government forces because they either did not care or did not believe that the international response would have been this rapid.
          The Syrian government on learning that their own forces deployed chemical weapons against their own people so close to the centre of gravity could only do what their Russian and Iranian puppet masters taught them to do – deny everything. I would also think the Russians are ever so slightly perplexed by their ally doing something as stupid as this, but boxed in they are guilty by association.
          The Israeli’s bombed T4 for a reason. Syrian, not Russian SAM systems were used. Russia reported the Israeli aircraft coming in, deploying their weapons and reported them leaving yet didn’t fire one S-400. No one has disputed the 5/8 weapons intercepted, no one has denied that the senior Iranian military officer was killed.
          The S-400 is a good bit of kit, if needed it could have been utilised against the Israeli aircraft, it wasn’t.
          It’s time to look at the bigger picture.
          Syrian regime, guilty of many atrocities – but so close to Damascus.
          Russian government, flexing it muscle on the international stage but now boxing itself into an ever tighter corner.
          Iran, looking to invalidate Israel as a country and running out of options with Saudi crown prince on world tour.
          Just some thoughts to mull on

          • Just a quick point on the S400 system. It is a modern networked ground based air defence system. It uses multiple radars linked together operating at different frequencies to build a picture of what is going on around it. It was designed this way to try to combat F35s ie multiple search radars using triangulation to track targets. The other ace up it’s sleeve is that it can control multiple SAM batteries within its sphere feeding them targeting information. I’m pretty certain that Syrian SAM systems operating near to the Russian airbase at Hmiemim will be networked to the S400 system.

          • S400 never been tested it might not be all its made out.. The israel air force say it didn’t work when they flew in its range over syria and iran

        • Taken from the insitute for the study of war

          ISW Senior Intelligence Planner Jennifer Cafarella responds to three key questions in the aftermath of the Bashar al Assad regime-Iran-Russia coalition’s April 2018 campaign in Syria’s capital and the associated chemical weapons attack on civilians.

          Q: What was the Bashar al Assad regime looking to achieve in the latest chemical attack in Damascus?

          Cafarella: Bashar al Assad’s attack against civilians in Damascus was textbook regime depravity. Assad’s forces targeted the Douma neighborhood’s largest hospital and other civilian infrastructure in order to inflict maximum casualties. Assad’s goal was to break the will of the local civilian population and force the surrender of the anti-regime jihadist group, Jaysh al-Islam, that has operated in the area. He succeeded. Jaysh al-Islam accepted a surrender deal the day after the attack to evacuate Eastern Ghouta.

          Assad, enabled by his allies Russia and Iran, likely also sought to test his freedom of action and impunity. He and his backers likely calculated that the U.S. would not respond if they escalated now, after President Donald Trump signaled his ultimate desire to withdraw from Syria after defeating remaining Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham (ISIS) forces in southeastern Syria. Assad has routinely increased the barbarity of his violence against Syrian civilians to determine what he can get away with without risking a serious Western reprisal.

          Assad and his backers also sought to limit the extent to which the U.S. could verify the attack in order to mitigate the risks that the U.S. would be able to determine the credibility of local reporting. They reportedly disguised the nerve agent with Chlorine, an industrial agent used as a makeshift chemical weapon. They also conducted the attack in a besieged enclave in Damascus, far from the reach of U.S.-backed rebels or international observers.

          http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/qa-chemical-weapons-attack-syria

          • That’s not really concrete proof is it, or even proof at all, it’s someone opinion just like mine.

            She thinks it’s “textbook regime depravity” and “testing” what he can get away with. Eastern Ghouta was controlled in 3 parts, so Assad military defeats 2 and then drops a gas canister from a helicopter on the third for a laugh.

            Yeah I’ll think I’ll take that theory with a pinch of salt thanks.

          • What everyone seems to be forgetting is the country with the most to gain, who also has helicopters in country. Has just completed a Military Intervention into Afrin and is desperate to keep the conflict going. Has also bee the most vocal for Assad’s removal is Turkey and President Erdogan.

            Turkey has chemical weapons program. They have had one since the 80s. However people just have never looked closely cause they are in NATO and therefore technically an ally.

          • I wouldn’t put anything past that tin pot dictator Elliott, but I think he is too busy with the Kurds.

        • SoleSurvivor: Thing is, the ruthless logic being applied here is to win at all costs which includes not giving a flying **** about clueless liberal westerner sensitivities. Not everything can be solved over a latte cos *church fetes*

          • “clueless liberal westerner sensitivities”

            Yeah because that’s really how to describe outrage at a chemical weapons attack where children are involved.

            I think it’s just basic human decency that Ian no matter what your views are.

            “the ruthless logic being applied here is to win at all costs”

            They already are winning, they took 2 parts of Easten Ghouta by force and had the third surrounded.

            And no you’re right this isn’t going to get solved with a latte, it also isn’t going to get solved by people at home on their computers itching for some cruise missiles to be launched either.

            This isn’t about not wanting intervene just because I’m against any sort of intervention because that’s not true, I don’t want to get involved because on top of what I have already said I have a decent memory and every so often I google “what is Libya like today” can you remember Libya? Everyone seems to forget we bombed Gaddafi to make everything “better” but it’s now left a failed state ruled by warlords, created the biggest refugee crisis since ww2, it quite possibly the worst place to live on earth.

            This shoukd be solved by either the Syrian army with Russian and Iranian assistance totally defeating the Syrian rebels, with Turkey and the US leaving immediatel and more importantly stop giving arms to the rebels.

            Or it involves a massive ground invasion of a multi national peace keeping force to restore order and stop the Civil war by disarming the rebels.

            Somehow I don’t think the second one is on the table so let’s pray for the first ay?

      • Do you really think Assad would gas the fully surrounded, final pocket of rebels in Eastern Ghouta just hours before the agreed to leave the city ? Just a few days after Trump said US troops would be leaving Syria very soon ?

        • No. It’s a false flag. Meant to give an excuse for the West to intervene. They would never let Syria make its own destiny. The plans for a war with Syria were made long ago.

      • My god how could you fall for such unadulterated BS a child can see it’s made up fake crap we are whistling to the Saudi tune they own us lock stock and barrel.

      • Hmmm. Problem is the West ends up getting it in the neck too.

        Whether they deserve it or not I think all sides need to calm down, as the gas attack is being forgotten and this is becoming a game of who blinks first between Trump and Russia.

        We don’t need that right now, or ever.

    • I think everyone should read this report before commenting further. It would certainly have required a huge deception on the part of the “West” to carry it out. “All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one.” – William of Ockham.

    • what are you a veteran of Harold? getting pissed in norn Irish boozers on the sly or tapping German girls on the rhein?

      I may slightly agree with you though fella, only because we haven’t the man power or ordnance in reserve at the moment to get stuck in for more than a few weeks if it truly goes South with Russia.

      the Russians are smarting after being humiliated over recent years, I wonder how long they will put up with it and truly bite back. it doesn’t even have to be militarily, they have crooks and gangsters on the payroll all over the West who can cause some real trouble. look to Cyprus and the current readiness state of the SBA troops to understand further… we’re pulling on the tail of a snake at the moment.

      • Not sure the coward analogy is the right one. I see ‘the west’ as the schoolmaster handing out a punishment caning to wayward Assad. When you break the agreed ruies on chemical weapons you get a beating.

    • Out of interest I logged onto you website, and observed one Joe Glenton. Well I am afraid any organisation that lying, bluffing, cheating coward represents shows it’s lack of standards and a serious lack of ethics. Glenton was a base raf back in Bastion while some of us were doing back to back tours, on the ground, in FOBs. Glentons whole reason for going AWOL was total tosh, and when he got caught he came up with all this nonsense on advise of his solicitor, and the anti-war lobby fell for his waffle hook line and sinker. The bloke is hated by those of us who carry our mental and physical issues quietly day by day. The worst this loser ever saw was a lack of cheesecake in the Bastion cookhouse.

  3. I thought the MOD never discusses submarine deployments.

    Telling the Syrians that strikes are coming is lunacy. Gives them time to get all precious gear tucked away safely & to bolster defences.

    The best time to get Assad under control was before we dithered so long that the Russians stepped into the civil war. Having had several Assad chemical weapon attacks, now we’ve talked up a considerable response, it will be a huge mistake if we do nothing or very little, as that will send the message that you can use whatever horror you like & the UN/west will do nothing. The UN will not do much due to the Russian veto.

  4. Evening everyone. Just wondering what the consensus is if things escalate beyond lobbing in a few Cruise missiles to the point where we send aircraft in. Any idea how Typhoon would fair against S-400? My understanding is the RAF’s Typhoons have the most comprehensive DASS of all operating countries. However, from what I’ve read NATO and even the Israelis have a healthy respect of this system. Is it that good? Would love to hear thoughts/comments and let’s hope we never get to that point.

    Thank you all.

    • Morning David
      To measure the Typhoon or any aircraft against the S-400 would not be a true means of evaluating the system.
      This is the difference between air forces that have lots of combat aircraft and air forces that have a cross section of capabilities which allow nations to strike the enemy from the air.
      The S-400 is a very good complex weapon system designed to defeat stealth type aircraft utilising multiple sensors fused together to give commanders on the group the best RAP (recognised air picture) so that they can effectively defend the airspace.
      To defeat this the sensor system has to be disrupted, spoofed or destroyed so as to remove the enemies ability to manage and defend its airspace.
      To do this you need a variety of devices mounted and deployed from aircraft and ships which will seek to do the above allowing strike packages to them go in and attack as close to the centre of gravity as possible.
      Typhoon having a good DASS system is great, but it is being used only once the larger defensive systems have been removed or isolated or where the target is too important and the risks have been accepted.
      This is nothing secret, all air forces publish their doctrines and base their ORBAT on it.
      The RAF is one of very few air forces that can deploy and operate in denied airspace, however to do so by itself carries a lot of risk. It therefore operates in conjunction with allies, most notably the US when conducting operations of this type.
      Whilst it looks great for Macron to say he wants the French to get involved he doesn’t actullay bring much to the party. The FAF have some great strike aircraft but they have to get those aircraft on to target, without RAF and USAF assistance that will be a risky affair.
      S-400 vs Typhoon/Rafale/F-22 etc all carry different risk profiles, S-400 vs U.K./FR/US combined air operations is a totally different proposition.

      • Lee, your response is really interesting and, thank you for taking the time to write it!

        If I may though, I can see the US has a clear advantage with fully operational stealth bombing ability (F22/B2) but, what makes the UK better equipped than France to penetrate contested airspace? (Excluding the F35 which would probably be rushed in to service if it went very hot!)

        Thanks!

        • The Praetorian “DASS” system is very very good. Enabling a lot of countermeasures/warning systems etc when penetrating airspace.

        • Hi stua
          The RAF have a more balanced array of capabilities to allow it to first understand and then prosecute targets in contested airspace. People always seem to look at the combat aircraft (Typhoon, Rafale, Tornado, F-22 etc) and not the systems that militaries use to get those aircraft into position to give them the highest probability lowest risk attack profile.

      • Good morning Lee,

        Thank you very much for taking the time to comment – very insightful and much appreciated.

        David

      • Lee – Wow. Thanks so much for such a full and interesting answer. It’s great to see that we appear to have someone here who is a sort of airborne equivalent to Gunbuster’s naval expertise.

        I have one question to ask if I may. You said “The RAF is one of very few air forces that can deploy and operate in denied airspace”. Out of interest, who are the other “very few” air forces that could potentially do this?

        • Hi Julian
          Many thanks for the above comments – most appreciated.
          Air power is most often measured by the commentariate by the number of combat jets air forces have on strength very much in the same way navies are measured by the number of warships and the army by the number of tanks and infantry.
          This is why you will see in newspapers currently info graphics of aircraft, ships and missiles with little descriptions of how fast they go and what range they have got. It makes great press and lots of chat (see blogs 😁).
          What is not shown is the support and infrastructure those platforms need to be able to do the kinetic things they do.
          Answering your question – only one “Air Force” can independently carry out full spectrum offensive air missions – that is the US (USAF, USN and USMC), even the USAF cannot do it alone.
          Following closely behind is the RAF and FAF with the Chinese and Russians trailing behind.
          Some will ask why the Russians and Chinese follow the smaller RAF and FAF, hopefully below I will try and explain (apologies for length of response).
          The Russian military, whilst well trained and extremely proficient cannot sustain full spectrum operations. This has been proved in Syria, after a great show and tell – cruise missiles, laser guided bombs and all the related media, they quickly moved to what they could sustain – high intensity low technology operations reliant on mass over quality.
          The Chinese, with all their technology and mass still find it difficult to operate full spectrum missions beyond their sphere of geographic influence, they counter this by building islands and deploying tactical systems. They have the equipment, they are maturing their doctrine but the people, process and technology isn’t advanced enough yet to utilise and integrate beyond their realm of geographic influence.
          The RAF, whilst having shrunk in size has tried to balance the “front end” with the “back end”.
          Yes the combat fleet has shrunk but the people are still highly trained, the processes are well understood and developed and the technology has not gone beyond what we can afford.
          The same goes for the FAF, we work with them, we trust them – the platforms we utilise to generate effect are roughly the same.
          When people see 4 aircraft deployed here and 4 deployed there they mock, this is because it is compared to the might of the US and the numbers that they utilise. Never underestimate our effect:
          Training
          Sentinel
          Storm Shadow
          Brimstone
          RAPTOR
          Meteor
          C4I
          C2
          Just some of the things the U.K., whilst small in size can bring to the Party.
          To summarise:
          US currently peerless full spectrum operations independently and continuously
          RAF multi spectrum operations independently but fearlessly and sustainably
          FAF wide spectrum short term operations, for effect – needs others to sustain
          Russian full spectrum operations for the short term but cannot sustain
          Chinese wide spectrum operations within geographic sphere of influence

          • Agree Lee. To your list I would add Voyager AAR. Best in class. Weaknesses? Sentry becoming increasingly unusable and no SEAD capability for which we would have to rely on USAF/USN support. May change with introduction of F-35/SPEAR III combination.

  5. I am hoping that this situation leads to a swift strike with no further reprocussions.
    However, I live in hope that this crisis does have a positive effect in our military. When mrs May asks the forces ‘what are our options?’ She will be told we can only manage a day one strike because we don’t have many tomahawks. We can only offer a handful of jets because we lack depth of numbers. We have very few rn fighting ships to offer as the few we have are overstretched and out of service or posted on the other side of the world. Then Mrs May will see we are a sideline player behind France because of our lack of power we can offer in support.
    Will this be the wake up call to increase defence budget to 2.5 -3% and increase our capabilities before our standing in the world and with the US is irreparably damaged? I hope so….

  6. Well, there is a role for measured punishment. Assad is not in control of his forces, or indeed his country which is assailed as he would see it by Isil, Turkey, Iran and US supported rebels. Russia and the US could end this carnage if they wanted. Turkey is making mischief. Erdogen thinks he is reincarnating the Ottoman empire. Pray for Syria.

  7. You need your head examined if you think Assad gassed his own people. There is something deeply wrong about this, like our government and America’s are actively trying to go to war

        • I can’t get my simple head around this. According to intel the Heath Robinson simmering chlorine barrel was dropped from a helo which took off from a Syrian army air base. Assad might be evil but I don’t think he is stupid. He and his generals must know they are inviting a punishment beating. Have the Russians told him don’t worry chum the S-400 system means you’ve got carte blanche?

  8. My guess this is all a storm in a tea cup. Announcing it in advance was clearly a PR stunt and so will any token attack. I highly doubt we are going to war with Syria or even really changing anything post a few missiles thrown to show to the media we are doing something about the chemical wep attack. I don’t think anyone in their sane mind thinks we shouldn’t try and stop further chemical attacks but equally it would be good to wait the UN independent investigation of who was behind it before jumping to conclusions. Each side is as bad as the other when it comes to trying to stitch up the other side with their allies.

    • (Chris H) – Steve we have no legal right to do anything about the chemical attack. The UN is castrated by the Russian Veto and we really don’t know who did what in a very volatile civil war. And there is the clue – Its a civil war and we should stay the hell out.

      • What is the legal position regarding Assad and war crimes? Is there such a thing as an international arrest warrant?

        • I am not sure we should get involved, if we are only half doing it and not getting properly involved. It just makes things worse and the UK a bigger target for terrorists.

          However from what i know, it is not illegal to get involved just because the UN doesn’t back it.

  9. All this Syria stuff could have been stopped in its tracks had the Labour leader of the time had backed PM Cameron on a no-fly zone in 2013
    He said he was which gave the hope that he would side with the government and when it came to the vote he would not back Cameron (i bet Corbyn had something to do with it no doubt)
    Because the British didn’t back a no-fly zone the Americans decided against going it alone
    That war could have been stopped before it really got started
    So you can blame the Labour party for all the trouble and with the pro-russion leader of the party we have in charge now god forbid if the people are daft enough to vote him in

    • What on earth are you talking about.

      The vote on Syria in 2013 was to join the US in military action not a no-fly zone.

      David Cameron had a majority in Parliament, any vote lost Is the result of his own conservative MP’s rebelling, which is what happened.

      Jeremy Corbyns fault? Oh yeah I’m sure a left wing backbench scruffy MP in 2013 who was a million miles away from becoming labour leader was really the mastermind behind the blairite shadow cabinet.

      I’ve heard some stuff but that takes the biscuit.

      • SoleSurvivor
        Look again
        It was for a no-fly zone only and not for boots on the ground
        As for my remarks about Corbyn that was only tongue in cheek remark from me regarding his record of supporting anyone that opposes the British

          • I don’t need to look again I know, I’ve replied with the links to the commons motion but it’s being moderated.

            Google “commons vote on Syria” and then tell me it was for a no-fly zone.

            The vote was originally for us to join US led military action which would of been cruise missile launches and air strikes just Libya, Cameron watered it down to include only after the UN had confirmed that chemical weapons were used, and still lost.

    • Well spotted Sir. This all could have been nipped in the bud several years ago but wasn’t due to that weasel Milliband and his communist mates taking the chance the to give the tories a bloody nose. Agree on that communist Corbyn, if he ever becomes PM we are finished.

      • I thought at the time we really missed the opportunity to do the right thing in 2013. Civil wars are never pretty & Syria amuch tougher nut militarily than Libya, but allowing Assad to use chemical weapons with relative impunity gives carte blanche to any odious regime. We left a glaring international vacuum into which Russia stepped to save its ally. After Iraq & Afghanistan the public wouldn’t wear another intervention when one may have been wiser.

  10. I really hope nothing happens strike wise with this scenario. The language and the way the Russians are making noise about not is very concerning for all involved.

  11. Nothing’s going to happen. Putin is a revolting dictator but he didn’t get to where he is by being an idiot. He’s not going to start WW3 over a third world s**thole like Syria.

  12. @Elliot
    Interesting thought concerning Turkey. It is less than 200 miles from Afrin to Damascus as the crow or lone helicopter flies. The Kurds fighting in Afrin have asked for help from Assad. Asking who gains from this event is the right question and the answer is Turkey and only Turkey.

  13. (Chris H) We are being suckered into an illegal act. And we are being pushed along by the Americans (led by the Israelis) who have this delusion they know whats best for everyone else on the planet. Except they don’t. They say ‘we must do something’ when actually we can’t (*legally) do a damn thing.

    Having said that however I do agree with Elliott in another Thread that some dangerous forces are at play but I will add personalities: Putin’s pride, Russian honour, Israeli manipulation, Trump’s stupidity, our need to support the USA and Macron’s need for domestic political diversion and a slice of the world action.

    I fear we are embarking on a ‘Libya II’ and possibly even an ‘Iraq II’ and will live (I hope!) to regret it badly

    • One of my most reliable decision making tools is ‘follow the money’ and the trail will lead you to the answer. Isn’t the Syrian ‘civil’ war really about the Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline?

    • This is a real nightmare, on one side if we let it go we effectively allow WMDs to become normalised (which is now almost the case in the Middle East) and fail to support our allies ( some of which now appear less than stable) who we are really going to need in a future that’s looking really bleak at present. On the other side we throw missiles into a civil war, which aids no one and just adds to the misery ( it’s now to late to change the outcome of that war, we will just kill a few more people) and risk triggering escalation that will lead to WW3 ( we have always known Syria has a high risk of explode out as we have have at least 8 major nation states with war fighters engaged in the theatre).

      It’s all made a little worse by the fall out from Salisbury.

      I’ve come to the conclusion that we ( the west) are on an inevitable road to a major peer on peer conflict with Russia and Iran ( hopefully not China). The only questions are:

      1) push it now and risk conflict with Russia and Iran when Russia is militarily at a high piont and the west has weak leadership and a obsession with a down scaling of it military.
      2) wait, knowing that Russia is in terminal decline as a nation, and starting to rebuild western military power ( the Ronald Reagan approach ) pushing when we are good and ready. This may seem the better option but still has risks around political will and Russia picking when it wants to push.

        • Daniele, at present the leadership of Russia seem intent on making the west the big enemy. It would be great if we could move the realationship along, but looking at the past few years unless something significantly changes 3 is just not on the cards.

  14. […] https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/british-nuclear-submarine-reportedly-moved-into-tomahawk-missile-ran… There is a protest meeting in Bristol centre by the fountains at mid day on Sunday, if anyone can make it. Who are ‘They’? … organising this. e.g. Chatham House Prof. Michael Clarke is a member of ‘they’. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldconst/236/23603.htm Brooks Newmark…. does he support British or Israeli policy? Syria ‘chemical attack’: France’s President Macron says he has proof – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-43740626 Narrow the area we need to send to and how we should approach it -Veterans today has some links https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/04/11/t […]

  15. Anyone who has an issue with destroying chemical weapons storage facilities in order to further prevent the gassing and murder of civilians, is therefore complicit in any future chemical attacks on those innocents. And also weak.

    On another point, we could have used the new aircraft carriers. Oh – they have no planes. Dammit. That would have involved planning for the future instead of delays due to petty political arguments from the Labour and Conservative parties. Oh well – not much changes in Britain, despite the history of being perennially unprepared.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here