Britain is officially out of the planned US attacks on Syria today, after a parliamentary vote saw broad rejection of the Cameron government’s call to ignore their lack of evidence and approve the conflict.
The vote was close, but the admission that the British government doesn’t have anything resembling a “smoking gun” of evidence to back their allegations seemed to be a bigger problem for parliamentarians than it was for the prime minister.
Defense Secretary Philip Hammond confirmed that after the vote, the British government will not take part in the initial American attacks on Syria, but officials raised the prospect of holding another vote, potentially next week, if they come up with any actual, real evidence.
US officials expressed “disappointment” that Britain won’t be joining the attack, but said it won’t stop their own plans to strike Syria in the coming days. The Obama Administration has rejected seeking Congressional approval, likely fearing that the US Congress would similarly reject the hasty calls to attack.
French officials are also suggesting that they “need proof” now in a way that they didn’t a few days ago, and this may mean the Obama Administration, once bragging about this being an “international action,” will end up attacking without any partners.
Limeys lead the way!
Uh, can we get a mulligan on this whole Revolution thing, and please let us come home and be part of a democracy again? Pretty Please.
Why can't Obama admit that maybe there isn't enough evidence to justify immediate action. so any attack is put on hold until further more reliable information becomes available? Is it because he fears to appear weak, which is extremely ironic as he is commander-in-chief of the most powerful armed forces in the history of the world?
It seems to me the Brits, in Parliament, not unlike the US Congress, are looking for political cover. It will not be at all surprising, upon the release of the UN Investigative report, when the next vote is held in Parliament, it will pass. We see this kind of set up time and again. Eyes wide open and counting…
The evidence, the findings of US intelligence, are almost verbatim what Cameron was holding up as 'evidence ' yesterday; the findings of British intelligence. No doubt as Kerry told Biden and Biden told Obama, the more people tell it, the truthier it gets.
A Parliamentary action of enormous significance. The US, the neoconservatives and their responsibility to protect allies, like Samantha Power, will now have to go it alone. If the UK won't participate in US military actions, how can the French, the Germans and the Italians? Ed Miliband goes from being a source of ridicule to the probable next UK prime minister. There's going to be a lot of pressure on him from the US, from Blairites, from the Murdoch media, hope he can stand up to it.
For the Syrians, they are at least spared the military intervention of yet another armed force bent upon killing them. As for Obama, no one believes him anymore. The ACA, Snowden, the Egyptian non-coup, now this. We are living through the late Nixon years again, circa late 1973.
If Obama goes ahead and bombs anyway, what does that say about the state of the US democracy compared to that of the Brits? Doesn't it say that democracy is dead in the US? Doesn't Obama realize that his second term is toast if he goes ahead?
The Germans have flat out said they won't participate, Italy demands UN mandate (which would never happen), and French poodles are now wait-n-see what UN inspectors will find.
Now Obama will have to rely on champions of fluffy freedoms like Saudi-Arabia, Turkey (most jailed journalists in the world), Bahrain and others?..
It is not a question of any kind of evidence, is a matter of prestige, the English prime minister nor the American president will admit to their mistakes. Look at the history of British and America every president hade to have a war under his name, their British partners after the Second World War, every prime minister also had to have a war under his or her name, Margaret Tatcher she had a war with Argentina, Tony Blair the Northern Ireland, Balkan and then Iraq war…. and etc to David Cameron the Libyan and then Syrian war. War and acts against humanity is a betting contest between USA and British on whom they can kill more of nationals that are after their independence from the wicked western democracy, in that regard they have and will use the outmost brutal regimes in this planet to achieve their wicked goals wanting to divide nations and their wealth among themselves.
Always one of the stupidest arguments as to why people need to get killed and maimed.
wow. the brits grew a set. impressive.
Yes,impressive…. But it was narrow,and the Bank Of England/City Of London:57 % Us Federal Reserve Private bank will keep on pushing their ALWAYS puppet PM's since 1684 ! SEE THE GREAT TOMATO BUBBLE.COM…THE BAD WAR.COM
A clear illustration for anyone not already convinced of how the parliamentary system supports democracy and the presidential system does not.
Wouldn't a vote of no-confidence and new elections be a really good idea right now? The example of a quick fall of a leader might serve as a warning to the next who wants to spy on his own people, his enemies and journalist … and who wants to go start needless and useless wars on the other side of the world.
Hum it seems like the president could be setting himself up for impeachment NSA and now Unprovoked act of war , not even the slightest clear and present danger. Against treaties and well established international law. Not even a smking gun!!!! Just because Clinton called him a no balls president. Better to back down then go one bridge to far.
Cheers for the British Parliament! Whereas the English learned the lessons of 2003 and do not want to return to imperial days of hundred years ago, France’s Picot will have to find an American Sykes to mess up the Middle East. Having created the chaos that is now Syria, the French cannot wait to play imperial power, but this time with the US. The American public does not want war, nor wishes to become involved in Syria’s civil war. Our Congress is filled with trigger happy senators and representatives that have no problem spending money we don’t have, sending someone’s son or daughter to battle evil (but not their family members) and demonstrate our hubris of superiority over the world. You may recall that Blair was known as our lap dog for his blind obedience to Bush’s wars, now we are going to replace the British Yorkie with a nice French poodle.
In the American Plutocraty, can Godfather Obama really order a war without asking Congress. Then Godfather Obama is a King and not a president. He compares himself to a Pharaoh !
“America does not at the moment have a functioning democracy,” — former President Jimmy Carter
http://www.salon.com/2013/07/18/jimmy_carter_us_h…
the revolting parliment did something right
Only ten years ago the Iraq catastophe, yet Obama et al, Cameron, Hollande seem to have forgotten. The people were ignored last time; let us hope they are listened to now-even the US public, with the MSM they have, are against the attacks on Syria.
That was politically dumb for Cameron to put his proposed war on chemicals to a vote. The only thing he could have done worse was to make it a a matter of confidence. Had that been the case, Britain might have been out of everything for three months.
As it is I'm thinking he'll reintroduce the matter if the UN investigation links Assad to the gassing.