This post from Have Amal beautifully explains the possible outcomes of bombing Syria, in an incredibly simple manner. If you have been following the recent discussions about how to solve the incredibly complex problems in Syria recently, this article offers a fantastic explanation of why bombing Syria does not provide all the answers that some claim they do. No-one says the alternatives to bombing will be easy to achieve. However, claims that they will almost certainly fail rest on extremely shaky foundations. Not to mention that the method of bombing countries to wipe out terrorism has proved incredibly unsuccessful in recent history. I urge you to read this article and let both me and the author of Have Amal know what you think of the current plans to bomb Syria, in an effort to destroy Daesh.
Should UK go to war in Syria?
Thousands of protesters in London Downing Street say NO!
Thousands gather in Downing Street, against the bombing of Syria.
Protesters remain seated, even after protest.
Why shouldn’t we go to war in Syria?
Here are a few reasons:
- It will kill innocent civilians. There is no such thing as a bomb so smart that it always hits its target. No doubt, innocent people will die. Some people may argue that the UK airstrikes are not that much in number, a few bombs will be used to get ISIS. However, this will be militarily ineffective and therefore pointless, but if they are significant, they will kill civilians.
- “When I say ‘War’, You say Welfare!” Instead of spending billions on Trident, why not fund schools, housing, NHS and jobs. Help the welfare state.
- It will not work. The US and its allies are already bombing Isis in Syria and Iraq without…
View original post 743 more words