Well I’m not privy to the day to day thinking of the senior Syrian military. But it seems Assad’s used them before. ‘Making a point’ is sometimes held to be important.
If there were in fact no chemical weapons this time then that could explain Trump’s backtracking in the last 24 hours. Macron’s going to look a bit of a prat though if this was just a cock-up in the heat of the moment in A&E. He’s said it was definitely chemicals. Then again, as you say, it would have been pretty easy for the Russians to find an actor who resembled a blurry guy in a video and then to pay him to say chemicals never happened. If the OPCW do find chemicals then the Russians will say the rebels planted them. If they don’t then the rebels will say that Assad’s people, who now hold the ground, have cleaned them up.
As for the British Special Forces, we could theorise that the west have provided the chemicals to the rebels so that they can falsely smear Assad. That will then allow us to launch a carefully targeted missile strike to blow the captive SAS/SBS guys up before Assad has a chance to put them on the telly. Suddenly it’s all starting to make sense.
It does sound as though the Russians have given them the addresses of a couple of disused trading estates or airfields they can drop munitions on if the allies insist. Let’s see later how much of a slap on the wrist these precision strikes prove to be.
On Wednesday night, I was shocked to hear the audience of The World Tonight informed that ‘there is no constitutional requirement for the Government to seek parliamentary approval [for UK military action in Syria] … it is alarming that such a position continues to be repeated across news outlets, when it is categorically untrue.
(My bold.) And then:
… our uniquely intricate (and, yes, sometimes impenetrable) uncodified constitution cannot be reduced to statute alone. Instead comprises (sic) a curious miscellany of Acts of Parliaments, court judgements and constitutional conventions. The last of these - constitutional conventions - are often slippery, perhaps slightly old-fashioned, but nevertheless vital political customs that have evolved over time to provide a framework for the actions and operations of government …
And at the bottom:
The beauty and the beastliness of constitutional conventions is that they are dynamic, malleable creatures, shaped by political words and deeds. The repeated referrals to Parliament on conflict decisions, the consistent commitments of government ministers, and the associated legitimate expectations of MPs have resulted in a nuanced and negotiated convention …
So, not really “categorical” then. I hope that this ex policy wonk and now PhD student http://www.sussex.ac.uk/profiles/392042 firms her arguments up before she sits down to write her thesis.
Parading dishevelled British soldiers in front of cameras would be about the most stupid thing the Syrians could do. If anything were to increase the 20% support Theresa May was getting for launching an attack, that would be it.
He hasn’t started well. Nothing the punters like better than a few explosions on the TV so he is fighting a losing battle in many ways. Relevant or not, the decision to pursue legalities as your opening soundbite is rather tame.
There seems to be a bit of aggro developing in the USA about whether Congress should have been consulted. It’ll be interesting to see how much trouble Mrs May has to deal with over her approach to this whole affair tomorrow. The timing of the Parliamentary recess has been a Godsend for h, given how it started with BoJo being caught lying, but ends with what will be claimed as a military and diplomatic triumph.
But, but, further up you said that revealing that there were Brits in Syria when there aren’t supposed to be would be an embarrassment for the government. So is it going to embarrass them or to strengthen them ? I am confus …
Incidentally, does anyone really expect us to say where our special forces are operating ? I thought that that was part of their raison d’être.
They’ve already suggested that the British have been assisting Jaysh al-Islam in their anti-government efforts. That’s a fairly serious accusation. Put it this way, if they are holding SAS members (allegedly 11) then MoD will know they are. There’d be no need to show them off if the propaganda effect of doing so was negative as it undoubtedly would be.
Also I’m not sure that parliament has, at any point, given the nod to there being boots on the ground in Syria. Our actions there are supposed to be limited to airstrikes on Daesh.
I just watched Vince Cable speaking about this latest attack. Hopeless.& irrelevant are the words that spring to mind.
Stronzetto is urging his party members to move to Cornwall and fight for independence prior to Brexit. When asked what would you do in Syria? He said “Strike a deal for the gas pipeline”. Remarkable really
I don’t think he gives a monkeys about the UK, it would be for domestic consumption. I think it is pretty safe to assume that the Iranian report was fabricated.
