UK Prime Minister Cameron loses Syria war vote

[happyg]

-- British Prime Minister David Cameron lost a vote endorsing military action against Syria by 13 votes Thursday, a stunning defeat for a government which had been poised to join the U.S. in strikes to punish Bashar Assad's regime for an alleged chemical weapons attack this month.

Cameron's nonbinding motion was defeated 285-272 and he conceded after the vote that "the British Parliament, reflecting the views of the British people, does not want to see British military action."

The prime minister said in terse comments while he believes in a "tough response" to the use of chemical weapons, he would respect the will of the House of Commons.

At the start of the week, Cameron had seemed ready to join Washington in possible military action against Assad over the alleged chemical weapons attack. But the push for strikes against the Syrian regime began to lose momentum as Britain's Labour Party - still smarting from its ill-fated decision to champion the invasion of Iraq in 2003 - announced its opposition to the move.

Cameron gave concessions, promising to give the U.N. inspectors time to report back to the U.N. Security Council and to do his outmost to secure a resolution there. He also promised to give lawmakers a second vote in a bid to assuage fears that Britain was being rushed into an attack on Assad.

In the end, it wasn't enough to dispel lingering suspicions that what was billed as a limited campaign would turn into an Iraq-style quagmire.

Tony Travers, the director of the government department at the London School of Economics, said Cameron had clearly miscalculated when he brought Parliament back early from its summer recess. He said the move had been unpopular even within Cameron's Conservative Party.

"Clearly this will be seen as a defeat, it suggests he got the politics wrong, both with the opposition and with some members of his own party," Travers said. "It's not great, it's not brilliant, nor is it the end of the world for him. He's lost votes before. It doesn't necessarily stop them taking further action, but they are going to have to start again really."

He said there was "not a lot" of public support for British military activity in Syria.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_BRITAIN_SYRIA?SITE=7219&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-08-29-17-43-07

[Right_in_Virginia]

The prime minister said in terse comments while he believes in a "tough response" to the use of chemical weapons, he would respect the will of the House of Commons.

And where's our House of Representatives?????

I think Germany's pulled back, too.

[Scottftlc]

Could it be that Obama's war is unravelling?

Certainly, if our Congress does not vote now, we appear much more a country ruled by a "strong man" dictator than our European peers.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Could it be that Obama's war is unravelling?

Certainly, if our Congress does not vote now, we appear much more a country ruled by a "strong man" dictator than our European peers.

Would Sparky have to return his Peace Prize???     

[mountaineer]

It will be interesting to see whether this dampens Barry Hussein's fervor for bloodshed.

[Atomic Cow]

It will be interesting to see whether this dampens Barry Hussein's fervor for bloodshed.

I doubt it.  He wants his tough guy moment and a chance to help Al-Qaeda.

[Rapunzel]

Barry has to drag us into this to save face......... hell of a reason to go to war, isn't it.

[happyg]

Barry has to drag us into this to save face......... hell of a reason to go to war, isn't it.

I think most people would rather he eat crow than save face. We already know, and many more are learning, that Obama is an empty suit. To kill all those people because of pride, makes him no better than the worst dictator.

[Rapunzel]

I think most people would rather he eat crow than save face. We already know, and many more are learning, that Obama is an empty suit. To kill all those people because of pride, makes him no better than the worst dictator.

I think he does fancy himself as dictator.

[happyg]

I think he does fancy himself as dictator.

I think so, too. He probably thinks it's 'cool to play White House'.

[Oceander]

I wonder just how much damage this did to Cameron, and whether it might not be a factor in precipitating early elections in the UK.

[Fishrrman]

[[ Cameron's nonbinding motion was defeated 285-272 and he conceded after the vote that "the British Parliament, reflecting the views of the British people, does not want to see British military action."
The prime minister said in terse comments while he believes in a "tough response" to the use of chemical weapons, he would respect the will of the House of Commons. ]]

My opinion of the Brits regarding dealing with islam and general cultural collapse isn't very high, but at least they have the wisdom not to touch the Syrian tar baby.

Now ol' Brer Barry, he ain' so smart!

[massadvj]

Clearly, OPapaDoc is regarded as a joke by our "former" allies in Europe.  The man's incompetence is boundless.

[Oceander]

Clearly, OPapaDoc is regarded as a joke by our "former" allies in Europe.  The man's incompetence is boundless.

I think he was never regarded as anything more than an amiable dunce; he's now clearly seen as much less than that.

[Rapunzel]

In the 2007 replay of Biden railing against Bush going to war in Iraq and wanting him tried for war crimes he started ranting about how he (Biden) was a "constitutional" scholar and "constitutional" teacher and thus he knew beyond a shadow of a doubt what Bush did (and remember Bush DID go to congress) was illegal......... 

Since when was Biden a constitutional professor???????

[EC]

I wonder just how much damage this did to Cameron, and whether it might not be a factor in precipitating early elections in the UK.

Almost none, in any meaningful sense. It's a none binding motion, meaning he is still at liberty to act as needed. Just the usual pols posturing that we know and detest. It was pretty much a party line vote, Labour against, Conservatives for, and Libs mostly against. One of the reasons a coalition government is a pain in the ass.

As to the chances of an early election - that now becomes less likely, IMO, not more. The only person who has the power to call an election before the last legal date is the PM, or the majority vote of the House of Commons following a successful vote of no confidence in the PM.
That is why, when Margaret Thatcher got her vote of no confidence and was ousted, she was replaced by John Major with no early election - there weren't enough votes available for it to be passed. Elections happened as scheduled and he won another term.
Tony Blair was a different issue - he stood down, which means the Chancellor automatically becomes the PM. Since Brown was a hugely unpopular he refused to call an early election, letting the full term run out the clock.

Since Cameron is not, at the moment, in a position of strength, an early election would most likely result in Labour taking the house and the premiership outright. A short, decisive war, on the other hand, in which the UK had a significant part in, would boost his popularity and make a snap election to gain full control of the House more likely.

[mountaineer]

I think so, too. He probably thinks it's 'cool to play White House'.

He thinks it's cool to kill people, thus the drone "snuff films."