Fears of potential reprisals against Western targets if the US or Britain intervened in the Syrian crisis ignored the risk of terrorism due to the failure to intervene. Any environment hosting a vacuum of governance coupled with a totalitarian ideology that reinforces extreme poverty, serves to be a springboard for international terrorism...
Lesson One: don't believe what you read in the papers. But Lesson Two: take the long view. Labour has not suddenly become a lean, mean election machine, simply because it won a by-election in what should always have been a rock-solid seat. The party's civil war is only just beginning, and just like the war in Syria, it will be long, messy and bloody.
When you enter Syria, you have to start following all their Sharia [Islamic law] rules and pray, otherwise the khizba [police] will get you. For example, if you don't pray on time, they can take you and punish you. I told them that I did the hijra to the Islamic State, and then applied to the Sharia court to get my children back. I lived in the mosque between March and September. I could not even take my clothes off once. Nobody forces you to fight, but you do have to find a way to make a living.
Even with the laughter and the jokes that could be heard in the chamber, it would be too cynical to suggest that any MPs decision was made lightly. Yet with no evidence to suggest that the intervention will achieve its aims, the jump to air strikes seems premature and a disservice to the constituents of this country, but a horrific injustice to the people of Syria.
Cameron's new campaign contains no concrete plans for curtailing the above, no plans for injecting life into the economies of these communities once IS has been eradicated and no plans for bringing an end to a civil war which has displaced 9.5 million people. Thus, as seen in Ma'an, a cycle of fight or flight will continue in the absence of any genuine offering of enduring stability for the Syrian people.