Syria crisis: MPs ‘right to reject military action’ – BBC poll

I’ve written and posted quite a lot in regard to Syria, I believe this conflict is a line in the sand that can’t be crossed! The evidence is sloppy, the reasons are geo-political and due to a certain pipeline, the country is secular and one of the oldest in the world. I cannot detract on why the revolution started but the war between Sunni and Wahabbi AlQaeda insurgents and the Shia and Alawite is unnecessary. The media has spun a story which is untrue and suspect on every turn, we’re all being played. Our support should be going to the refugees of the conflict and not Al Qaeda.


Courtesy of The Beeb:

Almost three-quarters of people believe MPs were right to reject UK military action in Syria, a poll commissioned by the BBC has suggested.

The poll also suggested 72% did not think the move would damage the UK-US relationship – and two-thirds said they would not care if it did.

ICM Research spoke to 1,000 adults in England, Scotland and Wales by telephone between Friday and Monday.

Downing Street has said there will be no second Parliamentary vote on Syria.

The government lost last week’s Commons vote on supporting, in principle, military action against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s in response to a suspected chemical weapons attack.

‘Firmed’ opinion

The BBC poll suggested 71% of people thought Parliament made the right decision.

By a small margin, a greater proportion of men – 72% – thought MPs made the right decision than women, where 70% agreed.

The BBC News Channel’s chief political correspondent Norman Smith said the BBC poll appeared to suggest that public opinion had “firmed up” against any military action in Syria.

He said that underlined the difficulty Prime Minister David Cameron had in trying to bring any debate back to Parliament.


Almost half of people questioned – 49% – thought the vote would hurt Britain’s international reputation, with 16% believing it would hurt the country’s reputation a lot.

But 44% thought it would not make any difference.

More than two thirds – 67% – thought the so-called “special relationship” between the UK and the US was not relevant in the modern age.

Those aged under 35 appeared a bit more concerned than most about the UK’s standing, with 57% agreeing the country’s reputation would be damaged.

Voters appeared split on their opinion of the way the prime minister was handling the situation, with 42% disapproving and 40% approving it, giving him a net approval rating of -2.


Labour leader Ed Miliband had what was known as a “net approval rating” of -6 for his handling of the issue, with 33% of people approving of how he conducted himself and 39% having the opposite view.

However, the figures were significantly better than their wider recent approval ratings.

A poll for ICM in May of this year gave David Cameron an approval rating of -15 and Ed Miliband an approval rating of -22.

During the period in which the poll was carried out, President Barack Obama said he would consult Congress about military action, and the US Secretary of State John Kerry said Washington had evidence that the nerve agent sarin had been used by the Syrian government during the deadly attack in Damascus.

But it appears that the British public have little appetite to participate in any joint military response, said BBC political research editor David Cowling.

“[There is] emphatic support for what the parliamentary parties have done, [and] emphatic views that this is not really damaging the special relationship, which I know is a matter of concern for many politicians,” he said.

He went on: “What strikes me from this poll and other polls that we have seen is that the British public certainly don’t have an appetite for our [military] engagement but also don’t see any link between us and what is going on in Syria.

“Nobody underestimates or understates the appalling damage that has been done over the last two years in Syria but there seems to be no will at all for the British people to be engaged in any military activity.”

The poll’s findings are broadly in line with other opinion polls asking similar questions, which have also concluded that a substantive majority of people are against UK military involvement in Syria.

A YouGov poll of nearly 2,000 people on Wednesday suggested 50% were against a missile strike, while 25% were in favour.


Meanwhile, a poll of nearly 2,000 people carried out by Opinium Research for the Observer newspaper on Saturday found 60% were opposed to British military action.

The interviews carried out for the poll were then weighted to the demographic profile of all adults across Britain.


4 thoughts on “Syria crisis: MPs ‘right to reject military action’ – BBC poll

  1. After David Cameron put Syrian intervention before Parliament and lost, President Obama agreed to put the matter before congress, and now there is a growing call for President Hollande of France to do the same. French opinion polls show 64% are against intervention.
    The cynic in me does wonder if this has been a carefully orchestrated way for western leaders to feign a stance of moral righteousness after two years of atrocities in Syria, while at the same time ensuring that they don’t get embroiled in the conflict.

    Publicly; “Sorry Syrians, we wanted to help but our hands our tied by the will of our people”

    Privately; “Phew, that could’ve been a really expensive and politically damaging fiasco! Especially if we pi$$e# off the Russians and Chinese! Now, back to the economy”

    What do you reckon???

    • Its an interesting theory you propose but the Syrian conflict, in my opinion, is complicated, multifaceted and will lead to military intervention by the US.

      The UK did the right thing, put it to the vote and thankfully common sense prevailed. We still remember the lies of Tony Blair and that the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya have not brought about stability or liberty to the citizens of these lands. More of our soldiers commit suicide than are killed in conflict, this speaks volumes.

      In regard to the US, the belligerent cousin from over the pond, the 2 drivers for the economy are the financial sector and the military industrial complex. The financial system is on its last legs, unfunded future liabilities many times their GDP, a housing bubble, a student loan bubble, a ‘debt ceiling’ issue which hasn’t dealt with the debt, quantitative easing and the taper issue. If they do taper, the only part of the economy that can drive it forward is the MIC.

      This leads me to the conclusion that the US needs this war to stop its economy from collapsing and from stopping the petro-dollar from collapsing. It will lose world currency status but not without making a scene, like a naughty petulant child. I just hope the American people wake up before the American dream turns into the American nightmare.

      • The American economy has always been a juggling act between military spending, public deficit, employment, finance & trade, but you’re right, it’s reached a critical mass now and the options (if any) are extremely limited. I expect the US will probably intervene in Syria in the near future, if only to destroy all the chemical weapons so that whichever faction rises to the top of the conflict, none will be able to potentially turn the chemical stocks against western interests.
        It’s still very contentious though, which side do you attack to get the best result? Ignoring for a moment the rights and freedoms of the Syrian people and just looking objectively at what would be best for “stability”, if recent history has taught us anything, it’s that a stable dictator is much easier to deal with than a democracy in turmoil!
        As always, the losers will be the innocent civilians caught in the middle and the western tax payers forced to pick up the bill.

      • Completely agree, the only losers will be the Syrian families and the Western taxpayers. In regard to which side do you attack, neither but if AlQaeda are Western enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan, logic dictates you attack the rebels. There’s no logic, just a narrative to further.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s