Apparently anxious to allow me to form my own opinions in life, my father had always seemed reluctant to offer very much advice when I was growing up. However, amongst some hurried instructions he gave me (as he drove me to catch the train which would take me to start my military service) I particularly recall being told to avoid discussing religion, politics, and sex.
Interestingly, almost sixty years later, I can claim - to some extent - to have followed his instructions to the letter; the only exception being that I've arrived at a point in life when it seems that the only relationship I have with sex is to talk about it.
Putting that aside, however, although I believe that politics and religion in some parts of the world have become intertwined to such an extent that they are almost the same thing. The fact that a significant number of conflicts throughout history have been motivated by religious factors but initiated by politicians is hard to deny.
Turning to the present, however, I'm afraid that I am going to have to disobey my father by visiting a subject which is quite definitely political. I'm referring, of course to the Syrian crisis - and, in particular, my take on the UK's position and to offer my own opinion on what caused the rather awkward position in which the government now finds itself (more later).
In order do address the situation, it is necessary to take into account the effect the Blair's government controversial decision to get involved in the Iraq invasion has had on the current position. Clearly, for example, the court of public opinion in the UK seems to be against British troops becoming involved in Syria - or, for that matter, any military action in the foreseeable future.
Understandable though that stance might seem, there is (IMHO) a far more compelling argument to justify the present government's decision to consider action against the Assad regime than there ever was to topple Saddam Hussein. For example, evidence of chemical weapons in Syria is indisputable and certainly more plausible than that provided by the 'dodgy document' upon which Mr. Blair based his decision.
Somewhat inevitably, however, (and this is where the Blair factor takes effect) consequences of the Iraq war - and, to some extent, the other conflict in which Blair decided to involve British troops, Afghanistan - have deterred the Great British public from supporting any further loss of British lives.
Now, no one would deny that the general public can be excused for being against British involvement in Syria because, in that respect, they have been consistent in their opposition. That consistency, however, cannot be said for the official Opposition in The United Kingdom - i.e. The Labour Party.
Let in never be forgotten that up until the morning of yesterday's debate when the government was sensationally defeated, the leader of the Labour party had given his assurance to the Prime Minister that he would be supporting the coalition's proposals. Predictably, however, some bright spark in the socialist camp recognised an opportunity to inflict serious damage to the Conservative party (and, in particular, Mr. Cameron) by withdrawing the aforementioned support for purely political reasons and the outcome is now history. Shame on them.
Interestingly, almost sixty years later, I can claim - to some extent - to have followed his instructions to the letter; the only exception being that I've arrived at a point in life when it seems that the only relationship I have with sex is to talk about it.
Putting that aside, however, although I believe that politics and religion in some parts of the world have become intertwined to such an extent that they are almost the same thing. The fact that a significant number of conflicts throughout history have been motivated by religious factors but initiated by politicians is hard to deny.
Turning to the present, however, I'm afraid that I am going to have to disobey my father by visiting a subject which is quite definitely political. I'm referring, of course to the Syrian crisis - and, in particular, my take on the UK's position and to offer my own opinion on what caused the rather awkward position in which the government now finds itself (more later).
In order do address the situation, it is necessary to take into account the effect the Blair's government controversial decision to get involved in the Iraq invasion has had on the current position. Clearly, for example, the court of public opinion in the UK seems to be against British troops becoming involved in Syria - or, for that matter, any military action in the foreseeable future.
Understandable though that stance might seem, there is (IMHO) a far more compelling argument to justify the present government's decision to consider action against the Assad regime than there ever was to topple Saddam Hussein. For example, evidence of chemical weapons in Syria is indisputable and certainly more plausible than that provided by the 'dodgy document' upon which Mr. Blair based his decision.
Somewhat inevitably, however, (and this is where the Blair factor takes effect) consequences of the Iraq war - and, to some extent, the other conflict in which Blair decided to involve British troops, Afghanistan - have deterred the Great British public from supporting any further loss of British lives.
Now, no one would deny that the general public can be excused for being against British involvement in Syria because, in that respect, they have been consistent in their opposition. That consistency, however, cannot be said for the official Opposition in The United Kingdom - i.e. The Labour Party.
Let in never be forgotten that up until the morning of yesterday's debate when the government was sensationally defeated, the leader of the Labour party had given his assurance to the Prime Minister that he would be supporting the coalition's proposals. Predictably, however, some bright spark in the socialist camp recognised an opportunity to inflict serious damage to the Conservative party (and, in particular, Mr. Cameron) by withdrawing the aforementioned support for purely political reasons and the outcome is now history. Shame on them.
