Syria: why warnings about good men doing nothing won’t swing the debate

Danny Finkelstein writes  in his column for The Times today that just because we are unsure about what the outcome and effect of any intervention in Syria may be, that is not reason enough to do nothing. Further to support his case for military intervention he suggested that those that argue against military intervention fail to grasp that the consequences of that approach are impossible to anticipate as well. In other words, quite possibly damned if you do and damned if you don’t. Well I certainly agree with the latter point.

I fully accept that I am no expert on the Syrian crisis, and the complexities of the region. I was not elected to Parliament by my constituents because of that or despite that, but this Thursday I will have to vote on a motion that will ask the House to support armed intervention in Syria. I can only listen carefully to the arguments and, hopefully the evidence put before the House and make up my mind accordingly.