Coffee House

David Cameron: Britain is not going to get involved in another war in Iraq

18 August 2014

9:10 AM

18 August 2014

9:10 AM

That there are just two weeks now until MPs return from summer recess to discuss Britain’s response to the events in Iraq, Palestine and Syria will give Downing Street some hope that a recall of Parliament is now unnecessary. That as may be, but the new British stance outlined by David Cameron and Michael Fallon yesterday would be the subject of an urgent statement and lengthy debate were the Commons sitting. Events and British involvement are changing fast and the legislature is getting no more opportunity to probe what the executive is up to than the rest of us.

This morning on BBC Breakfast, David Cameron tried to clarify what he meant:

‘I want to be absolutely clear to you and to families watching that Britain is not going to get involved in another war in Iraq, we are not going to be putting boots on the ground, we are not going to be sending in the British army. Yes we should use all the assets that we have – our diplomacy our political relationships, our aid, the military prowess and expertise that we have to help others.

‘We should use these things as part of a strategy to put pressure on Islamic State and to make sure this terrorist organisation is properly addressed and it cannot cause mayhem on our own streets.’

But though Michael Fallon was extremely helpful yesterday in explaining Britain’s increased involvement in Iraq, making the case for a lengthy engagement of whatever kind will take more than a newspaper article. And at some point MPs may begin to wonder whether they should have been consulted before the RAF became as involved as it has, or before Britain armed the Kurds. Others will argue that Parliament’s consent is not required for these sorts of actions. But it’s scrutiny surely should be.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
  • Bob Dunford

    all this do nothing,canwe do nothingwhena suicide bombgoesofat a school killing hundreds of children,your children do nothingwhena suicide bomb goesoff at asupermarket killing all your family there shopping,british foriegn minister said this war in britain could go on for years ,just think in years it couldbe a blood bath,why cant they lock downour borders do noy let any more muslems in ,put a curfew on all muslems so we know where they are,as well as having the armed police and army out there,i never thought we would end up like this,what a goverment,allowing terrorist to run a mock,with all our lives,they say there is now 1.500 returning back who have sworn a oath to kill as many christains as possible,no way should they be let in again

  • Bob Dunford

    david cameronsaid we do not wantto get involved with iraq
    when the terrorist suicide bomb goes off in one of our schools,churches ,shopping centre ,even parliament we will know then we are involved,
    wouldit not be better to have the war in iraq,with nato forces planes ,tanks,helicopters ,troops from amerca,canada,austrailia .other nato countrys then having war onour streets,canada ,austrailia already said this,lets all sit down with nato andplan this war how to stop them, as we alluse to do,nato said if a terrorist shoots at one soldier he is shooting at all the soldiers in the world,why has not cameron sat down with nato before this,it could have stopped all this killing in iraq,
    just think for your selves for one moment,in your hearts,do you want war onour streets not knowing what they have planned,if your family will still be alive the bext day,but in iraq nato military has the plans,of stopping them,please comment ask questions ,but we must stop them some how they will not go away

  • Bob Dunford

    next week nato is in wales ,uk,with every head of every country and is asking this question do you want war on your streets, or war in iraq,do you want to stop these isil terrorist or let them kill till they take over iraq, then come to your doorstep,which they will,canada ,austrailia have said we cannot protect our people, fighting as they do with suicide bombers ,on our streets,these bombs will kill hundreds,imagin it at a school,at a shoppiing centre, church,or even parliament,no we must all get together and fight them in iraq,tanks ,planes,helicopters troops ,they will not know what hit them,if they want war and death we can give them this,

  • Bob Dunford

    when the suice bombers blow up hundreds of us on our streets we are involved,
    whenthey start shooting our children on our streets we are involved,whenthey start cutting off heads aqgain on our streets we know we are involved,
    how ishe gongto make us safe ,must we stay in doors ,not send our children to school ,austrailia said we rather fight the terrorist iniraq then on our streets we cannot protect them on our streets,
    canda has said the same,america has said the same,
    wouldit not be best to fight them in iraq,with nato forces,cameron should sit down with nato along time ago and thrashed this out,to stop the isil terrorist in iraq,before they had chance to kill all those christains,every nato country is with this idea,why not cameron,will he fell safe onour streets when the lid flys off,please have a discussion talk to every one,if you do not want war on our streets,what would churchill have done,hid in a cupboard ,no he would have sat down with nato,and said like austrailia prime minister said if they want war we can give them war they never seen before,austrailia canada other countries are urging nato to go ,into iraq and stop them which i beleive is all in our hearts,

  • Roger Hudson

    The Arab spring was stupidly predicated on the idea that a few iPad wielding ‘liberal’ Arabs were a sign of a great under-swell of western democratic desire.
    We should now know that tribe, sept and religion are the powers at play, nothing from the western ‘enlightenment’.
    The British government should now totally concentrate on getting the CONTEST program re-designed and button down the UK to thwart islamic extremists at home. The government must also cut off links with the founts of terror and Wahabiism , we must live without Arab oil.

  • Ordinaryman

    “the military prowess and expertise that we have”. What planet is this man on?? Him and his kind have reduced our “military prowess and expertise” to the point where we are unable to defend our positions in a small war, examples of which are Basra and Helmand. He really should be seriously considering his suitability for the position he holds. It’s time these people realised that the real world is totally different to back rooms of an Oxbridge debating society. They may be looking at life through rose tinted glasses, but the rest of us are not. It is becoming more and more apparent that our current leaders where not born to lead and they certainly haven’t been taught to lead.

  • tolpuddle1

    If we are to defeat Islamism, we must have moderate Moslems on our side.

    Writing off Islam and all Moslems as evil, is to ensure our defeat.

    • Ordinaryman

      I agree, just show me where the moderate Muslims are, I can’t hear too many of them speaking out against the barbarism carried out in the name of Islam.

    • Dave Cockayne

      That is about as likely to work as Chamberlain asking moderate Nazi’s to consider asking their more zealot brothers to perhaps consider not exterminating the Jews.

      • tolpuddle1

        So Islam = Nazism ?

        No, I don’t accept that.

        • Dave Cockayne

          Islam is worse when you compare the two philosophies.

          Both created murderous personality cults but Hitler only wanted a thousand year Reich, Mohammed wanted the entire planet to submit to Islam forever.

          Islam splits the world into two categories, Dar al-Islam, the countries that have submitted to Islam and Dar al-Harb (the house of war) to describe the countries that haven’t.

          Both separate people into two categories (Muslim/Aryan) special people with rights, (non-Muslim/Aryan) people with no rights or diminished rights that can be killed or enslaved.

          If you strip god out of Islamic philosophy and replace him with the state what you have is a very ambitious and brutal form of fascism.

  • mahatmacoatmabag

    ISIS = Islamic State of Absolute Savagery

    coming soon to a neighborhood near you courtesy of the EU & the UK Labour party

    • Newcombe

      ISIS = Islamic State of Incessant Savagery.

    • Ordinaryman

      ISIS = Islamic State of Ingrained Savagery

  • Augustus

    Isn’t it time to take stock and ask what exactly has this fight against Islamic terrorism gained us besides an increase in the number of radical Muslims in our midst? An economic crisis, together with dismay about military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan, have probably led to a cynical and indifferent attitude to Islamic terrorism by our politicians who have tired of being interested in ME terrorism. Military capabilities have been reduced all over Europe and America too, almost as if enemies didn’t exist any more. In his Sunday Telegraph article, ‘Isil poses a direct and deadly threat to Britain’ Cameron says: “if we do not act to stem the onslaught of this exceptionally dangerous terrorist movement, it will only grow stronger until it can target us on the streets of Britain. We already know that it has the murderous intent. Indeed, the first Isil-inspired terrorist acts on the continent of Europe have already taken place.” But then he seems to lose it: ” We should be clear: this is not the “War on Terror”, nor is it a war of religions. It is a struggle for decency, tolerance and moderation in our modern world. It is a battle against a poisonous ideology that is condemned by all faiths and by all faith leaders, whether Christian, Jewish or Muslim.” So, Islam itself is at war with the Islamic State and other Islamic movements. That then begs the question: What exactly is this ‘good’ Islam, and who’s leading the good side in this ‘war of religions’? Cameron also says, “‘The position is clear. If people are walking around with Isil flags or trying to recruit people to their terrorist cause, they will be arrested and their materials will be seized. We are a tolerant people, but no tolerance should allow the room for this sort of poisonous extremism in our country.” But what does he think that flag represents? Isn’t he forgetting that there’s nothing else on but the two basic principles of islam: there is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his Prophet? And now, he says, ‘we must work with countries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the UAE, Egypt and Turkey against these extremist forces’ , but Qatar provided weapons for all Assad’s opponents, including IS, why must we work with them? And Turkey opened its borders for European jihadists so they go and fight in Syria unhindered, must we work with them too? .These were all meaningless hollow words from a man who still appears to be living in the age of the Arab Spring.

    • Ordinaryman

      “But what does he think that flag represents”? Possibly the same as a swastika, which is just a crooked cross, on a flag??

      • Augustus

        Shahada, that’s what’s on their black flag – look it up.

        • Ordinaryman

          Irony – look it up. You may also like to look up the origins of the swastika.

          • Augustus

            The shahada is found on all manner of Islamic flags, whether black, white, green etc., including the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Like the IS flag, they all portray the basic Islamic tenet. That’s the point, whichever extremist group carries them.

  • Archibald Heatherington

    I wonder why we didn’t just bomb the poo out of Assad AND the rebels in Syria when we had the chance and reduce them all to a chaotic jumble of rubble, with no coherent force on either side. This wouldn’t be happening now!

  • will91

    ‘I want to be absolutely clear to you and to families watching that Britain is not going to get involved in another war in Iraq,”

    That statement reeks of that odious belief that the British people are somehow “war weary.” That is one of the most frankly irritating and misguided clichés I have ever come across. The citizens of Coventry were war weary during the Blitz, the citizens of Fallujah and Aleppo are war weary. How can it possibly be said that we are war weary? That is an insult to those who have lost family members. All the rest of us are required to do is put up with hearing about the war on the news and even that is has proved beyond what people are willing to stomach.

  • will91

    “Weakness is a provocation” – Donald Rumsfeld.

    • Ordinaryman

      And he was right on this occasion!

  • E Hart

    They [Isis] haven’t faced any real opposition yet. When they do, they’ll collapse. The reasons for this are simple; they are a disparate ramble; zealotry with inhumanity (doesn’t win friends and alienates any chance of gaining popular support – coercion never equates to persuasion); it’s military success so far is based on an ability to drive pick-up trunks down trunk roads; they have no air power and despite appearances to the contrary they can’t use much of the equipment they’ve got except on Youtube videos; they are vulnerable to running out of lolly (Who’s going to bankroll them, do the catering and iron the pyjamas indefinitely?), oh, and they are surrounded by enemies (Turkey, Iran, Kurdistan, Jordan, Shia Iraq, Assadi Syria, Lebanon and the West). In short – vile though they are – they have got more chance of dying an early death than they have of forming an Islamic caliphate.

    Like all divided houses, this one isn’t going to stand either.

  • CharlietheChump

    We should reflect on the Tilbury container and conside whether the published immigration figures have any basis in reality at all. How many more shiploads have slipped through?

  • Mynydd

    How long will it be before Mr Cameron finds other word(s) for war in Iraq.

    • Inverted Meniscus

      You mean like the war in Iraq that the Fascist scum of the Labour Party dragged us into? Do you mean that Iraq? Labour Troll.

      • Mynydd

        Maybe he could come up with ‘no fly zone’ or ‘training’ or ‘peace keeping’ plenty of words that could be used instead of war.

  • Barry Obongo

    There are so many ways to parse this:

    ‘I want to be absolutely clear to you and to families watching that Britain is not going to get involved in another war in Iraq, we are not going to be putting boots on the ground, we are not going to be sending in the British army. Yes we should use all the assets that we have – our diplomacy our political relationships, our aid, the military prowess and expertise that we have to help others.

    Mr Cameron should explain why backing *some* of the Kurds with military assistance will produce a different outcome to the carnage in Libya and Syria (oh, and Iraq and Afghanistan). And has he got one eye on rapidly-disintegrating Algeria?

    ‘We should use these things as part of a strategy to put pressure on Islamic State and to make sure this terrorist organisation is properly addressed and it cannot cause mayhem on our own streets.’

    It matters not whether IS or its proxies realise a physical terrorist attack on British soil; what matters is that, whilst the violence-espousers like IS and al-Qaida spring up and do localised damage, the gradualist approach of the Muslim Brothers and thousands of other like-minded movements continues to erode hard-won liberties and social cohesion through Islamisation. And then there’s the jihad of the womb…

  • Colonel Mustard

    “Yes we should use all the assets that we have”

    Which are somewhat less in the military department after you decided that giving billions of borrowed money away in aid to foreign countries was something that you could be most proud of. Let me be clear about this – it takes a man of rare stupidity to compromise the security of his own country in the vain hope of securing the goodwill of those who hate him anyway and will still hate him.

    • dado_trunking

      Face the future Colonel – Eurocorps.

      You might as well face it today.

      • Colonel Mustard

        “Eurocorps” will be about as effective as a chocolate fireguard even if that bunch of mega-tweeting, spineless Euro politicians could agree on an “appropriate” military response to anything.

        The first “Eurocorps” that Napoleon dragged into Russia in 1812 did not fare very well. A cohesive, monocultural military with a singular command and control system is going to be more not less essential in future.

  • the baracus

    We are now reaping the rewards for the packing our national institutions with socialism’s useful idiots. The sheer stupidity of encouraging the removal of national governments in the middle east results in a vacuum that results in what we see today. The Arab spring was nothing more then an Arab Springboard for the jihadists. The most amazing this in all of this is that their motives and goals have not changed, but we have gone from bombing their enemies for them and supplying them arms, to fighting the very same people in little over a year….. useful idiots indeed….

    • Mynydd

      Who was the cheer leader for the Arab spring, and used the RAF to remove a national government in Libya, none other than socialism’s useful idiot, the Prime Minister Mr Cameron.

      • the baracus

        Yes – I’m sure that in your little world, you believe the PM forms the countries foreign policy having dreamt of a solution the night before and after finishing his breakfast. Unfortunately, the prevailing consensus would more likely be a result of the socialist government in exile, full of useful idiots – ironically your fellow brethren, whose idiotic Utopian views (such as collectivism) are doomed to fail.

        • Mynydd

          As Prime Minister Mr Cameron is responsible for all government policy and actions. At the moment government policy seem to change between breakfast and tea time and which minister is in front of the TV camera In Libya Mr Cameron change the no fly zone policy into the action of bombing tanks and other targets.

      • the viceroy’s gin

        Your Millipedal heroes voted up the Libya disaster. UKIP scared you types off re Syria, after you’d first gone over like typical socialist lemmings with Call Me Dave .

      • Inverted Meniscus

        Labour Troll. Please ignore.

  • In2minds

    “‘I want to be absolutely clear to you” –

    Now why do I find that funny?

  • zanzamander

    Who are the people in the photo? Isis?

    • GUBU

      I doubt it. ISIS are not big on gender equality.

      • lucillalin

        Probably Kurdish fighters

        • http://owsblog.blogspot.com Span Ows

          correct

    • Holly

      NC-IS.
      Shame to admit this, but I love the lasses trousers.

  • Frank

    Dave hung out to dry by moronic speech writer, or does this show Dave’s gift for words?
    This is a wonderful example of foreign policy made on the hoof by not very bright people and I include Dave/Clegg/Miliband in this.
    To think that this is what Britain has been reduced to.

    • Mynydd

      Please understand Mr Cameron/Clegg being the government can make foreign policy, on or off the hoof, however Mr Miliband being the opposition cannot make foreign policy.

      • Inverted Meniscus

        Remind us all, which party embroiled us in Middle Eastern wars in the first place? Ah yes, the Fascist Labour Party of Blair and Brown. Bastards!

        • Mynydd

          Remind us all, which party embroiled us in Libya, and two years later had to send a warship to pull out our own people

  • zanzamander

    Jihadis are foot soldiers of Islam and come in many guises and not all carry guns. They want Islam to dominate and take different routes to achieve the same goal. Many want quick results and pick up guns while many others are patient and play the long game.

    Our understanding of Islam, Jihad and terrorism is totally muddled, politicised and compromised by the constraints of democracy, guilt and plain ignorance. Here is our PM wanting to bomb Jihadis thousands of miles away yet is afraid to say a single word against the very same ideology that inspires these killers here at home.

    In the end Jihadis will win. Sure, just like in Afghanistan, we’ll call it our victory, but the end result will be the same that has happened throughout history – a victory for Islam.

    • tolpuddle1

      The West fought Islam for many centuries and won.

      But in those days, the West believed in Christianity, in something worth defending.

      I don’t see many private equity bosses or hedge fund operators (or right-wing commentators) rushing off to defend our very wonderful capitalist, post-Christian society.

  • zanzamander

    And not too long ago, this same PM stood up in the same parliament and wanted us to help these very same Islamists in Syria that he now wants us to bomb in Iraq.

    So it is ok to support Jihadis when they’re fighting people we don’t like.

  • Kitty MLB

    Indeed but those in the Middle East are not building an Islamic
    terrorist state in order to play scrabble on their prayer mats.
    The ulitmate goal is to destroy the West. And evil thrives when good men do and say nothing (according to Edmund Burke)
    We could build a wall around the West and wait for them to play
    knock, knock..that may happen when Cameron and all other current leaders are gone..but it will happen. And yet in this country
    we have those who will hold the viper to their breast…they need dealing with.For us or against us.
    In the words of Churchill ( repeating myself) some feed the crocodile first hoping it will eat them last.

    • Andy

      Scrabble is so ‘un-Islamic’.

      • Kitty MLB

        Okay, Cricket in the desert..but the balls will be different.

        • Andy

          Now Dear, you’re not very good at this Islamic stuff. No cricket either – mussies are not very sporting.

          • Harry Pond

            Don’t they gallop about on horses throwing a dead goat at each other or something?

            • Andy

              Polo !!!!!!

              • Roger Hudson

                I thought that was played with a man’s (your enemy’s) head in a sack as the ‘ball’.

                • Harry Pond

                  That was in ‘The Man who would be King’ with Caine and Connery- if only they were available to deal with this IS. crowd. Having said that the Burpers from Carry on up the Khyber were far more frightening than IS. will ever be.

    • ButcombeMan

      Where is the wise counsel of Anthony Charles Lynton Blair when we need it. He understood Iraq.

      • Kitty MLB

        Yes well that lunatic went on his own crusade but now the genie is out of the box.The whole situation
        with the Middle East can be linked back to him.
        But that wont stop the savages from coming here one day and murdering your grandchildren .
        They and those here in the same vein need dealing
        with.

        • Archibald Heatherington

          I think it can be linked back to Mohammed…

          • Kitty MLB

            Fair point but Blair still has blood on his hands,
            and we have those living here who hold a viper to their
            breast because he thought such people should
            live amongst us in the West.

        • Kennybhoy

          Incoherebt caca which is completely contradictory of what you wrote a mere to hours previous…?

          The current situation in Iraq is not the result of western intervention but of western withdrawal!

          Backing up the US after 9/11 was probably the only good thing Blair ever did!

          • Kitty MLB

            You mean what I mentioned about Cameron
            clearing up unnecessary mess that we aught
            not have got involved in to start with.

            Well I have decided to keep out of these Iraq
            debates, all a bit to heavy for me.

  • http://owsblog.blogspot.com Span Ows

    Did he mention is isn’t about religion again?

    (cue Hookie attack in 5…4…3..)

Close