MPs will soon get to vote again on whether Britain should proceed with airstrikes on ISIS in Syria. How would you vote?
Login
Sign up to Soapbox today and join the debate for FREE
ROSS
Scotland, United Kingdom
56
Audience
DEBATE STATISTICS
9 Comments
0 Pros
0 Cons
SHARE
Please select a debate to comment on
- Yes!
- No!
DEBATE STATISTICS
10 Comments
0 Pros
0 Cons
X
Login with soapbox
Login without using Facebook or Twitter
Complete the form below to reset your password.
Debate at your
fingerprints
fingerprints
● Talk, Discuss & Share
● Join & Create Societies
● Get involved
● Cheer & Heckle
Connect to soapbox with...
We recommend this for instant login
Login with soapbox
Login directly using your Soapbox account
Register with soapbox
Join the number 1 place online for FREE debate
Profile details
Make your account a little bit more personal!
Get started
Pick some categories, these will populate your account
with latest debates and news from these topics.
with latest debates and news from these topics.
Got a promo code?
Good job Jake!
Your account has now been created on Soapbox.
You should now receive a confirmation email confirming your account details.
You should now receive a confirmation email confirming your account details.
Welcome to Soap BOX
You have 1 free megaphone!
You have 1 free megaphone!
Click below to find out more about Soapbox Megaphones
or get started and post a debate to Soapbox.
or get started and post a debate to Soapbox.
OR
X
X
Yes!
Pro
Con
I would surprise myself and vote yes. It needs to be a part of a much wider strategy though airstrikes alone won't do it.
3 years ago by Linda Wilson
That vote will go through I'd think. I'm not really decided on this and I'm only commenting in this column, not voting yes. So far the bombings have made little impact let's just face it.
3 years ago by Rahul N.
Bomb 'em. But ground troops are called for, and specialised troops at that.
3 years ago by Old man Ehlers
3 years ago by Felipe
I think Jeremy Corbyn should change his tactics cos all the Labour ops are complaining of harassment and bullying over this thing.
3 years ago by Tristan11
Yes to not do it would be irresponsible no? Isis have the daggers out of Europe's citizens and we have a window to disable there network. Of course yes.
3 years ago by bryanevans
Yes becos the strategy is now working. What do people want, let this thing burn out by itself or be pacifists? Yea it will burn out ok but it will burn out all over the world and take a lot of ppl down. They are fascists.
2 years ago by James Ellis
When I hear of more people throw off buildings I think it's time to go to war, properly. Why are we giving these bullies even the time of day and why are we being so ridiculous and passive?
Air strikes by all means yes, plus we should support local troops and make sure that we take a few tips from the Israeli troops which are the only ones that ISIS truly fear. We have a common enemy, and an odious gruesome enemy, and let's deal with this thing.
2 years ago by bryanevans
How would I vote? There are only rotten options to the question. I hear a lot of Change Foreign Policy and I think that is the most important message but at the same time Isis are not going to spare anyone or withdraw unless they are forced to at this point. they are too power drunk to do anything of that sort.
2 years ago by Mongoose
No!
Pro
Con
That vote is going through regardless. No I don't agree with it. Local and regional forces should be equipped not foreign bombing that will create more heat internationally. The other part is that a war like this can only be won on the ground and not from the air, another argument for forces from the region having to push Isis back. To me this is a bit of a shortcut that will back fire. Just like most other military action has backfired over the last 15 years or more.
3 years ago by Braden Kelly
Western attacks fuel more terror. How many times do we have to try before we figure that out?
3 years ago by Norman
I have had a big rethink about this. I'm really not sure. We can heap guilty ourselves by being passive and also by taking the wrong action. Taking no action seems not really good enough anymore faced with a network that is bent on our defeat and death. I always stood with 'no bombing' but I think it's more important to find the RIGHT action. And bombing could even be a part of that right action.
3 years ago by TYT
No but it will go through. They don't feel that they any other options.
3 years ago by The Oracle
Tragic wrong decision today. 3-2 Majority.
3 years ago by Nicole C
Like a band of lemmings sad to say. I thought we were supposed to learn from history?
3 years ago by Norman
What's you alternative? Negotiations? Diplomacy?
3 years ago by Old man Ehlers
I have had a big rethink about this. I'm really not sure. We can heap guilty ourselves by being passive and also by taking the wrong action. Taking no action seems not really good enough anymore faced with a network that is bent on our defeat and death. I always stood with 'no bombing' but I think it's more important to find the RIGHT action. And bombing could even be a part of that right action. Like Ehlers says diplomacy is like a joke to these people.
3 years ago by TYT
It seems that the bombings have worked even though the left is not wanting to admit that. Isis is on the run in there own territories.
2 years ago by bryanevans
Big demonstration against the Syria war today I wanted to join.
3 years ago by robbie_t