ON the subject of bombing Syria.

The people who object have been described as pacifists who won’t fight back.

As an objector let me say nothing is further from the truth.

Reiterating the cruelty and wanton killing by ISIL is pointless because the objectors already understand the stakes involved and that is why they are for military intervention that will not involve wholesale slaughter of innocent people with children being the main casualties.

Cameron asked the foreign affairs select committee for its recommendations but when they didn’t include bombing they were ignored.

Former chief of defence intelligence Air Vice Marshal Sir John Walker has said that due to Government defence cuts we could not sustain an effective bombing campaign against ISIL.

Many high ranking RAF officials agree but they too have been ignored with Cameron preferring an illogical and factually weak argument concerning 70,000 foot soldiers.

He has now admitted that he does not know how many of them will support the UK, neither does he know what will come after military intervention if it is successful.

So the lessons of Iraq have not been learned and yet again we rush into a conflict that can do nobody any good.

An objector is quoted: “Only a negotiated settlement brokered by the regional powers Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey and guaranteed by the UN is capable of gaining the confidence of the Sunnis and Kurds.

“Once Syria is stabilised, IS can be defeated in such a way that it will not spring up again as soon as we turn our backs.”

This seems a far more sensible and appropriate approach to me but he could have added ‘stop the UK from arming ISIL through Saudi Arabia and give the Vienna peace talks more time’.

As for us not beating the Nazis without bombing; considering only 10 per cent of Germans supported Nazism at its height I can only assume this to be an emotive statement.

Also the bombing of London, Coventry and even Warrington did not help the German cause.

The same can be said of the bombings of more than 30 countries since the end of the Second World War by the USA and which yet again we seem to be blindly following.

Finally if MPs are not going to reflect the views of their constituents then why do we need them?

GRAHAM BRINKSMAN Orford