The UK’s establishment press (i.e. the pro-war press) has been raving about a speech that Labour MP Hilary Benn made in support of joining the US, France and Russia in bombing Syria.

The Spectator published the text of the speech with the headline “Full text of Hilary Benn’s extraordinary speech in favour of Syria airstrikes”

Below are some quotes from it and my comments.

The speech opens with a call for Prime Minister David Cameron to apologize for calling Jeremy Corbyn a “terrorist sympathiser”. That’s the high point of Benn’s speech. It’s all downhill from there.

“…we have a moral and a practical duty to extend the action we are already taking in Iraq to Syria…We now have a clear and unambiguous UN Security Council Resolution 2249….because every state has the right to defend itself – why would we not uphold the settled will of the United Nations”

He uses third rate sophistry to insinuate that the UK has some kind of legal obligation to bomb Syria. The UN resolution he refers to is not a chapter VII resolution. The U.K. would therefore have a very dubious legal authorization – never mind obligation – to bomb Syria.

“…can we really stand aside and refuse to act fully in our self-defence against those who are planning these attacks?”

He simply asserts that dropping bombs defends people in the UK rather than exposing them – never mind innocent bystanders in Syria  – to even more risk.

 “And if we do not act, what message would that send about our solidarity with those countries that have suffered so much – including Iraq and our ally, France….It has been argued in the debate that airstrikes achieve nothing. Not so. Look at how Daesh’s forward march has been halted in Iraq.”

Ah yes Iraq – that stunning success that continues to embarrass anti-war activists. Damn. Was hoping he would not bring it up. Didn’t Tony Blair say in 2003 that – twelve years invading Iraq to get rid of non-existent WMD – the UK would be bombing a terrorist group with a foothold in Iraq, Syria and Libya?  Was over a decade of bombing “acting in self-defence” as has been constantly claimed, or was it acting in self-destruction by enflaming the threat of anti-western terrorism – to say nothing of the destruction unleashed on the people in those war ravaged countries?

“Now, I share the concerns that have been expressed this evening about potential civilian casualties. However, unlike Daesh, none of us today act with the intent to harm civilians. Rather, we act to protect civilians from Daesh – who target innocent people.”

Well that makes all the difference in the world to people who watch their loved ones get blown up by UK bombs doesn’t it? The lack of concern is why a moronic speech like this is widely hailed by the establishment press. Consequences for UK are brushed aside, never mind Syrians.

“But I’ll tell you what else we know, is whatever the number – 70,000, 40,000, 80,000 – the current size of the opposition forces mean the longer we leave taking action, the longer Daesh will have to decrease that number.”

Here we have pathetic delusions of military grandeur – as if no other countries were bombing Syria and the UK’s contribution was going to be a game changer. The nineteenth century is over. Please move on.

Benn closes with the stupid but obligatory and predictable WWII analogy below. Surprised he didn’t work in a warning that the UK must not risk being like Neville Chamberlain.

“And we are here faced by fascists. Not just their calculated brutality, but their belief that they are superior to every single one of us in this chamber tonight, and all of the people that we represent. They hold us in contempt. They hold our values in contempt. They hold our belief in tolerance and decency in contempt. They hold our democracy, the means by which we will make our decision tonight, in contempt. And what we know about fascists is that they need to be defeated. And it is why, as we have heard tonight, socialists and trade unionists and others joined the International Brigade in the 1930s to fight against Franco. It’s why this entire House stood up against Hitler and Mussolini. It is why our party has always stood up against the denial of human rights and for justice. And my view, Mr Speaker, is that we must now confront this evil. It is now time for us to do our bit in Syria. And that is why I ask my colleagues to vote for the motion tonight.”

---