FOR over seven years the Syrian civil war has raged and again Britain is considering taking action in response to an alleged chemical attack.

It gives me no pleasure to say this but it’s time we accepted there is nothing we can do to help now.

Because of the personal and ideological nature of this conflict it will only end when one side achieves total victory.

Whenever conflict is suspended it always favours the side that is weakest and on the defensive as it gives them time to regroup and prepare for the next round of fighting and thus prolong the war resulting in even higher casualties.

The west had its chance to intervene effectively years ago before Russia joined in.

Our reluctance to commit fully was understandable from the mess of earlier interventions and will be debated by historians for centuries to come, but now launching missiles or calling for a ceasefire will simply shift the balance of power closer towards a never ending stalemate.

So what should the British Government do now?


We missed the chance to give a decisive edge to one side and cannot now risk full scale military action due to the Russian participation.

The best we can hope for is a quick end to the war which looks certain to be an Assad victory.

I’m not saying we should like it, but should accept it and get it over with quickly.

Dr Scott Marmion,

Woodthorpe, York

Futile to negotiate with Assad regime

“ALL it needs for evil men to succeed is for good men to do nothing” - Edward Burke.

In 2013 David Cameron asked Parliament to vote for action to stop Assad from murdering his own men, women and children and Labour voted this down.

Now, five years and tens of thousands of innocent deaths later, Theresa May together with our American and French allies have done something to try to stop it and instead of supporting her Jeremy Corbyn prefers to defend Assad and Putin.

I used to think that Corbyn was at heart a good man - just misguided.

Now I am not so sure.

Anthony Taylor,

Grassholme, Woodthorpe, York

History is repeating itself in Syria crisis

AS I recall no-one was particularly bothered back in the 1980s when the Assad regime in Syria showed just how repressive they could be, even when only Islamic factionalism and not oil was involved.

When a Muslim Brotherhood attempt to assassinate the then President Assad failed his immediate response was to execute all the thousands of political prisoners in his jails.

The Syrian army then besieged the city of Hama which was showing signs of rebellion, killing between 20,000 and 40,000 civilians, many allegedly through the use of hydrogen cyanide gas possibly obtained from his friends in the Soviet Union in exchange for the use of a Mediterranean naval base.

Plus ca change.

A V Martin,

Westfield Close, Wigginton, York

We are facing a very worrying situation

PERHAPS if the USA had agreed with Winston

Churchill after the last war to “finish” Russia, this situation would not have occurred.

Churchill wanted that to happen but the USA were tired of war and took their bat and went home.

History would have depicted a different picture, would it not?

Hindsight is a wonderful thing I know, but Russia has always wanted to dominate, intimidate with persistent threats and deeds.

A very worrying and concerning situation.

Pamela Frankland,

Hull Road, Dunnington,York