This video from the USA says about itself:
Britain Votes No On Syria Intervention
1 September 2013
British Prime Minister David Cameron lost a vote endorsing military action against Syria by 13 votes Thursday, a stunning defeat that will almost guarantee that Britain plays no direct role in any U.S. attack on Bashar Assad’s government.
Read more here.
From daily News Line in Britain:
Friday, 13 April 2018
THE TORY Cabinet was in an emergency session yesterday evening with PM May meeting resistance from fellow Tory cabinet members over joining France and giving full support to Trump’s projected strike on Syria.
Earlier, Germany stated it will not join any military strikes against the Syrian government, with Chancellor Angela Merkel saying: ‘Germany will not take part in possible military action. There have not been any decisions yet, I want to stress that.
‘But we support everything that is being done to show that the use of chemical weapons is not acceptable.’ Germany, however, expects to be consulted before any Western allies conduct an attack on Syria, as partners must be united on the matter, Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said.
German government supports possible attack on Syria (without participating itself): here.
Barely in office, Germany’s grand coalition of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) and conservative Union parties (Christian Democratic Union, Christian Social Union) has commenced its programme of massive rearmament as laid down in its coalition agreement. A number of defence projects and military strategic plans have been announced in the past few days. They all serve one goal: to prepare Germany once again for war despite the catastrophic defeats in two global conflicts: here.
A YouGov poll asked the British public whether they would support a military attack on Syria.
Only 22% said that they would. Earlier in the day Ken Clarke, former Tory chancellor, said parliament should be recalled this weekend if the cabinet backs military intervention in Syria.
He said: ‘In a modern parliamentary democracy, you’ve got to have parliamentary approval before it acts, if you have a planned policy decision to launch a military attack.’ Clarke said he would back targeted strikes but only after a debate in parliament.
He said: ‘If the cabinet decides it is going to take part in military action, I think we could meet on Saturday. You don’t just wave aside accountability to parliament because it is inconvenient. Saturday or Sunday you could sit.’
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said: ‘Parliament must be consulted on this. Surely the lessons of Iraq, the lessons that came there from the Chilcot Report, have got to be learnt; there has to be a proper process of consultation. We elect Parliament, we elect Members of Parliament, they should have a voice in this. The cabinet on its own should not be making this decision. The dangers of bombing now could escalate the conflict beyond belief. Just imagine the scenario if an American missile shoots down a Russian plane or vice versa. Where do we go from there?’
Meanwhile, the British cabinet has agreed on “action” against Syria, bypassing Parliament.
The international chemical weapons watchdog has confirmed the UK chemical weapons lab Porton Down’s analysis of the type of nerve agent used in the poisoning of double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons did not name the nerve agent as Novichok.
British scientists at the Porton Down defence research laboratory insisted that they have not established that the nerve agent used to poison Sergei and Yulia Skripal was made in Russia.
Gary Aitkenhead, the chief executive of the government’s Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL), said that the source could not be identified.
Once again, Boris Johnson is a liability to Britain. Why is he still in the job?
He may have bent the truth over Porton Down and the source of novichok and baited Russia. But the foreign secretary always gets away with it.