Ross MP defends decision to back Iraq bombing
Register for free to read more of the latest local news. It's easy and will only take a moment.
JOHN Thurso has defended his decision to back bombing raids in Iraq, saying it was "absolutely right" that Britain go back in and "clear up the mess" that it made in 2003.
The MP for MP for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross said the air strikes against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) were "morally right and lawful".
MPs voted by 524 to 43 to sanction the strikes following a six hour Commons debate on Friday. Britain has sent six Tornado jets
to the country.
The group has attracted jihadist volunteers from many countries, including hundreds from Britain, to join its claim of jihad in Iraq and Syria. He said the aerial bombardment was "totally different" to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
John Thurso had commitments in the north, preventing him from casting a vote in the Commons, but supports plans to use air strikes to weaken the Isil movement.
He said: "The agreement at the moment is the airpower will be sufficient to allow Iraq and other Arab troops on the ground to do what is required. If that turns out to be not constructive then we would have to look again at the problem."
Lord Richards, formerly General Sir David Richards, who retired last year as chief of the general staff - Britain’s most senior soldier, said Isis was "not a terrorist organisation".
"It might commit acts of terror, but it has tanks, artilleries, huge wealth, courts of justice of it’s own kind", he told The Times.
The nationalists’ Westminster leader, Angus Robertson, made the party’s position clear by tweeting during the debate that MPs from the SNP would vote against the UK government’s motion which made "no mention of a plan for winning the peace".
Mr Robertson was one of 43 MPs who voted against the air strikes.
He was unavailable for comment, but in a written statement said: "The cruelty and inhumanity of ISIL is beyond doubt and no right thinking person would not want that organisation to disappear. But
fundamentally there is no plan over what next after the bombing has started. There was not a single mention in the UK Government’s motion anywhere about strategy or a plan to win the peace. The motion simply asked for a green light for military action which could last for years but with no commitment for post conflict resolution. For that reason I could not support the Government’s motion."
