It was inevitable that the “interventionists” would use the tragic slaughter in Aleppo to retrospectively justify David Cameron’s attempt to win a parliamentary vote to bomb Syria in 2013. The article by Kate Maltby (If you say ‘something must be done’ about Aleppo but opposed David Cameron when he tried to act, you have blood on your hands, 15 December) takes this argument to an absurd extreme. Given the support for the Assad regime from Iran and Russia does she really think a bombing campaign would have successfully removed him? Only a full invasion on the scale of the invasion of Iraq could have achieved that against major opposition from Iran and Russia. Even if this were successful what would Syria be like today? How many children would be crying our names?

Graham Mustin

Leeds

SOURCE:   http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/airstrikes-in-syria-were-never-the-answer-a7480066.html