Eight weeks today on 2nd December, a vote was held in the House of Commons that was described by a senior Tory as a “an urgent and immediate requirement.” Prior to that vote the Government had spent months trying to win over those MPs who might have been unsupportive of their policy. Within hours of the vote, the first bombs were dropped in Syria by British planes, as if to demonstrate how vital this vote was. It took until mid January for the infamous Brimstone missiles to be used, as reported in the Telegraph on 11th January. The same article reported Michael Fallon as saying “To ensure we are doing all we can in this fight I will be meeting key coalition defence ministers next week to review progress and to plan the next stage of the strategy.” It is this subject, that was the focus of the meeting that took place last week that is vital to the arguments used during the debate, prior to the vote on Syria. During that vote various comments and admissions were made that the Government needed a plan for the action in Syria. It could be argued that dropping bombs should come after a plan is formed, not beforehand. After all, although Syria has changed in the last 30 months, and indeed our own approach, it is not as though the vote on 2nd December came out of the blue. Thirty months ago at the end of August 2013 we were being asked to support attacks on the Government of Syria, rather than on those opposed to the Government. The clock is ticking on this issue and innocent people are dying in Syria with every tick. The lack of a strategy is not an academic oversight. It is vital that Parliament discusses if their emergency debate on 2nd December gave the right outcome and what progress has been made since then, so that we too can hear. It is our taxes that fund those Brimstone missiles, we are complicit in the decisions that have been taken in our name!