politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If Cameron Loses the vote thread
Perhaps it is time to review these markets, this is not good for Dave, I suspect there is no chance of UK participation in any military intervention in Syria now
Britain will still be involved, just we won't loose off about 5 Tomahawks whilst the US launch 200. That indicates that we shouldn't get into what is being planned anyway.
Let the US who sat on it the whole way through deal with it.
2135: UK Prime Minister David Cameron tells MPs: "It's clear to me that the British parliament and the British people do not wish to see military action; I get that, and I will act accordingly."
Just think, all those posters crowing in the previous thread about the fact that there were dozens of Labour MP's not there voting......and then Cameron is sunk by his own MP's. Absolute shocker from Cameron....absolute shocker!!!!
His judgement is clearly that launching a military assault on Syria is in Britain's national interest. He couldn't carry Parliament with that judgement.
2135: UK Prime Minister David Cameron tells MPs: "It's clear to me that the British parliament and the British people do not wish to see military action; I get that, and I will act accordingly."
Good. But he misread the country on this one. We are all rightly suspicious of Blair's WMD legacy. Anyway Syria is simply not in our vital strategic compass. Leave well alone .
A good day for Parliament (not counting those who decided to stay on holiday) - a rare case where politicians were in genuine doubt and voters were overwhelmingly against so their views carried the day.
Daniel Hannan @DanHannanMEP 6m David Cameron promised to transfer questions of peace and war to MPs and emphatically kept his word. Good for him, good for democracy.
"and Dave to leave as PM in 2016 with Ladbrokes at 16/1"
Quick edit to make that 2013, presumably?
Dave will hang on, surely? He doesn't even technically need parliamentary approval for a war and the rebellion was smaller than the Iraq war one. Certainly it looks bad to have miscalculated, but this isn't resignation material.
2135: UK Prime Minister David Cameron tells MPs: "It's clear to me that the British parliament and the British people do not wish to see military action; I get that, and I will act accordingly."
He should think about his own position. This man is silly.
Ironically, this last statement was genuinely statesmanlike.
As someone who has always opposed intervention I can't say I am too devastated by the result but the damage is substantial and permanent. Both Cameron and the UK will be diminished by this.
I have never understood the governments' thinking on this. All of the polling showed enormous opposition in the country. We will not recover from the lies of Iraq for a generation. We just don't want to play any more.
I seriously wonder if Hague might resign. I think he might.
Hague was supposed to be the bloke who understood the Tories, he's got this badly wrong. We know Osborne and Cameron aren't in touch but Wee Willie was supposed to have a clue wasn't he?
Yup.
There is a possibility that Hague will resign.
But I think he will be persuaded to stay on the grounds that events will overtake the vote.
It is very characteristic of this Cameron government. Cameron leads more as a Chairman rather than CEO. He is quite happy to change tack in adverse winds and this can give the impression of not being in control but although he will be disappointed by the defeat it won't throw him off course.
My respect for the HoC and its MPs has gone up in direct proportion to the distance it has fallen for Tory leadership. But the biggest loser must be Clegg and the Lib Dems if they hadn't already reached rock bottom. Surely there must now be a challenge to his leadership?
Just think, all those posters crowing in the previous thread about the fact that there were dozens of Labour MP's not there voting......and then Cameron is sunk by his own MP's. Absolute shocker from Cameron....absolute shocker!!!!
People like ScottP haven't the first idea about politics, why are you surprised?
I am not surprised Tim, just like to point out they were absolutely hanging their own leader if somehow he was crap enough to lose his own vote despite all those Labour MP's not voting.
I need to repeat it again.....An absolute shocker from Cameron. There is crap...there is really crap and there is David Cameron.
A good day for Parliament (not counting those who decided to stay on holiday) - a rare case where politicians were in genuine doubt and voters were overwhelmingly against so their views carried the day.
Jim Murphy on the World Tonight seemed totally mystified as to why parliament was supporting Assad gassing children, as well he might.
Oh well, if parliament is not fussed about the 80-year world ban on chemical warfare coming to a de facto end, so be it. The ban has been spectacularly successful - we may have failed on stopping many other nasty things, but that one has lasted unbelievably well, with just a few exceptions, until tonight.
1. Protect the national interest through all means necessary.
2. Carry a Queens Speech.
3. Carry a budget.
If a Prime Minister falls short of any of those duties their authority is finished.
It just so happens Cameron has fallen short on the first and most important duty of all - His authority will never recover either with his party or with the country.
There is absolutely no way I could carry on leading the country/government/Tories in these circumstances.
Oh it's going from bad to worse.....Gove attacking other Tories in the Lobby and claiming they support Assad with some kind of Sooty impersonation....Tories in uproar.
Anyone planning on backing an early election, keep in mind that we still have a Fixed Term Parliaments Act, and that if this affair causes a sharp drop in support for Cameron or the government it is hardly an incentive for Tory backbenchers to trigger an election. Waiting 18 months with an improving economy is still the best option, an this may well blow over anyway.
Jim Murphy on the World Tonight seemed totally mystified as to why parliament was supporting Assad gassing children, as well he might.
Oh well, if parliament is not fussed about the 80-year world ban on chemical warfare coming to a de facto end, so be it. The ban has been spectacularly successful - we may have failed on stopping many other nasty things, but that one has lasted unbelievably well, with just a few exceptions, until tonight.
Well done, Ed.
Over to you, Assad. You've got free rein now.
I don't think we can either praise or blame Ed, Richard.
There will probably be no action at all now, Obama was always less keen than Cameron and Congress seems to be even more opposed than Parliament, next week is the G20 summit and unless some new plan can be thrown together then (perhaps maybe even including Putin) the news agenda will have moved on
Just think, all those posters crowing in the previous thread about the fact that there were dozens of Labour MP's not there voting......and then Cameron is sunk by his own MP's. Absolute shocker from Cameron....absolute shocker!!!!
In party-political terms, that may be so.
In terms of this country's democracy the response from Mr Cameron sounds good to me.2135: UK Prime Minister David Cameron tells MPs: "It's clear to me that the British parliament and the British people do not wish to see military action; I get that, and I will act accordingly."
Whoops! Sorry, that was back when Cammie was talking about sending arms to the rebels, not now that he says we aren't taking sides by planning to back up a couple of hundred or so cruise missiles aimed at Assad held areas and facilities.
Here is some recent polling.
YouGov/The Times poll finds support for firing UK missiles against Syria fell to 22%, from 25% on Tues opposition grew from 50 to 51%
Which is not markedly different from US public opinion.
The BBC's chief political correspondent, Norman Smith, tweets: Prospect of a second Syria vote or UK joining any attack on #Syria would now seem a political non-starter.
Doubt this will do any harm to Cameron electorally, though, he avoids an unpopular war, Parliament is strengthened and Miliband still looks like a weasel than a man of principle and strength
Doubt this will do any harm to Cameron electorally, though, he avoids an unpopular war, Parliament is strengthened and Miliband still looks like a weasel than a man of principle and strength
That's the best one up to now...Hodges PBers....get spinning!!!! There must be something better than that.
Hague was supposed to be the bloke who understood the Tories, he's got this badly wrong. We know Osborne and Cameron aren't in touch but Wee Willie was supposed to have a clue wasn't he?
Yup.
There is a possibility that Hague will resign.
But I think he will be persuaded to stay on the grounds that events will overtake the vote.
It is very characteristic of this Cameron government. Cameron leads more as a Chairman rather than CEO. He is quite happy to change tack in adverse winds and this can give the impression of not being in control but although he will be disappointed by the defeat it won't throw him off course.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 33s Stunning scenes. Michael Gove overheard shouting at Tory rebels outside Commons chamber: “You’re a disgrace, you’re a disgrace”.
Douglas Alexander is surprisingly impressive. His Scottish accent helps give the impression of honesty.
I found him rather irritating when he was younger but now he comes across a lot better. He was exactly the same as a new 29 year old MP in 1997 and seemed strangely earnest for such a young person.
Not sure it's going to have much public impact. Obviously it's going to have a big impact on Syrian intervention itself, and Cameron's standing within the party, but with respect to the latter I don't think it'll show itself at this present moment.
Doubt this will do any harm to Cameron electorally, though, he avoids an unpopular war, Parliament is strengthened and Miliband still looks like a weasel than a man of principle and strength
What are you smoking? The PM has lost a vote on military action, which is automatically good for the leader of the opposition and bad for him.
What happens when the next chemical attack in Syria is all over the news and perhaps there are 1000s dead . Do we just ignore it?
Sadly yes. North Korea is a concentration camp for 23m yet we are not going to invade are we? We are not going to turf out X number of African or Asian dictators or even the bloke running Belarus in Europe. We cannot right the all world's wrongs. All of which is not the same as being prepared to fight , literally, for your real strategic interests. It's just Syria isn't one. Sad for its people sure but that's the way it is.
Jim Murphy on the World Tonight seemed totally mystified as to why parliament was supporting Assad gassing children, as well he might.
Oh well, if parliament is not fussed about the 80-year world ban on chemical warfare coming to a de facto end, so be it. The ban has been spectacularly successful - we may have failed on stopping many other nasty things, but that one has lasted unbelievably well, with just a few exceptions, until tonight.
Well done, Ed.
Over to you, Assad. You've got free rein now.
There really is no point in blaming Ed. He really did not know what he wanted and the amendment was clearly a mistake.
The problem, not for the first time, is that the tory party has become ungovernable and arguably incapable of governing. Only 285 votes against, some no doubt tory. The government should have been able to win this vote fairly easily but their own MPs did not support it.
I really will be surprised if Hague is in the government by the end of the weekend.
Bet Cameron wishes he never recalled the HOC. A good debate was had, but they will be repeating themselves next week, when hopefully some new information from the UN will be added. There is no doubt that Cameron originally wanted the vote to sanction UK forces being involved and then had to change the motion to be tabled, because of Labours stance. Think that Cameron/Clegg really underestimated the level of opposition, as they probably thought that most people would want action to be taken following the use of chemical weapons.
What happens when the next chemical attack in Syria is all over the news and perhaps there are 1000s dead . Do we just ignore it?
There are counter-battery radars that can tell you which direction artillery fire is coming from. I assume there's airborne versions and they're on those planes Y0kel mentioned the US were flying in.
Jim Murphy on the World Tonight seemed totally mystified as to why parliament was supporting Assad gassing children, as well he might.
Oh well, if parliament is not fussed about the 80-year world ban on chemical warfare coming to a de facto end, so be it. The ban has been spectacularly successful - we may have failed on stopping many other nasty things, but that one has lasted unbelievably well, with just a few exceptions, until tonight.
Well done, Ed.
Over to you, Assad. You've got free rein now.
I don't think we can either praise or blame Ed, Richard.
We can't even use the Lib Dems as a scapegoat.
This one was lost by the Tory backbenchers.
No it wasn't. If Labour had supported their own position - everyone agrees their amendment was effectively identical to the government motion - the motion would have passed, despite the principled objections in both parties. What's more, Cameron had already accepted all the concerns, and built them in to the government motion.
This is pure, 100%, party politics by Ed Miliband, completely unconcerned with the consequences in terms of the message it sends out.
Fair enough.
Labour, but more importantly the victims, will have to live (or die) with it.
Jim Murphy on the World Tonight seemed totally mystified as to why parliament was supporting Assad gassing children, as well he might.
Oh well, if parliament is not fussed about the 80-year world ban on chemical warfare coming to a de facto end, so be it. The ban has been spectacularly successful - we may have failed on stopping many other nasty things, but that one has lasted unbelievably well, with just a few exceptions, until tonight.
Well done, Ed.
Over to you, Assad. You've got free rein now.
I don't think we can either praise or blame Ed, Richard.
We can't even use the Lib Dems as a scapegoat.
This one was lost by the Tory backbenchers.
Yep, that's very much how the numbers stack up, which is why this is all the more damaging to Cameron. His party didn't trust or believe him when he tried to discharge his duty in a matter of war - Nothing could have caused more damage to David Cameron's authority.
His judgement is clearly that launching a military assault on Syria is in Britain's national interest. He couldn't carry Parliament with that judgement.
How can he possibly lead the country from here?
Easily. He's prepared to accept the will of Parliament (and, apparently, most of the citizens). I gather he'd be within his rights to disregard that.
Which Conservative MP do you think they should elect to the Premiership instead?
A reminder to the inept spinners - who seem intent on copying Blair's counterproductive tactics of painting those opposing a military strike as supporting a regime and it's actions - that the situation is far more complicated than their simple minds seem to be able to process.
One must therefore move on to consider the second component of the US claim, that not only has sarin been used, but that it has been used by Assad's forces. It is in this respect, at least publicly so far, that the US has produced little if any evidence to support its claim, other than to suggest that as the rebels don't have sarin, its use must therefore have been by Assad. This assumption however may be false.
For example, just two weeks ago security forces in neighbouring Iraq announced the capture of an alleged al Qaeda cell engaged in the manufacture of sarin. The al Nusra Front, long reported to be at the core of the most effective anti Assad Syria rebel forces, is integrally linked to the same al Qaeda group to which the alleged Iraqi terrorists belong.
Similarly, in neighbouring Turkey the week before, police arrested a number of Syrian al Nusra suspects, reported by the Turkish media to be in possession of sarin. Turkey is a strong supporter of Syria's rebels however, and the sarin story quickly disappeared from the Turkish media - just as also happened recently to coverage of Turkey's current anti-government protests.
To this picture must be added the comments of Carla del Ponte, a leading member of the UN Commission of Inquiry (CoI) into the alleged use of CW in Syria. The commission has yet to report, but on 6 May del Ponte, a former war crimes prosecutor, stated that there was strong evidence of the use of sarin by Syria rebels.
There is then, contrary to the US claims, ample evidence to suggest that Syria's rebels have access to sarin, or the capability to produce or acquire it. Obama himself implicitly acknowledged this in his "red line" speech of August 2012, when he stated that the red line was intended not only for Assad, but for the rebels too - suggesting his intelligence services considered this a credible possibility.
Jim Murphy on the World Tonight seemed totally mystified as to why parliament was supporting Assad gassing children, as well he might.
Oh well, if parliament is not fussed about the 80-year world ban on chemical warfare coming to a de facto end, so be it. The ban has been spectacularly successful - we may have failed on stopping many other nasty things, but that one has lasted unbelievably well, with just a few exceptions, until tonight.
Well done, Ed.
Over to you, Assad. You've got free rein now.
I don't think we can either praise or blame Ed, Richard.
We can't even use the Lib Dems as a scapegoat.
This one was lost by the Tory backbenchers.
No it wasn't. If Labour had supported their own position - everyone agrees their amendment was effectively identical to the government motion - the motion would have passed, despite the principled objections in both parties. What's more, Cameron had already accepted all the concerns, and built them in to the government motion.
This is pure, 100%, party politics by Ed Miliband, completely unconcerned with the consequences in terms of the message it sends out.
Fair enough.
Labour, but more importantly the victims, will have to live with it.
Good luck. They'll need it.
That's pathetic. Once you've reflected on that, you'll know it.
Anyone remember me being mocked on here this afternoon?
Well I was right - it was always likely that with Labour against that there would be enough Con/LD rebels to defeat the Government.
Especially when you a have a chunk who are simply determined to get Cameron. the substance of the issue is irrelevant - they are het up about gay marriage and simply want to get him.
Hague was supposed to be the bloke who understood the Tories, he's got this badly wrong. We know Osborne and Cameron aren't in touch but Wee Willie was supposed to have a clue wasn't he?
Yup.
There is a possibility that Hague will resign.
But I think he will be persuaded to stay on the grounds that events will overtake the vote.
It is very characteristic of this Cameron government. Cameron leads more as a Chairman rather than CEO. He is quite happy to change tack in adverse winds and this can give the impression of not being in control but although he will be disappointed by the defeat it won't throw him off course.
Not sure it's going to have much public impact. Obviously it's going to have a big impact on Syrian intervention itself, and Cameron's standing within the party, but with respect to the latter I don't think it'll show itself at this present moment.
My guess is that Hague will play the long game.
He took his own leadership defeat well with a high degree of self-awareness of his weaknesses in terms of appeal to the then electorate.
According to Fox News, it looks like Obama is going ahead with his plans for intervention in Syria. Much more likely the UN will be by-passed now that the UK is out of the game.
Hague was supposed to be the bloke who understood the Tories, he's got this badly wrong. We know Osborne and Cameron aren't in touch but Wee Willie was supposed to have a clue wasn't he?
Yup.
There is a possibility that Hague will resign.
But I think he will be persuaded to stay on the grounds that events will overtake the vote.
It is very characteristic of this Cameron government. Cameron leads more as a Chairman rather than CEO. He is quite happy to change tack in adverse winds and this can give the impression of not being in control but although he will be disappointed by the defeat it won't throw him off course.
Not sure it's going to have much public impact. Obviously it's going to have a big impact on Syrian intervention itself, and Cameron's standing within the party, but with respect to the latter I don't think it'll show itself at this present moment.
My guess is that Hague will play the long game.
He took his own leadership defeat well with a high degree of self-awareness of his weaknesses in terms of appeal to the then electorate.
According to Fox News, it looks like Obama is going ahead with his plans for intervention in Syria. Much more likely the UN will be by-passed now that the UK is out of the game.
Fox is even reporting the Obama is planning to go ahead without prior authority from Congress.
There should be no crowing from Labour. Cameron's misjudgement of his own party's mood, and the mood of the British people, has hugely damaged the UK's standing.
Jim Murphy on the World Tonight seemed totally mystified as to why parliament was supporting Assad gassing children, as well he might.
Oh well, if parliament is not fussed about the 80-year world ban on chemical warfare coming to a de facto end, so be it. The ban has been spectacularly successful - we may have failed on stopping many other nasty things, but that one has lasted unbelievably well, with just a few exceptions, until tonight.
Well done, Ed.
Over to you, Assad. You've got free rein now.
He hasn't though, has he? America and France will still strike, the UK will have nothing to do with it, that's all. Assad is still in a terrible position.
I think parliament probably reached the correct decision because it is a devilish issue and striking Syria with missiles can't be guaranteed to make the situation better. Hence the unusual, surprising result. I'm not convinced it is right to take action despite my heart telling me we should string Assad up from a lamp-post. The situation is so complex.
Cameron was still right to recall parliament and to offer the vote. The fact he has lost will be temporarily embarrassing but the Syria issue is not going away and the vote reasserted parliamentary democracy.
We are going to look like weak hand-wringers across the globe though and our standing in the world will be diminished. But Cameron is head of a coalition, he has no majority, this vote proves that whatever he had chosen to do, he would've lost. The appetite within parliament just isn't there to strike.
It is going to look awful it Assad gasses more civilians but I doubt he will.
Quincel - Cameron avoids an unpopular war which would have hit his poll rating, been seen though to have acted appropriately by going though parliament and the UN. Miliband shores up his leftflank but also looks to be playing politics with the national interest
Comments
Very, very crap.
This kills it once and for all and quickly. Much, much neater.
Will make Hague's task in the UNSC virtually impossible.
Interesting to see what Obama does now. Much I guess will depend on Turkey and France.
I rather fear we will be returning to this issue but I hope it won't be in response to continued and aggravated use of chemical weapons in Syria.
Cameron has played it straight. The residual poison left by Blair is still corrosive.
Significant final point of order from Miliband. Forces Cameron to rule out royal prerogative.
PM "gets" that the people and Parliament do not favour an attack.
Let the US who sat on it the whole way through deal with it.
So much for the silly season.
Seriously, what on Earth does tim mean by this?
His judgement is clearly that launching a military assault on Syria is in Britain's national interest. He couldn't carry Parliament with that judgement.
How can he possibly lead the country from here?
The right decision too IMO.
When will we see the next "Ed is Crap" thread. It ha sbeen at least 24 hours !!
David Cameron promised to transfer questions of peace and war to MPs and emphatically kept his word. Good for him, good for democracy.
No need for partisan stuff or egos.
Quick edit to make that 2013, presumably?
Dave will hang on, surely? He doesn't even technically need parliamentary approval for a war and the rebellion was smaller than the Iraq war one. Certainly it looks bad to have miscalculated, but this isn't resignation material.
Ironically, this last statement was genuinely statesmanlike.
I don't think he will, or should, resign though.
As for Miliband. Remember the silly season "weak" stuff? No? Me neither.
As someone who has always opposed intervention I can't say I am too devastated by the result but the damage is substantial and permanent. Both Cameron and the UK will be diminished by this.
I have never understood the governments' thinking on this. All of the polling showed enormous opposition in the country. We will not recover from the lies of Iraq for a generation. We just don't want to play any more.
I seriously wonder if Hague might resign. I think he might.
There is a possibility that Hague will resign.
But I think he will be persuaded to stay on the grounds that events will overtake the vote.
It is very characteristic of this Cameron government. Cameron leads more as a Chairman rather than CEO. He is quite happy to change tack in adverse winds and this can give the impression of not being in control but although he will be disappointed by the defeat it won't throw him off course.
I need to repeat it again.....An absolute shocker from Cameron. There is crap...there is really crap and there is David Cameron.
Barry Gardiner MP @BarryGardiner
Gove loses it in the lobby! Accusing colleagues of supporting Assad in a very high pitched voice.
Oh well, if parliament is not fussed about the 80-year world ban on chemical warfare coming to a de facto end, so be it. The ban has been spectacularly successful - we may have failed on stopping many other nasty things, but that one has lasted unbelievably well, with just a few exceptions, until tonight.
Well done, Ed.
Over to you, Assad. You've got free rein now.
My hunch is that hardly any of them will have voted in favour of action.
The Prime Minister has three fundamental duties.
1. Protect the national interest through all means necessary.
2. Carry a Queens Speech.
3. Carry a budget.
If a Prime Minister falls short of any of those duties their authority is finished.
It just so happens Cameron has fallen short on the first and most important duty of all - His authority will never recover either with his party or with the country.
There is absolutely no way I could carry on leading the country/government/Tories in these circumstances.
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/hansard/commons/todays-commons-debates/read/unknown/11/
We can't even use the Lib Dems as a scapegoat.
This one was lost by the Tory backbenchers.
In terms of this country's democracy the response from Mr Cameron sounds good to me.2135: UK Prime Minister David Cameron tells MPs: "It's clear to me that the British parliament and the British people do not wish to see military action; I get that, and I will act accordingly."
Here is some recent polling. Which is not markedly different from US public opinion.
Commons didn't back Con policy, Lib policy or Lab policy. Instead it backed UKIP policy!
:-)
MPs can actually get to influence events.
They saw through the lies. The JIC report was risible. YouTube... FFS
14 previous chemical attacks. LIES
Only Assad could have done it. LIES
Stunning scenes. Michael Gove overheard shouting at Tory rebels outside Commons chamber: “You’re a disgrace, you’re a disgrace”.
The problem, not for the first time, is that the tory party has become ungovernable and arguably incapable of governing. Only 285 votes against, some no doubt tory. The government should have been able to win this vote fairly easily but their own MPs did not support it.
I really will be surprised if Hague is in the government by the end of the weekend.
This is pure, 100%, party politics by Ed Miliband, completely unconcerned with the consequences in terms of the message it sends out.
Fair enough.
Labour, but more importantly the victims, will have to live (or die) with it.
Good luck. They'll need it.
Or short term political implications.
Longer term, 2015, just watch that "narrative" move on now from the 'Ed Miliband picks his nose haha!' silly season guff...
Shouldn't he be going around kissing their Osbornes, he will need their votes to replace Cameron.
Which Conservative MP do you think they should elect to the Premiership instead?
Well I was right - it was always likely that with Labour against that there would be enough Con/LD rebels to defeat the Government.
Especially when you a have a chunk who are simply determined to get Cameron. the substance of the issue is irrelevant - they are het up about gay marriage and simply want to get him.
He took his own leadership defeat well with a high degree of self-awareness of his weaknesses in terms of appeal to the then electorate.
According to Fox News, it looks like Obama is going ahead with his plans for intervention in Syria. Much more likely the UN will be by-passed now that the UK is out of the game.
Something must change there....
"Over to you, Assad. You've got free rein now."
From declaring SeanT's latest scribblings 'a work of genius' you've now taken to aping his style.
Can we have the old Nabavi back?
I think parliament probably reached the correct decision because it is a devilish issue and striking Syria with missiles can't be guaranteed to make the situation better. Hence the unusual, surprising result. I'm not convinced it is right to take action despite my heart telling me we should string Assad up from a lamp-post. The situation is so complex.
Cameron was still right to recall parliament and to offer the vote. The fact he has lost will be temporarily embarrassing but the Syria issue is not going away and the vote reasserted parliamentary democracy.
We are going to look like weak hand-wringers across the globe though and our standing in the world will be diminished. But Cameron is head of a coalition, he has no majority, this vote proves that whatever he had chosen to do, he would've lost. The appetite within parliament just isn't there to strike.
It is going to look awful it Assad gasses more civilians but I doubt he will.