The unwillingness of the West and particularly the UK parliament to carry out military action against a regime that used chemical weapons against civilians, prolonged the conflict in Syria, allowed the extremists to gain more power over the more moderate rebels, and led to them being a direct threat to Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey.

We could chose not to intervene in Syria again, and this time it might be the right answer. But by refusing to defend civilians in Iraq and Syria against brutal mercenaries and brutal government forces, we will be condemning millions more civilians to become refugees, tens of thousands to death, and thousands to torture and rape.

We get all outraged by a few beheadings of British and American citizens, while choosing to ignore the same fate befalling hundreds or thousands or civilians in the north of Iraq at the hands of the same groups.

NATO should have imposed a no fly zone over Syria a couple of years ago. NATO should now prevent the movement of military vehicles anywhere in Syria and Iraq except with their permission.

What we have seen is exactly what occurred when the Soviet Union left Afghanistan. I expect the same will happen again in Afghanistan - probably next year, and the Taliban will be back in charge (or possibly a more extreme group).

We should not forget that there have been plenty of peacekeeping operations that have not been complete failures and that have saved the lives of millions of innocent civilians. Of course it is easier to not get involved and to allow the slaughter and torture to continue, but I don't believe that is the moral choice.