We’re being dragged into war because our liberal elite is bored

Let’s face it, sorting out a moribund economy is no fun. Neither is reforming the welfare state. Or stopping hospitals torturing patients. Or dealing with the consequences of allowing two of the horsemen of the modern apocalypse – rampant immigration and multiculturalism – to ride roughshod over the land. It’s slow, painful, unrewarding, unpopular work. But ordering air-strikes against a cruel dictator in a distant country which now has nothing to do with us is peasy – and, with any luck, you’ll be out of office by the time someone has to sort out the consequences!

For a start, it allows leading politicians to look tough and decisive for a change: Cameron can appeal to traditional Tories by coming over all Churchillian, Nick Clegg can simper compassionately about dead children, and Ed Miliband – oh, who cares! A Labour MP of the female persuasion can burnish their lefty credentials by opposing the war and threatening to resign (then it was Clare Short, now it’s – who else? – Diane Abbott).

As for the BBC, well, it’s monumentally bored. If Labour were 20% ahead in the polls and there were no signs of recovery in the economy, or welfare reforms were proving unpopular, or viewers were swallowing all the propaganda about non-existent “cuts”, or Britons were indignant at the new anti-immigrant rhetoric emanating from the Tory Party, or the corporation wasn’t still embroiled in paedophile sex scandals and trying to rebuild its reputation following some appalling journalistic blunders, I suspect the Beeb would be whipping itself up into an anti-war frenzy right now. Instead, it has decided to back the political class,  just as it did before Iraq and the Falklands. Of course, at the first sign of things going wrong – a western missile killing civilians, a reprisal terrorist attack in this country – the corporation will immediately be clawing at the government’s throat.

Like most conservatives, I was a member of the “something must be done” majority over Iraq and Afghanistan. I still accept the basic neocon tenet that democracy is a good thing and should be encouraged everywhere, on the basis that democracies – among many other benefits - are generally less keen on starting wars than dictatorships. There was – I’ll admit it – a tear in my eye when the Iraqis first braved attack by terrorist swine to vote in free elections in 2005. I loathe fascist thugs and I enjoy seeing them being horsewhipped by the prefects. And the sight of shrieking anti-Western nihilists at anti-war protest rallies makes me wish I had the power to call in an air-strike myself. But I now classify myself as a former intervenionist who got mugged by reality.

There are – true – some reasons for intervening in Syria's civil war. But unless lobbing a few missiles into the country is a prelude to air-strikes against Iran to halt its nuclear weapons programme, the case for intervention looks extremely flimsy. Cameron’s line about the need to send a message to despots that chemical weapons are A VERY BAD THING just won’t wash. So are nuclear weapons in the hands of Islamofascists – and we seem to be doing sod all about sending a clear message to Iran's terror-funding mullahs.

Dave – get on with fixing the economy so we can pay our debts. Spain and Argentina are actually threatening British sovereign territory – if you feel the need to attack a foreign country, what about them? Better still, if you’re bored, find a hobby. As for you lot at the BBC, I'm sorry things aren't going your way - but that's rather your fault for doing what your charter specifically forbids by choosing to act as the chief propagandist for the main opposition party. Rather than reacting to recent setbacks by demanding that Britain becomes embroiled in a war, perhaps you could turn your attention to producing some decent drama series?