Not a fun of Bashar al-Assad, but in light of recent developments in Syria two things are troubling me.

First, where is the definitive indisputable confrontation that Assad actually ordered the chemical attack that murdered 70 civilians? Because from where I am standing, it does not make any sense. Why would he risk global condemnation when he is winning the war, recapturing his cities and pushing ISIS back. Why when all his recent actions are beginning to receive some approvals would he self sabotage!? Many, unsurprisingly, are asking who will benefit from this action and the US retaliation to it?

Secondly, I am extremely concerned by our attitude to killing. For some reason, it seems we are outraged by the killing of 70 people who were gassed, yet somewhat relaxed by the killing of 230 civilians killed a week or so ago in a drone attack! Why is that!? Killing is killing. Killing is not football, where you support your team no matter what. The taking of a life, any human life should equally appal us no matter the numbers killed, the method used to kill them or the nation doing the killing.

Who'd though the day will come when Prez Putin will be the wise & sensible leader who prefers negotiations over war? #Syria

— Walaa Idris (@WalaaIdris) September 5, 2013

A few days age, when I twitted the above tweet, many sniggered and laughed, hinting that the Russian president can’t or even shouldn’t be taken seriously.

Today, while Obama is doing the media round selling war to the American people, we learn Moscow is negotiating with Damascus to develop a “workable, precise and concrete” plan for Syria to put its chemical weapons arsenal under international control.

For those of us who want peace, Putin is looking and sounding more and more like a world leader, a peace promoting solution negotiating leader.

Wonder who is not sniggering now?

In response to Imtiaiz Ameen’s article in ConHome today HERE, I would like to say the following.

I am British and happened to be a Muslim too. However, I neither brand last week’s Parliament decision as a victory against the executive, nor feel euphoric and praise Miliband’s action, and I am most defiantly not a coward who turns a blind eye when innocent people are being killed in their thousands.

What happened on Thursday, was the representative correctly reading and reflecting the public’s mood and sentiment. Thursday was a good day for democracy. When the mother of parliaments led the way and showed the world democracy can sometimes be tricky, but it is always fair.

On Thursday, we also learnt that our country is in good hands with this Prime Minster. Because he councils, debates and listens but most of all he is unafraid to admit it when he gets it wrong.

Sadly what’s happening in Syria, although savagely painful, is an internal civil war that can only be solved internally by the Syrian people themselves. We can help them and their leaders see sense but we cannot make them act it. Bombing Syria will not stop this killing; it will escalate it and increase the damage.

Post Iraq, the appetite for war is no longer there. The carnage and destruction left behind that intervention is a blemish on democracy, trust and human decency.

History is here to teach us. The lessons from Iraq tell us that even those in the highest offices of the land can misread events and get things wrong. It teaches us to check and recheck before considering another strike.

Not getting involved militarily does not at all mean, Britain will sit on her hands and watch while innocent people get slaughtered. There are many peaceful ways to help and provide assistance. That should be our aim as Britons and our call as Muslims.

Too many bullets have been fired already; too many lives have been lost and too much blood has already been spilt in Syria. Let’s give peace a chance. Negotiate, lobby, and even beg and plead but let’s vow to stop this bloodshed without being instrumental in spilling another drop of blood.

Have no idea why Cameron is insisting on arming the Syrian rebels! When he knows too well that even if he puts the motion to a vote, he will lose it, half his parliamentary party, his coalition partners and the majority of Labour will vote against arming the rebels.

So what on earth is he playing at?

Obama is a show off, who has nothing to lose. This is his finial term and nothing he does will change much or affect him and his presidency in any way. There are no more selections or elections for him, so he can dream, hope and do what he likes with little or no repercussions.

On the other hand, Cameron is in different place altogether. Most of the country is against any type of intervention and any aid besides humanitarian aid to Syria. He is in a partnership; they too are against arming the rebels. Add to that his popularity amongst his own party is in decline, plus almost half of his parliamentary party are against arming of the rebels ……

So, what is he playing at? What is his game? Why is he pushing the issue? When he can’t win it even if he puts it to a vote in parliament. Didn’t he see what Iraq did to Blair!?

The time for supporting the rebels was month ago, before, as Cameron himself put it this week, the unsavoury characters infiltrated both sides. Before it became impossible to separate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak – now the best solution, the only possible solution left is the diplomatic one. Both sides need to put down their arms and stop the bloodshed and murderous killings.

Why is Cameron not championing that solution and rooting for that outcome?