Conservative Martin Vickers says he has "reservations" about voting for air strikes.

He argues that ground forces are needed, but describes the Free Syrian Army as a "disparate group." 

He says "I want to be convinced" by the government case, but "I feel that a longer term strategy has not been put forward."

He adds his instinct is to "hold back at this stage".

House of Lords
Parliament

Labour peer Viscount Hanworth says "I am well appraised of the logic that if we are bombing ISIL in Iraq then we should also be bombing them in Syria - my conclusion is that we should be bombing them in neither".

Viscount Hanworth says that "bombing is a blunt and heavy handed way of attacking the enemy" and points out the likelihood of collateral damage of civilian populations and their livelihoods.

He says that attacking the financial support of IS should be the focus of any strategy as this could "reduce ISIL to a small rump and the failure of its monstrous ambition would be clear for all to see".

 SDLP MP Mark Durkan says today is about the "real fears" MPs have about the safety of their constituents.

Talking about the government strategy he says "I don't believe it is coherent or complete", and warns of the danger of "mission creep", adding that the government is using some "shifty allies".

House of Lords
Parliament

Crossbencher Baroness Kidron asks if there will be "a shift in refugee policy" if the Commons votes for air strikes, "in order to reach out to those who weill, as we add firepower to the existing violence, leave Syria in ever greater numbers".

House of Lords
Parliament

Labour peer and former Defence Minister Lord Davies of Stamford says assumptions that the Assad regime in Syria would collapse were mistaken. He thinks ground troops will probably be needed at some point, though he does not think UK troops should be on the ground in Syria.

He says it is necessary to be "pragmatic" and make allies as "we must win this war", adding that the UK allied itself with Stalin in World War Two, despite the Soviet leader's "crimes".

House of Commons
Parliament

Conservative MP and former soldier Tom Tugendhat says he has sat all day listening to this debate and says he remembers listening to a similar Commons debate when he was in a forward operating base waiting to go to war in 2003.

"When many people in this place were talking about it I was preparing for it and I remember vividly the fear in my heart".

He says that because of this he feels the burden of today's vote heavily, but says "this dreadful regime must be stopped".

"It is not enough to wish for peace - we must fight for it."

House of Lords
Parliament

Liberal Democrat peer Lord Greaves says that if he had a vote on the government motion, "I would vote against it". He thinks this is in line with the views of the majority of party members, adding that the decision by Lib Dem MPs to back the government made many members feel "angry and let down".

"I do not believe what is being put forward by the government will work," Lord Greaves says, adding:

House of Commons
Parliament

Labour's Barry Gardiner speaks out against military action in Syria and calls the prime minister "plausible in public and graceless in private".

"I and other colleagues who will vote against his motion tonight are not terrorist sympathisers, he was wrong to say that we are". 

Mr Gardiner says "the population of Raqqa will not be allowed into the tunnels or whisked away in armoured jeeps - they will remain in the city and wait for British bombs".

"This is a very foolish strategy indeed and risks doing more to strengthen Daesh than eradicate them" he says.

In finishing Mr Gardiner appluads the fact that the Speaker has spent the entirety of this debate in the chair.

"I admire your bladder" he tells a laughing John Bercow.

House of Commons
Parliament

Conservative MP Sarah Wollaston says that she voted against the government on taking military action against the government of Assad in 2013 but intends to vote in favour of extending airstrikes to Syria because "this has gone beyond a civil war" because IS are "bringing the fight to us".

"This is an enemy with which there can be no dialogue who engage in slavery, rape, child rape and mass murder" she says.

When asked by another MP how airstrikes which are designed to "cause death and destruction" could possibly improve the situation on the ground, Ms Wollaston replies "people are already being tortured and suffering across these territories"

Sarah Wollaston says there is now "a compelling case for us to be able to look the families of those who may lose their lives in future in the eye and say that we did absolutely everything we could to diminish the powers of this evil organisation.

"This is the fascist war of our generation". 

House of Commons
Parliament

Labour MP Phil Wilson - who represents Tony Blair's former constituency Sedgefield -  says he is convinced of the merits of the case to extend military action into Syria.

Mr Wilson joins others who support extending military action to Syria in saying that it is important to stand by our allies in the fight against IS "even if our military involvement will only be small - it is a start" he says.

The MP said airstrikes "buy time for us to build a larger strategy" to defeat IS.

Jack ThompsonAre air strikes the be all and end all? No. Will it bring peace to the region? Not alone. Will they be a game changer tactically? Probably not. However, they are a significant strategic step that will support our international obligations and help damage ISIL's attempts to organise itself into a legitimate state. A political settlement is not achievable alone - they do not have realistic political goals to meet on. A hard stick is necessary to drive them back.  

Gemma SaundersWe are going to be no more of a target to ISIL as we were when they slaughtered the British on a beach in Tunisia. They have to be disrupted in the Middle East to stop them getting stronger. If we don't start action now do we wait till they invade another country by which time they will be stronger.

Ray JubberIt looks almost certain that David Cameron will get the vote to bomb IS. I’m totally on his side.

But unless ground troops are employed this will have little effect. Whatever events unfold in the future, we must get rid of these evil Monsters, and at whatever the cost. We have the means, we just need the WILL

Diane WhiteoakI am deeply concerned to listen to some members in the House of Commons speak against us joining the war against Daesh.  It is their job to protect the UK, to work with the UN and to take action against terrorists who threaten us.  I consider all those who vote against the motion to give our forces the powers they need to be so weak they need to resign their positions and allow others to take these crucial decisions on our behalf. 

PJThis is another in a series of ill-thought out military adventures that will make things worse. Pouring petrol on a blaze seems to be the reflex response of Western governments.   It hasn't worked so far and it won't work now.   We should not add the UK's (small) weight to this.

Ban AzizInstead of bombing Syria, how about the government cuts ties with the countries funding, arming and supporting Daesh - Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey to name but a few.  Saudi Arabia is the centre of Wahhabism, the very ideology that Daesh started from.

Paul De PonteI liked the email from the humanist Labour member who said that he was opposed to many of Cameron's policies, but as a pragmatist and through listening to the arguments supports the motion to target Daesh. I have gone through the same process, but come out as against the motion. What this demonstrates is the real difficulties facing MPs when voting on what they believe is best for their constituents.

Aaron SinclairBombing Syria will only lead to more devastation and we will then become more prone to extremists acts where hundreds if not thousands of UK residents will be killed. For what? A few members of ISIS dead? What about the amount of civilians killed who are unable to flee? 

House of Lords
Parliament

Former Conservative Party deputy chairman and Treasury Minister Lord Flight doubts that air strikes will be "sufficient to conquer and destroy Isil without major ground force involvement". He supports "a large global coalition force" with the backing of the United Nations.

And he quotes from "a recent letter in the Times from a British Muslim" which claims that Raqqa in Syria is not the "head of the snake" of IS.

Here is a picture of the anti-war protester who crawled under a lorry at Westminster as MPs debated air strikes on Syria.

The woman initially refused to move, although she is now reported to have been led away by police and arrested.

Image source, BBC News

House of Commons
Parliament

Hywel Williams speaks from the Plaid Cymru benches and rejects the assertion that his party are pacifist, saying they opposed mililtary action in Iraq but supported it in Libya.

Mr Williams says the debate so far has presented MPs "with a false choice – bomb or do nothing".

He says we can do things that are "reasonable, proportionate and effective", such as aiding the Kurdish Peshmerga and trying to end the conflict between the Turkish government and the Kurds so both forces can fight IS.