Only a few people have commented on this but those that have seem to be of a similar view - doing nothing is not an option. I find this rather surprising given the track record of the UK joining with the USA in military actions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. They didn't turn out very well and they certainly didn't make the world a safer place. They didn't even make the UK a safer place. I also find this "no option" view a rather dangerous way of thinking. It suggests that, really, there is no political decision to make; it makes itself; there is nothing to debate. However, I am not clear why the UK has no option. Countries such as Germany, Sweden, Spain, Russia, India, Japan and Turkey do, it seems, have an option; and, up to now, they have opted to stay out of the aerial campaign. Why do they have a choice but the UK doesn't? Is it because our country is more important than theirs, wealthier, more moral? Is it a legacy of our more recent imperial past; a form of dangerous nostagia of a once "great power"? Whatever, there was a decision to be made; there was an option; doing nothing - i.e. not bombing supposed IS positions - was always a possibility (as the Foreign Secretary said barely a couple of weeks ago). I suspect we will, again, in hindsight, come to regret this decision. I regret it now.