WARRINGTON'S MPs both voted for UK air strikes against Islamic State in Syria following last night's House of Commons vote.

The first UK air strikes were carried out against IS - or Daesh as it is increasingly referred to - in the early hours.

Warrington South MP David Mowat and Warrington North MP Helen Jones were among the 397 votes backing the military action following a 10-hour debate yesterday, Wednesday. There were 223 votes against action.

Ms Jones was one of 66 Labour MPs to vote in favour of the strikes after leader Jeremy Corbyn said there would be a free vote, despite arguing the case for war 'does not stack up'.

Mr Mowat said: “Last night I voted to comply with the request from the United Nations and our closest ally France to extend the UK air operations from Iraq to also cover Syria.

"This will involve the deployment of a further eight aircraft to the region.

“Of course it is true that this will not fix the problem of ISIS.

"That can only be done by working with Russia and others to negotiate a overreaching solution to the civil war in Syria. And even that will only be a start. 

“But to refuse to help would also send a message to both our friends and enemies in the region.

"This would have been wrong and outside the traditions of our country to fight for freedom when necessary.

"It would have been particularly wrong given the call from the United Nations.”

Warrington North MP Helen Jones said: "Most of the emails I have received suggest that the proposal is to undertake wholesale bombing in Syria. 

"That is simply not the case. The aim is to disrupt the operations of Daesh, to remove its commanders and to degrade its capacity to mount attacks in Britain and elsewhere.

MP threatened over Syria vote

"There are those who are opposed to military action in all circumstances. While I respect that pacifist viewpoint, it is not one that I hold. 

"Our intervention in Kosovo, for example, saved thousands of innocent lives. 

"There are also those who have written to me saying that we should not act in Syria.  

"I cannot take that view and I supported the motion on Wednesday for the following reasons.

"Daesh represents a clear and present danger to people in Britain.  It carried out a terrorist attack on British people in Tunisia and several plots against this country have been disrupted during the year.  We may not be that lucky in the future. 

"If we are not prepared to attack the Daesh commanders who direct the plots against this country and train people to carry them out, then we will be at greater risk.

"We have been asked by our NATO allies to support them.  NATO is a defensive alliance in which all members agree to support one another if attacked. 

"Undermining that alliance risks the future defence of this country and I am not prepared to do that.

"The UN Security Council has unanimously agreed that all member states take “all necessary measures” to “prevent and suppress terrorist acts committed specifically by ISIL” and “to eradicate the safe haven they have established over significant parts of Iraq and Syria.” 

"That resolution is clear that Daesh “constitutes a global and unprecedented threat to international peace and security”.

"Daesh itself does not recognise the border and its establishment of a so-called caliphate in Syria and Iraq is a rallying point for extremists from all over the world. 

"Unless we are prepared to reduce their territory they will become stronger and pose an even greater threat.

"Daesh has killed thousands of Muslims.  It crucifies people, throws gay people from tall building, beheads hostages and sells captured women into sexual slavery.

"To allow these acts to go unchecked when we could act to stop them is, in my view, to become complicit in them.

"There are those who believe that by acting against Daesh we are putting ourselves into greater danger. That is to misunderstand its ideology. 

"Daesh is an extremist organisation which hates all democracies and feels justified in attacking their citizens.

"They will try to attack us whatever we do, just as they attacked Paris, Ankara and Beirut.  To those who say that our involvement in Iraq caused these attacks can I point out that the following terrorist attacks were carried out before the Iraq conflict:  the 1992 Yemen Hotel Bombing, the attack on the North Tower of the World Trade Centre in New York in 1993,  the 1998 bombings at embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the attack on the USS Cole and the grenade attack on the UK embassy in Yemen in 2000,  the 2001 World Trade Centre and Pentagon attacks in the USA,  and the Ghriba synagogue bombing,  the Limburg bombing,  the Bali Bombing and the Mombasa bombing in 2003.

"These are just some examples. They were attacked because extremists will always attack those who do not support their ideology.

"I have had some emails which say “Not in my Name.”  I would ask those people to consider, very seriously, whether the consequences of not acting, would be in their name. 

"Should we have stood by to allow the Kurds to be over-run or left the Yazidis to die on a mountain side?  Should we do nothing while France, Tunisia and other countries are attacked, or wait for an attack similar to that in Paris to take place in one of our cities?

"There is no easy option in this situation and there are consequences in doing nothing as well as in taking action. 

"I have come to believe that the dangers of doing nothing are greater than the dangers of taking action and that is why I voted as I did."