English: I'm pleased to say the Conservative group voted to allow the debate to go forward this afternoon. I do think it is important that when motions of this severity come forward - or importance rather than severity, importance, come forward - that the Assembly does have the opportunity to express its view. I disagree with the view that the leader of Plaid Cymru has put across. I disagree with some of the points that the Member from Swansea East has made this afternoon. But, at the end of the day, we are a democracy, this is a debating Chamber, that is what our role is. I do support the point that the leader of Plaid Cymru makes that, sadly, the First Minister hasn't turned up for another important debate today. And this is an important debate, because on the weekend, as has been outlined in the opening comments, the First Minister - . And Theresa May did not ring Carwyn Jones because he was Mr Jones from Bridgend. She rang Carwyn Jones because he was the First Minister of Wales and, thereby, he was speaking on behalf of the Government. I'm assuming that the endorsement that the First Minister gave, which I welcome, because I do believe that the actions undertaken by the Prime Minister were correct, were appropriate and were proportional - . But I go back to the point about the First Minister giving that endorsement, and his endorsement was, 'I offered my support to any intervention', and those were his words that he said, so, therefore, he was obviously speaking on behalf of the Government, and the Government vote here today, I assume. And I welcome that support, I do, but it would have been good to have heard from him here today as to his arguments and his points on why he was able to give that support, because there are colleagues in the Labour Party - Jo Stevens, for example, and the leader of the Labour Party in Westminster - who legitimately have made a point that they don't believe that the actions were legal. Now, I disagree with that point, but, as I said, we live in a democracy and points have to be made, and when you make the point you then have to explain why you are standing by the point that you have made and the commitment that you have made. As I said, from the Conservative benches, we voted to have the debate this afternoon. We as a group support wholeheartedly the proportionality and the decisiveness with which the Prime Minister has acted on a specific issue. It's not about regime change, but about the horrendous use of chemical weapons and the images that we have seen come forward out of Syria over the weekend - the weekend just after Easter - where children were screaming in agony, where adults were screaming in agony, and we know that at least 70-plus people died because of that chemical attack. We know for a fact that in 2013 the UK Parliament voted not to militarily intervene to stop further acts of warfare or chemical warfare in Syria. Regrettably, that vote prevented, in my mind and many other people's minds, the proliferation of more chemical attacks in the intervening period up to last weekend.
Welsh: Rwy'n falch o ddweud bod grŵp y Ceidwadwyr wedi pleidleisio dros ganiatáu i'r ddadl fynd rhagddi y prynhawn yma. Credaf ei bod yn bwysig pan ddaw cynigion mor ddifrifol â hyn gerbron - neu mor bwysig â hyn yn hytrach na difrifol - fod y Cynulliad yn cael cyfle i fynegi ei farn. Rwy'n anghytuno â barn arweinydd Plaid Cymru. Rwy'n anghytuno â rhai o'r pwyntiau a wnaed gan yr Aelod dros Ddwyrain Abertawe y prynhawn yma. Ond yn y pen draw, democratiaeth ydym ni, Siambr drafod yw hon, dyna yw ein rôl. Rwy'n cefnogi'r pwynt a wna arweinydd Plaid Cymru ei bod hi'n anffodus nad yw Prif Weinidog Cymru wedi dod yma ar gyfer dadl bwysig arall heddiw. Ac mae hon yn ddadl bwysig, oherwydd dros y penwythnos, fel yr amlinellwyd yn y sylwadau agoriadol, fe wnaeth y Prif Weinidog - . Ac ni ffoniodd Theresa May Carwyn Jones oherwydd mai Mr Jones o Ben-y-bont ar Ogwr ydoedd. Fe ffoniodd hi Carwyn Jones oherwydd mai ef oedd Prif Weinidog Cymru ac oherwydd hynny, siaradai ar ran y Llywodraeth. Rwy'n tybio bod y gymeradwyaeth a roddodd y Prif Weinidog, sydd i'w chroesawu am fy mod yn credu bod y camau a gymerwyd gan y Prif Weinidog yn gywir, yn briodol ac yn gymesur - . Ond rwy'n mynd yn ôl at y pwynt am y Prif Weinidog yn rhoi'r gymeradwyaeth honno, a'i gymeradwyaeth oedd, 'Fe gynigiais fy nghefnogaeth i unrhyw ymyrraeth', a dyna oedd y geiriau a ddywedodd, felly roedd yn amlwg yn siarad ar ran y Llywodraeth, a phleidlais y Llywodraeth yma heddiw, rwy'n tybio. Ac rwy'n croesawu'r gefnogaeth honno, ydw, ond byddai wedi bod yn dda clywed ganddo yma heddiw ynghylch ei ddadleuon a'i bwyntiau ynglŷn â pham y gallodd roi'r gefnogaeth honno, oherwydd mae yna gyd-Aelodau yn y Blaid Lafur - Jo Stevens, er enghraifft, ac Arweinydd y Blaid Lafur yn San Steffan - sydd wedi gwneud pwynt teg nad ydynt yn credu bod yr ymosodiadau'n gyfreithlon. Nawr, rwy'n anghytuno â hynny, ond fel y dywedais, rydym yn byw mewn democratiaeth ac mae'n rhaid i bwyntiau gael eu gwneud, a phan fyddwch yn gwneud y pwynt rhaid i chi esbonio wedyn pam yr ydych yn arddel y pwynt a wnaethoch a'r ymrwymiad a wnaethoch. Fel y dywedais, o feinciau'r Ceidwadwyr, fe bleidleision ni dros gael y ddadl y prynhawn yma. Fel grŵp, rydym yn cefnogi'r modd cymesur a phendant y mae Prif Weinidog y DU wedi gweithredu ar fater penodol. Nid yw'n ymwneud â newid y gyfundrefn, ond â'r defnydd erchyll o arfau cemegol a'r lluniau a welsom yn dod o Syria dros y penwythnos - y penwythnos yn syth ar ôl y Pasg - lle'r oedd plant yn sgrechian mewn poen, lle'r oedd oedolion yn sgrechian mewn poen, a gwyddom fod o leiaf 70 a mwy o bobl wedi marw oherwydd yr ymosodiad cemegol hwnnw. Gwyddom fod Senedd y DU wedi pleidleisio yn 2013 dros beidio ag ymyrryd yn filwrol i atal rhyfela pellach neu ryfel cemegol yn Syria. Yn anffodus, ataliodd y bleidlais honno, yn fy meddwl i a meddyliau llawer o bobl eraill, ledaeniad rhagor o ymosodiadau cemegol yn y cyfamser hyd at y penwythnos diwethaf.