The limited bombing of chemical weapons facilities in Syria by the US, France and the UK was proportionate and effective, and killed nobody (Report, 16 April). It was an act of defiance against the murder by the Assad regime of defenceless civilians, using banned chemical agents. It was also a warning to the propaganda machine in Moscow, made more necessary by the behaviour of its ambassador at the UN – who blocked all meaningful international investigations of or action against the poisoning of civilians. Unlike some Guardian readers (I do read your paper along with others), I am not going to offer public succour to Moscow and Damascus.

Ashley Haworth-Roberts

London

• Jeremy Corbyn’s view of diplomacy appears to modify Roosevelt’s maxim along the lines of “speak softly and carry a stick of rhubarb”. That is not to suggest the route the government followed is unarguably the best. Successful diplomacy requires not just good faith on both sides but also costs associated with the outcome (being the use of chemical weapons) which we are trying to avoid. It also requires a hard-headed recognition that the Syrian and Russian regimes, which are our counter parties, reflect Hannah Arendt’s totalitarian features of using systemic deception and the undermining of objective truth as tactical options and strategic ends.

Corbyn’s willingness to facilitate this in relation to both Salisbury and Douma should be to his lasting discredit.

Colin Garwood

Berkhamsted, Hertfordshire

• Thank you for these letters (15 April) on Syria. At long last some honest opinions on the civil war. Why can’t our western governments be this honest? We should admit that if in 2011 we had sided with Russia and supported the legitimate and stable government of Syria, there would now be around 400,000 Syrians still alive and whole cities and towns not reduced to rubble.

No matter how abhorrent and evil the chemical attacks, that crime still pales in comparison to our own crime of being willing accessories to the destruction of an entire country. I shall be making a donation to the Guardian as a direct result of this refreshing article that restores my faith in your journalism.

Martin FitzGerald

Gland, Switzerland

• Since the UK electorate has been ignored in the decision to bomb Syria, I believe the government should publish a chart with a scale indicating the conditions that would automatically trigger a response to alleged destructive weapon offences. Nuclear, chemical, cluster bomb, phosphorus, missiles, drone attacks plus all the other weapons of war can be graded by a Moral Outrage Index with an indication of the speed and type of unauthorised response. Public consultation would then be unnecessary.

Christopher Nash

Henley-on-Thames, Oxfordshire

• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com

• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters