The Prime Minister's case for air strikes in Syria "disintegrates like dust" under scrutiny, according to the SNP's foreign affairs spokesman Alex Salmond.
David Cameron will seek MPs' backing to launch British military action against Islamic State (IS) extremists in Syria in the House of Commons today.
He has faced criticism for branding opponents of action ''terrorist sympathisers''.
Around 110 MPs have signed a cross-party amendment against air strikes, stating the case has not been made.
RAF jets are reportedly being readied for deployment from Lossiemouth in Moray.
Speaking to BBC Scotland's Good Morning Scotland programme, Mr Salmond said: "I think the Prime Minister's language is an indication of desperation, because he sees that the support he thought he had is starting to slip away as his case for extending air strikes into Syria starts to disintegrate on examination."
He said he believed the Prime Minister would secure a much slimmer majority than the 176 predicted in The Daily Telegraph newspaper.
"Some of the Prime Minister's claims start to disintegrate like dust, like the claim for example that there are 70,000 available ground troops who are going to step into the vacuum which will be released if Daesh is forced to concede ground in Syria," the former first minister said.
"It is just not true, it is not credible. As these claims start to disintegrate, the support for this action starts to ebb away."
The SNP has stated its MPs will vote against Mr Cameron's plans, while Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has given his MPs a free vote.
Some Tory members, including John Baron, will also reject the action.
Mr Salmond rejected suggestions SNP MPs were not allowed to dissent from the party line.
"Don't be ridiculous," he said.
"The SNP MPs are perfectly entitled and able to put forward a dissenting point of view."
He said the party had always been "suspicious of military adventures", and in this case there was "no credible argument for how the UK will make a military difference".
"What is missing is a political strategy, not the tactical bombing," he said.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel