Monmouth MP David Davies is standing by his decision to vote against the use of force in Syria.

Last week Mr Davies controversially rejected the House of Commons motion backing the use of force 'if necessary' in response to the deadly chemical weapons attack in Damascus.

He was one of thirty Conservative MPs that voted against the action and, in doing so, tipped the scales for the motion to be rejected by 285 votes to 272.

He told the Chronicle, "I listened with great care to what the Prime Minister said and entirely understand his motives for wanting to get involved, however I came to the conclusion that I had to vote against this motion.

"There is some hot air within Parliament now, but people have to get over it, that's the nature of the beast."

The UK government's motion was in support of military action in Syria if the use of chemical weapons was affirmed by evidence from United Nations weapons inspectors.

But Mr Davies argued that, in his eyes, military action would not have had the desired effect as it would require a large military intervention as opposed to a limited strike.

"Even if Assad could be persuaded not to use chemical weapons there would be nothing to stop him killing as many if not more using conventional weapons," he said. "If we are to prevent this we will need to undertake full scale military action probably involving ground troops.

"If we decided to do this we could easily end up fighting a proxy war with the Russians and Syrians who are supporting Assad."

One of the main concerns of those who voted against the military action was that there was no guarantee that it would help the civilian population.

Mr Davies said, "If we went ahead anyway and succeeded in removing Assad there is no guarantee that things would improve. Many of the Syrian rebels are linked to Al Qaeda and have themselves perpetrated war crimes. We would be fighting a war to put Al Qaeda-backed rebels in charge of a country with chemical weapons.

"Given all the uncertainties I do not think it would be right for Britain, with the US and possibly France, to get involved by firing missiles into Syria.

"Furthermore I believe that there is virtually no public support for military action and, as the vote showed, no cross party support."

The decision to vote against the motion has sparked controversy across Britain, with both the public and politicians divided in their views.

"The response has been fairly mixed and some has been quite abusive, even from Conservatives," said Mr Davies. "There have been quite a few e-mails aimed my way, calling me a 'spineless coward', but it wouldn't have been any braver of me to send troops there for a cause that we can't entirely see the outcome of.

"I have been to three military funerals in Monmouthshire, and when making a decision like this I have to think about the families of those brave men and woman who go out there on our behalf, and I could not see the beneficial outcome of entering into this."

But Mr Davies also hit out at those who criticise the decision for presuming that all Conservative members would vote in favour of the action.

"A lot of people did have the expectation that Conservatives would vote a certain way, and those expectations were clearly wrong," he said.

"I have been talking and writing about Syria for a few weeks now, so I thought it was pretty clear where I stood on the issue."

He also mentioned the damage that entering into the middle of such a complex issue could have on British foreign relations.

"There is a great hatred for Britain and America, and I don't feel this would be helped at all by firing missiles into the heart of it.

"All I can say is there doesn't look like there will be any action from Britain at the moment, and this something I am very glad about," he said.