Op-ed from the Washington Post. Lots of blather. Here's the key paragraph. . .
The United States should be using its own resources to determine, as quickly as possible, whether the opposition’s reports of large-scale use of gas against civilians are accurate. If they are, Mr. Obama should deliver on his vow not to tolerate such crimes — by ordering direct U.S. retaliation against the Syrian military forces responsible and by adopting a plan to protect civilians in southern Syria with a no-fly zone.
Syrian attack should prompt U.S. investigation into chemical weapons - The Washington Post
Question: Why should the U.S. act? What business is it of ours? And let's say we do act, and our actions prove to be the deciding factor in the Syrian civil war. What then? What assurances do we have that the subsequent government will be democratic or respect our notions of human rights (such as they are)?
The United States should be using its own resources to determine, as quickly as possible, whether the opposition’s reports of large-scale use of gas against civilians are accurate. If they are, Mr. Obama should deliver on his vow not to tolerate such crimes — by ordering direct U.S. retaliation against the Syrian military forces responsible and by adopting a plan to protect civilians in southern Syria with a no-fly zone.
Syrian attack should prompt U.S. investigation into chemical weapons - The Washington Post
Question: Why should the U.S. act? What business is it of ours? And let's say we do act, and our actions prove to be the deciding factor in the Syrian civil war. What then? What assurances do we have that the subsequent government will be democratic or respect our notions of human rights (such as they are)?