I love when brutal dictators get to use chemical weapons.

[Scootaloo]

26. And what makes chemical weapons the special line?

I'm not arguing that they're not awful, or that they should be acceptable methods, or any grotesque shit like that, mind you. I'm happy with their being banned and hugely stigmatized. It's just that all this sudden outrage seems completely arbitrary when set against the backdrop of the war itself. A hundred thousand dead in Syria, with the conflict spilling over into Lebanon, Turkey, and Iraq, over a million refugees filling up Lebanon, Iraq, and Jordan, two years of war and oh, suddenly we're so righteous? Suddenly we're so concerned?

Better late than never, perhaps, but if we were going to drop our shorts and jump in no matter what (as seems to be the case) then the bloviating about chemical weapons is just embarrassing and probably harmful, because yes, the Syrians we "help" will be wondering why the fuck we suddenly care... and they're not likely to come to flattering conclusions.

Speaking of those Syrians, how, exactly, is joining this six-asshole melee going to help them? Consider our options.

- A literal "shot across the bow" as described by the president. Congratulations, we wasted a 1.4 million-dollar weapon to blow up a parking lot, in the military equivalent of yelling at clouds. That'll show 'em!

- "Precision strikes" against Assad's military capabilities. Okay, at least this one makes some sense. But wait. if he's the one who used chemical weapons, and we reduce his ability to use conventional weapons, and make his fight against the insurgency more difficult... So you see where this is going?

- Okay, what say we strike at those chemical weapons sites we think we know about? Well, again not an awful idea, with one hitch - these weapons are no doubt stored in facilities that are understood to be potential missile targets, and have defenses in accordance. So while we might blow up or damage these places, we're certainly not going to cripple their ability to be used - and we'll have blown the doors off the hinges for any asshole who wants a new sarin shell for his hellcannon.

- How about a constant rain of missiles against Assad's military? That is, outright war (as opposed to just the previous acts of war)? well, first off, raining missiles has a tendency to kill people nearby, and since the fighting is in populated areas rather than the big open steppe in the middle of the country, we're likely to be raining fire and metal down on the heads of tens of thousands of people. Somehow retaliating against killing several hundred, by raining death on several thousand, doesn't strike me as a terribly moral move.

- Of course, Assad's not going to just lay back and take it from us. Very likely, the other factions besides the FSA aren't, either. And remember, the US isn't the only targets they have. A prolonged attack - which will be necessary to accomplish anything other than wasting US hardware - will inflame the conflict. In additions to the Syrians we kill with our strikes, the factions in Syria will "Step up their game." More people will die beyond Syria's borders.

- And say we knock over Assad. Now what? The FSA doesn't have the strength or support to take control, and frankly I doubt they'd be any better than the Baath. Do we crown one of the Islamist factions? If I recall, you have a rather genocidal mindset when it comes to people of Islamist political leanings (you know, the whole "supporting Egyt's liquidation of them" thing?) so I can;t imagine you'll be happy about that. Do we just call dropping Assad our "mission accomplished" and go back to letting the remaining factions hack at each other - now bolstered by the remains of the Syrian armed forces? I don't think that's going to save many lives, either.

You want to talk about a lose-lose situation? Well, there it is. You want a working option?

The insurgency has to end. It's the absolutely only way for Syria to ever see peace. We can't just "jump in" with that shit going on, every option we face will just make things worse. How to end it is far beyond my ken, sadly, and every idea that I have seems to be on the very edge of reality. I'm left with the impression that if we were going to get involved, the time to do it was two years ago, before the war splintered, and before Assad began regaining ground. It's too late to do anything constructive now, except for continued attempts to forge diplomacy.