WAR IS PERSONAL: Why I am against attacking Syria:

[frazzled]

7. Stopping the ability to use chemical weapons would certainly ...

not lead to more deaths. That has been the sole aim of this entire thing. The proposal (serious, but also apparently the "force on the table" to leverage a negotiated stand-down on the chemical weapons) was always to limit itself to taking out Assad's ability to gas people in the course of this war.

We stayed out of it for two years and it has gotten increasingly worse.

PS: If the point you were trying to make was the one I have articulated, then I'm afraid you failed in making your case. Try to say what you mean next time. Instead of titling it "Why I am against attacking Syria," maybe it should have been "How can we stop the devastation of the civil war in Syria"? Otherwise, it's just another misguided "peace" post, that ignores that no peace exists.