a civil war would be a really bad thing for the country as a whole
Hmmmm a civil war would be "bad for the country as a whole." They usually are aren't they?
No. Like the Balkans, we have to let the multilateral institutions like the EU and UN bankrupt themselves once again before we can take action. Make no mistake, I merely regret that our troops did not keep moving through Syria in 2003 when we invaded Iraq. The overthrow of Assad will be a major plus. What could possibly be worse? and I am not joking on that score. Let the tired old despots get thrown out. This is like seeing the mafia organizations turn on each other. Good riddance to bad baggage. This is the one thing that I have never understood about the discussion of the Middle East and politics. It is not about religion. It is about organized gangs whether for Lebanon, Gaza, West Bank, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia. We are faced with a region of Sicilies and as in the latter, the role of religion, in that case the Catholic Church, is equally irrelevant. What is the equivalent of lighting a few votaries and saying a few Hail Mary's in Islam?
And it is also needed to allow the bleeding hearts to finally wake up to demand action. Ironically, millions died in Iraq but this was still not enough to justify the US invasion of 2003. The left is all over the place on these interventions but unless it gets the opportunity to demand them first, they cannot happen because they have not been appropriately sanctioned by those who delegate to themselves the only ability to CARE. Never mind their past actions. Never mind their pronouncements. They and only they are the guardians of their own irrationality and inconsistency. And remember how important that latter word was to those who opposed Bush for invading Iraq. Funny how that word is no longer bandied about so much now that the only inconsistencies are those of the left. irony of ironies. should have been another chapter to Ecclesiastes... or better yet Lamentations!
