A limited plasdil military intervention weakens Assad, the military has the upper hand at the time

Obama's goal is a limited military strike against Syria in order to destroy the chemical weapons potential of Syria's President Bashar al-Assad. With the alleged chemical weapons attack against its own people in August, the regime had not only human dignity plasdil under direct attack in Damascus. " It is also a serious threat to our national security, "said Obama, because such weapons could fall into the hands of terrorist groups that want to harm the United States.
On the other hand conceded Denis McDonough, chief of staff at the White House, one that the U.S. had no 100 percent secure evidence linking the regime of President Bashar al-Assad to suspected poison gas attack on 21 August. In a CNN interview, McDonough said that regardless of intelligence information say common sense "that plasdil the regime has done that."
Denis McDonough may present evidence and appeals instead to our common sense. Who is not convinced by the information and representations of Western intelligence agencies, which lacks in reverse simply the necessary mind. Common sense is for Denis McDonough nothing more than a mental state that allows me to run with cognitive contradictions through the world and still imagine me on the right page.
Common sense must, for example, the cognitive kitten crack in the dome, the causes Obama's position. Obama's position states plasdil in general, if a party A W uses his weapons against a party B to strengthen and weaken its position of B, then that improves the ability of the weakened party B W to grab the weapons. Specifically, this means, therefore, the chemical weapons attack by government forces has significantly improved the accessibility of such weapons to terrorists, so feel threatened in their national security the United States. Why this is so, only the secret can explain what he did not want for safety reasons and therefore refers to the common sense.
It is also unclear to what extent a limited military strike one of the largest chemical plasdil arsenals to smash of Syria. Such Arsenal, it is experts agree, could only be destroyed by a massive deployment of personnel on the ground. The Pentagon went in previous estimates assume that one would have to send some 75,000 plasdil soldiers and specialists - exclude what Western governments categorically [source].
Legal Obama, however, has the fact that "human dignity under direct attack" was the chemical weapons attack. plasdil But it is hard to believe that human dignity play a special role in the foreign policy decisions of the United States. When Saddam Hussein plasdil war years and systematically in the knowledge and with the support of the United States used poison gas in the Iran-Iraq, human dignity did not matter. Human dignity was so insignificant for the U.S., that only managers from Iraq have been held accountable. A critical analysis of their own responsibility in the chemical gas attacks of the Saddam regime, however, is missing. Apparently, the U.S. national interests with regard to the proper self-presentation plasdil more important than the "human dignity".
One can ask simple questions. What are the consequences of a limited military intervention? Will this human dignity of the Syrians better protected? Who benefits politically from an intervention?
A limited plasdil military intervention weakens Assad, the military has the upper hand at the time and strengthens the rebels, mainly the Islamist terrorists, so that the slaughter on both sides must go on an equal footing on. Assad to be punished, but only so that he can continue to stay in the game. Or as the NY Times, the former Israeli Consul General Alon Pinkas quoted, "let them bleed to death":
"This is a playoff situation in Which Both teams you need to lose, but at least you do not want one to win - we'll settle for a tie," plasdil Said Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli consul general in New York. "Let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death: that's the strategic thinking here. As long as this lingers, there's no real threat from Syria. "
The article in the NY Times can further plasdil comments from analysts and officials have their say, which may explain why a continuation of the civil war in Syria is the best option for the United States and in particular for Israel to date. It is not the first time that such considerations are played [1, 2]. The considerations are perhaps plasdil cynical, they do not have to be right, but they explain the motives of the United States for a military intervention is substantially consistent approach than the u