Syria

I'll settle for that then.

By the standards of middle east oil producers it's output is insignificant. If the reserves AND the infrastructure to extract and distribute it were both viable we'd.have been in there long ago.

How ironic - Iraq didn't have WMD and we were in there like a shot. Syria does have WMD and the politicos can't be added. That's oil for you.

Iraq was unfinished business, and with 911 and all that Bush was looking for balls to break.

I wonder what the posts would have been like if the date read 1941

I agree with Velo in some ways but just saying

Are we considering going into other countries as well? If not the comparison is neither here nor there.

My point is we should be staying well clear of shiteholes that can't govern themselves. Let someone else deal with it for a change, or let them destroy themselves. If we absolutely have to be the world's police and go in we should be appropriately reimbursed via whatever resources they have, i.e. take the lot.

Mrs Assad can come stay with me.

Of course they are no more accurate in that endeavour than any other terrorists; plenty of innocent Muslims get caught in the crossfire. These nuts see Muslims who actually adhere to the code of Islam as expendable.

I agree we don't want to see yet another state succumbing to extremist rule, but at the same time we cannot sit by and watch innocents slaughtered.

So what's the answer. Any of the 3 groups vying for power are murdering arseholes.

We go in it'll end up just like Iraq - instead of Saddam murserig innocents, the innocents are now murdering each other instead, close on 100,000 a year. There is nothing we can do do militarily that will protect any non combatants in Syria in the long term.

Eh?