To what end and on what basis? W/O a UN resolution this would be a private action and so invites Russia and Iran to do the same. A more intense and violent civil seems like the only result. If the US supplies arms to rebels how can we really object to Assad getting Russian arms?Arming the rebels.
They do, my point was why are sure the rebels will take better care of them than Assad, or else you are suggesting more than just arming rebels. Iraq is a useful example because for all our effort it is neither stable, it is corrupt and it is turning a blind eye to weapons moving from Iran to Syria. It also is a demonstrable issue the US will face for some time that claims about WMD by us will be viewed with a jaundiced eye because we flat out lied. Even rock solid evidence in Syria will still look suspect right now. And unless you you are calling on the US to swoop in and destroy or capture WMDs I'm not entirely sure how arming rebels makes them more secure.Syria has WMDs. They have admitted to having them. Iraq again is not comparable to Syria.
No what you continuity resist is elaborating a doctrine for this intervention. If is humanitarian than I ask why only Syria - if is just US utility (and vague at that) in the face of no UN sanction or no clear and present risk to the US it sets the stage for other Great powers to do the same - with agendas we might not like much at all and in the future might not be so ascendant that we can check them without a standard practice in International law. I point to central America because there the US did intervene w/o an sanction and I think there are lot of dead people who might just feel our anti-communism was a bit not nice. We intervened in Iran w/o UN sanction and messed with their government as well - you can complain about Hezbollah but I wonder have they really killed more people than the SAVAK. Yes Hezbollah has attacked American but as a tool of Iran it is profoundly bizare to say that w/o noting the US has attacked Iran, Intervened in Lebanon, supports Israel to the hilt etc etc. what do you expect everyone to say oh its American imperialism hey no problem... And let's just be clear we toppled a democratic government and put in place an absolute (corrupt) monarchy with a vile secret police in Iran - a fact all too many Americans seem sort of I dunno not aware of so it not hard to see why the current regime views us as an enemy and act accordingly.Seriously conon? Your arguments have gotten so bad you bring up this as a real argument against intervention? The US's adventures in South America (i used that term lightly. The US meddled in South America and Central America.) are not even remotely comparable to the situation of Syria. Are you saying the US would go into Syria, invade, topple the government, and put an anti-communist dictatorship in power?