They seem to relish the opportunity to place reporters on the front line and others were probably working on their "
Brian Hanrahan " I counted them all out, and I counted them all back': Quote
John Dixon at Bothlas has posted a excellent comment on the issue of the hypocrisy of Nations who condemn Chemical attacks whilst having weapons of mass destruction themselves.
"Horrific though chemical weapons are, and outlawed as they are under international law, the method by which Syrians are being killed daily is surely secondary to the fact that they’re being killed – from their point of view at the very least. There is a real danger that the US, UK, and others are telling Syria that killing people on a large-scale is fine with the international community, as long as they use the “right” weapons to do it.Indeed when we can take account the destructive power of modern weapons . How much difference is there between Chemical Weapons and the "Shock and Awe" policy of the United States Military,
Further, the outrage at the use of chemical weapons is coming from people who themselves own, and want the rest of the world to believe that they would in certain circumstances use, weapons of mass destruction. It’s not a particularly high ground on which to stand and moralise".
Thousands have died in the Syrian Civil War (And Why Don't we call it that) and there is no clear side which the Western Democracies can feel it can hope to be victors.
Indeed if Assad regime was to fall which might end Iranian influence in part of that region . It could easily be replaced by an Al Qaeda influenced government.
In the meantime ordinary civilians are killed ,live their days in constant fear or are forced to become refugees.
I don't know other than mediation what the UN can do but whilst a proxy war between the US (and its allies) and Iran backed by Russia is being fought out in Syria it looks like Million might have to die via what we euphemistically call conventional weapons.