[Skybird]

I miss a clear definition of what should be achieved by a military strike, what the military objective is, and how to pull out of the situation once the objective has been achieved or can no longer be achieved.

I see only one objective that could justify to invest tens and hundreds of millions and more of our taxes and to put our warriors at risk: destroying as many of Syria'S chemical weapons arsenals (and biological weapons if they have them) as well as destroying their means to produce them, as well as destroying Iran's weapons deliveries and Hezbollah's stockpiles of missiles, because both actors could assist Assad by turning against Israel.

Obviously that is a relatively advanced and complex, longer lasting air campaign I am talking about. Sending some dozen Tomahawks over one or two days and leave it to that, is just a useless symbolic act achieving not much. It serves the calming of western bad consciousnesses. In other words: it is "Gefühlsduselei".

But some may feel great when the loud Booms! and bright lights start again. "Look, at least we did something, we tried!" - Who cares for what the attempt is worth, as long as it is the shine only that counts!?

BTW, the majority, a very robust majority of Syrians wanmt a Sharia-.based state and support racism, antisemitism and medieval punsihement for crimes. What do we owe them to help them bringing these wonderful things into power in Syria, eh? We owe them nothing.

Syria itself is not worth a single Western soldier's life. Take the chemical and biological weapons out, for that is our interest indeed, and leave it to that. Once the objective has been accomplished, get out.

And send the bill to Saudi Arabia. The money you save them from paying is money they are free to pump into the missionising of Europe. Tell them to stop that and help their precious beloved wonderful Muslim brothers and female halflings instead.