I think there is a danger in doing nothing but I'm very concerned that a limited airstrike type of response will not actually accomplish anything. Assad will just pick himself up, dust himself off and say, "That's it? That's all you've got?" And then he'll just go about his business. I don't know that anyone wants us to get involved in yet another protracted military thing (it seems like you're not supposed to call them wars even though that's what they are). It seems like we've been at war my entire life and I've seen a lot of people killed and it's not clear to me that we actually accomplished much. At the same time, don't you think to yourself, "What's next? A suitcase nuke?" And then what do we do. Ask the UN to write a sternly worded letter? The first thing I'm looking for is to see the surrounding nations stand up and act like this is important to them. They are the most at risk if Assad gets out of control. Then I'm looking for some reallyreally smart people to figure out what's really going to happen if we do X or Y or Z. I'm not interested in some moronic Dick Cheney formulation like "The Iraqis will welcome us with cheering and open arms" type analysis. None of us knows what's really going on here. We just know what is allowed to appear on the evening news. Hopefully there's more to it than that. To me it seems that it's a big risk either way you turn. All I know is that I don't want more Americans to die because of the behavior of yet another middle east dictator. I want the local surrounding countries to take the lead (I think they have armies too) and I want a team approach where the USA accepts a supporting position. The problem is that these days it seems that I rarely get what I want.