With the current front page news of Assad’s use of Sarin and a potential US military response, there’s been an Everest mountain’s worth of discussion over why we shouldn’t do anything.  Conspicuously absent is an honest questioning of the reasons to not intervene, well-explained reasons to intervene and analysis of the results of inaction. SOFREP is one of the few places you’ll find it.

The litany of common reasons and excuses not to intervene in Syria: AQ Islamists did it or we can’t be sure; The rebels are all Islamist.  We’d be helping AQ; We can’t separate the secularists; Not our Fight; Fear of Escalation; Don’t trust WH leadership; AQ/Islamists did it, or we can’t be sure.

AQ Islamists did it or we can’t be sure

MANY ascribe to the “rebels could have done it” school of thought without, or contrary to, the evidence.  Chem warfare isn’t child’s play.  IF the rebels did this it would be the most successful use of chemical weapons by a non-state actor in known world history.  The most successful use of chem was by Japanese terrorists employing Sarin in five subway locations killing 13. The Syria incident killed hundreds.  If true, it’s REALLY historic and a huge ante by potential terrorist groups.

For AQ/Islamists to have pulled this off, one must believe a complicated list of assumptions: