Not sure what all this stuff about WW3 is getting at. Putin has no more intention of starting WW3 than Jeremy Corbyn. But it seems he is happy to condone the indiscriminate use of sarin gas on children, at least if nobody makes any move to stop it.
As to posters signifying how they might well support the US action if only there was some sensible long term strategy, I'm very grateful to them for letting me know that the Pentagon has made them party to its long term strategic thinking (or absence of it). Or maybe the Secretary of State has posted an admission on Gransnet and I missed that one?
In my naivety I thought the US was simply making the point that while it has said it won't interfere in Syria, there are still red lines in the sand, including Obama's own red line that there must be no use of chemical weapons. As to whether that makes any sense in the context an acceptance by the US of the fact that Assad has used other weapons to even more destructive effect, well, yes it does make sense. Hence the support from the likes of the shadow defence minister, the deputy leader of the Labour Party, and the leader of the Liberal Democrats, none of whom to my knowledge have been advocating the bombing of Syria up to now. But Perhaps they should all listen more to Nigel Farage.
