For the US, the disadvantages of a ground intervention greatly
outweigh the advantages. It would come with a huge economic cost.
Think Iraq, not Libya. The state of US economy is bad as it is. If you add
another long-term war to this, they might as well start burning money.
That, and America and its military is tired of war. Some more body bags
every week wouldn't help that. Not to mention the risks of blowback
from another war in that region.


First you have to dispose of Assad and those who back him, which
wouldn't be easy. Doable, but not easy. Syria's military is more
formidable than the Iraqi military at the time and has the backing of
Russia and Iran (also via Hezbollah) in the form of training, weapon
deliveries and even manpower(Iran). It's much more densely populated and
Assad won't hesitate to turn that into his advantage.

After you get rid of them comes the hard part: getting the country
stabilized. Making sure Assad is gone doesn't mean you stop the civil
war. Assad supporters and rebels are fighting each other but rebels are
fighting among themselves as well. Not to mention the sectarian
violence, Alawites and Christians are going to be targeted.
Meanwhile you can be sure that Iran is going to destabilize a US-
controlled Syria, just like they did in Iraq. Iran may condemn the use
of chemical weapons publicly but it doesn't change its support for
Assad.


A big reason why America is involved in Syria is because of Iran and
Russia, not because of the poor Syrians. And not because of chemical
weapons. It doesn't really matter whether a thousand people get killed
by Sarin gas or by artillery. And they didn't really seems to mind in
the 80's when Saddam Hussein used it against Iran. The US and Israel are
weary of a bigger influence of Iran in the region. They're countering
Iran's backing of Syria by supporting the rebels.


Obama publicly drew a red line for the conflict and now has to act on
it. He has to show the world (Iran, North Korea) America doesn't give in
on its ultimatums. And meanwhile trying to lift the power balance a bit.
A limited operation can be a risk as well though. If the regime
makes it through the waves of Tomahawks unscathed, it could
actually be in its advantage.

And now that he's decided to wait for Congressional approval, time
passes and Syria is probably "hiding" or moving its important military
factors into civilian areas, knowing the US won't launch a Tomahawk at a
school.


Meanwhile people are dying in eastern Congo as well, but that's old news
so it doesn't matter obviously.