One Man's Opinion About Syria.

This one's a tough one. I normally stand united with the cause. 

I typically lean so far to the left that my portside palm scrapes the asphalt, embedding it with tiny rocks like meat and pebble cookie dough.

I usually stick to the party line with the devotion of a toadstool-nibbling Deadhead clamoring at the gates of Red Rocks…holding a coffee can that isn't for coffee.

Okay, enough with the blustery analogies. I'm a freaking commie pinko liberal and for those who've graciously read perhaps forty percent of my writings, it's fairly obvious.

But this whole Syria thing has me flummoxed. Stumped. Stupefied. 

When President Obama initially scrawled out his "red line," the threshold at which America intervenes to stop the Assad regime from poisoning its innocents en masse and thereby bypassing more conventional savagery, it seemed a logical next step. America could unilaterally eliminate Syria's chemical capabilities and provide some much needed bolstering to the rebel forces.

And I guess if that were possible, I'd still support it. But the more I think about it, the more I doubt that it is, so, as they say on Shark Tank, "I'm out." 

Time to skedaddle off the Obama Obandwagon.

Look, I'm no military expert. I know more about the Starship Enterprise's weapons capabilities than those of the United States military. And by the way, every once in a while, even the combined forces of Spock, Chekov, Scotty and Sulu couldn't get the phasers, deflectors shields and cloaking devices to function properly. Sometimes the shit just didn't work and a few dudes in red and blue and yellow turtlenecks went down hard.

Does America truly possess the capability to pick out the vats of sarin and the stacks of weaponized mustard gas, surgically excising them like plantar warts? Or perhaps, some collateral damage has already been deemed acceptable. If so, are we prepared to kill and maim civilians one way while attempting to prevent their massacre in a different fashion? 

So many questions, and I guess that's my point. As cruel and savage as this "civil" war has become, I can't see how America can improve the situation over there by engaging in "War Light: Now with 100% Fewer Boots on the Ground." 

We've grown accustomed to video game wars fought with drones from trailers in Nevada. We love our Double Whoppers and Triple Quarter Pounders, just not that whole unsightly cow-slaughtering process.

Syria is yet another example of a colonially-generated nation whose borders and tyrannical rulers were created to quell the tribal animosities that have lingered over the millenia and ultimately infected with Arab Spring Fever. No amount of American intervention is going to change that. Why rattle our sabers now after having spent decades doing nothing to curb African genocide? 

Do I have an answer, even a half solution to halt this excruciating massacre of Syria's most vulnerable?

No, but I don't think Barack Obama does, either.