That would have caused our leaders to shift gears and conclude that another war in the Middle East might be/could be an awesome policy option. Yes, it's a terrible, terrible thing, but we have zero strategic interests at all there (beyond our Friends in Freedom next door, who can take perfectly good care of themselves), and if we're saying that we've got to control the spread of chemical weapons, then that means we'd have to side with the dictatorship, not the rebels, since the dictator has the weapons, and it's probably a safe bet to say that he doesn't want anyone else getting their hands on them. Best case (for us), the administration is just posturing. At least we can hope so, since issuing sternly worded warnings devoid of any meaningful follow-up has been a long-standing habit of theirs, after all.
Update (4:50 pm): Then again, maybe not posturing. God, we are governed by fools.
---Baron V
Comments