We have little to win and a lot to lose by getting involved in this civil war. Our enemies are doing a pretty good job of killing each other off. We should let them continue.
So, if the advanced arms that Russia has in this arena include anti ship missiles, that are actually state of the art, and we commit an act of aggression (war). Will the Russians allow Syria the opportunity to destroy our aggressive assets? We started it. We did not have clear and convincing UN ready evidence (imagine I am taking the devil’s advocate position here). Do we take on Russia when Putin made his position clear? When the rest of the world is behind us...way, way, way far behind us!
Putin is betting that Obama will fold. Maybe killing a ship is enough of a lesson. Maybe not. The rest of the world is on which side of that bet? Where is Bibi? For the last two years the president has been clearly seen as a totally incompetent CinC, much less leader of any sort. He did not have a record of any leadership prior to the presidency either. But he got elected.
And here we are, WW3 in the middle east has started a bit ago, with the nonsense about theocratic democracy, without minority rights, or human rights for that matter.
The bet is almost in, Putin or Obama. Place your bets...
DK
By the way, someone mentioned Weasley Clark as an informed opinion. He almost started WW3 in Kosovo, per British Nato General Michael Jackson, over Russian troops at an airport, so I doubt his opinion is worth the NY Times it is written in.