My two cents worth is that when such atrocities, such mass murders of innocent men, women and children occur on such a massive scale, we (perhaps just I) expect that those with the knowledge, those with the expertise and above all those with the appropriate means and power (such as our government) to do everything within their power –perhaps short of war — to stop it.

How? That is why we pay our taxes and “hire” all these experts to figure it out.

And, no, it is not America’s “chore” to fix every humanitarian disaster, but we can sure give it a try.

Or, we could close our eyes and then piously say — after the fact — “Never Again.”

I was equally surprised to read the reported Dempsey comments.

The Hill now has a somewhat different version (See UPDATE above)

However, I am still puzzled at comments about not having done “any military planning” for Syria.

The Pentagon has detailed plans for almost every conceivable conflict or situation.

They are called “contingency plans.”

The dangers Satloff lists include the Syrian regime’s loss of control of its biological and chemical weapons stockpile, renewed Syrian support for the PKK to punish Turkey for helping the opposition, Syrian expulsion of Palestinian refugees into neighboring countries, Syrian-backed attacks on Sunnis in Lebanon, and an influx of jihadists into Syria. Of these, the first and last seem most plausible, but it appears that none of the usual measures proposed for intervention in Syria would do anything to prevent them.

What the military planners need is a clear directive as to what the outcome needs to be and what parameters do they have to operate within. Such as Iraq–Bush 41 clearly told the military to oust Hussian from Kuwait. Once done, stop any further operations. Bush 43 clearly told the military to capture or kill Hussian. And the knew how much power they could use to get it done.

Obama has followed his script with his leadership style (or lack of) by “vaguely maintaining the option for military response has put Pentagon planners in a strategic bind.” Once again he has indicated what he might want, but has not provided the leadership like he has so many times with the debt, deficit, economic policies and healthcare. He had deferred to others without giving clear directives as to the outcome he wants.

“No battle plan survives contact with the enemy.” Gen. George S. Patton.

I’m wondering if General Dempsey was in on the planning for the invasion of Iraq? I would think that nearly $700 billion dollars a YEAR would cover thinking/planning for any contingency. It’s not like there’s no equipment or troops over there, already.