SHORT COMMENTARY: NO CASE FOR ATTACKING SYRIA

I don't get it.  On the basis of Obama and his spokesperson's statements there is not sufficient reason to attack Syria:

1)  The purpose would not be to force Assad to resign.

2)  There would be no interest in upsetting the "balance of power" between Assad and the rebels.  

3)  The strikes would be highly limited and would not greatly diminish Assad's war-making capability.

4)  Martin Dempsy, Chair of The Joint Chief of Staff, has stated that limited strikes would have no effect on the underlying factors causing what is virtually a civil war in Syria.  The limited strikes would not effect historic, ethnic, religious, and tribal issues.

5)  As of a few days ago, the Obama administration was still trying to define its objectives in an attack on Syria.  (Yahoo News).)  One would commit an act of war without knowing the objectives?  This leaves one breathless.

6) Secretary of state Chuck Hegel has stated that the U.S. would only attack Syria if it had international support.  Of course, it doesn't.

7) From Truthdig:    Critics of Obama’s plan to bomb Syria seem to be unanimous in the belief that an attack would destabilize the region more than it already is, potentially bringing Russia and other Syrian allies into a protracted multinational war. They agree it wouldn’t be as quick and easy as the 2011 intervention in Libya, a country that had few allies and was led by a dictator who was clearly on his way out.