After all that Iraq business and so much that went wrong in the process, the reluctance of America and its allies to get involved in another such venture is easy to understand. But to do nothing in the face of what appears to be blatant disregard for civilian casualties and the use of deadly gas attacks on the general populace is unquestionably wrong. This sort of crime does need some response other than a general wringing of hands and profuse international condemnation.

And yet what is it that can be done? The outside world still seems powerless to intervene in any meaningful way. Even the vast arsenal of the United Sates is severely limited in its ability to bring only a small fraction of its undoubted power to bear upon the present Syrian situation. And even then there is no guarantee that the matter will end in a manner satisfying to any of the principals involved.

It seems that the world must think again about how to handle this affair. And the many others like it.

And once a template for unbiased intervention is found and verified to a worldwide audience, its general application can then be brought on stream and visited upon many other conflicts that might be in need of its rapid deployment.

Of course, all the military-industrial complexes around the globe will be up in arms about the whole concept (pun not intended there). I mean, waging war without weapons can hardly be good for business and, certainly, it’s too much of a radical departure from the normal and contemporary usages of warfare itself.

But, then again, isn’t it always good to have other options on the table? Especially as the ones currently on display seem to be distinctly out of favour with all those having to make a choice in the matter.