If you haven't been keeping up with the reactions of western governments to the situation in Syria, and are feeling guilty about it, I've found an excellent article that lays out the dilemmas facing advocates of both action and inaction. Written by Toby Harnden and Mark Hookham of the London Sunday Times and carried here by RealClearPolitics, the article does a good job of describing the quite reasonable arguments for both sides.
The history of U.S. interventions in the region hasn't been a glorious one. Beyond supporting Israel with material and intelligence, which we've done for six decades, prudence suggests staying out. When it comes to Syria, we don't have a dog in that fight.
This saying, popularized by former Secretary of State James A. Baker, is not exactly the equivalent of "don't give a s***." It more describes being unable to pick between equally unattractive alternatives.
