The position of western countries vis--vis the Syrian events is a complex one. But the idea that the west will accept a protracted conflict in order to weaken Syria as a state, exhaust it as a society, and reduce its ability to play a role in the region, is now widespread among the opposition. It is another bleak signal in a conflict without end.
Link:http://www.opendemocracy.net/vicken-...itics-of-anger

This is the conclusion of a bitter article citing Syrian exiles and a few left inside Syria. I am not saying it is wrong or right.

On SWC we have debated whether a Western intervention, even another option, yes the UN's "blue berets", could be justified and was practical. We have not IIRC considered the impact of not intervening, especially on the Jihadist legend of an uninterested West, with its human rights etc.

As one Syrian journalist says:
When the revolution started we filmed the violations and documented the repression. We believed that the work of citizen journalists will have an impact, and that the world will come to our aid.
Not that 'We told you and you stood watching' is not uncommon.