Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
Oh, I don't expect any admission from those who continue to get it so badly wrong (on Syria and just about everywhere).

The US cultural diesease of refusing to take responsibility for one actions is clearly alive and well and has sadly spread and infected the Brits in a big way (see their shrill denials over their abysmal Iraq and Afghanistan performance).

You can sleep well with the comfort that nobody could consistently get it wrong as the US WH over the recent past. You are in 'good' company.
Accusing anyone of "getting it wrong" doesn't hold much water unless you can say what you think "getting it right" would have been.

The US has, like most nations, never been overly fond of taking responsibility for its actions, but I can't see how one could reasonably argue that the Syrian Civil War is a consequence of US or British action.

I have my share of criticism of the US approach to Syria, most notably involving the excruciating "red line" comments, but at least they have gotten one thing right: US involvement remains peripheral and limited. There is no faction that could realistically be described as a US proxy, and US forces are not engaged. That at least is something: it was always going to be a mess, but at least we haven't made it a worse mess, or made it our mess.

What do you think should have been done, and what do you think the outcome of that action would have been?