As I write this, the government is pondering military intervention in Syria over the alleged chemical attacks against their own civilians last week.

According to this article, officials have incontrovertible proof of this attack, and are ramping up the drum beat to intervene, even without the UN’s inspectors having done any inspecting of the situation.

The Obama administration believes that U.S. intelligence has established how Syrian government forces stored, assembled and launched the chemical weapons allegedly used in last week’s attack outside Damascus, according to U.S. officials.

The report, being compiled by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, is one of the final steps that the administration is taking before President Obama makes a decision on a U.S. military strike against Syria, which now appears all but inevitable.

It sounds all so very terribly and depressingly familiar.

This is how the war in Iraq got started. You remember that, don’t you?

First, they claimed that there were attacks against civilians, then there were ‘weapons of mass destruction,’ and then it really got intense.

Here’s a pretty comprehensive timeline of what happened in Iraq.

We didn’t win the ‘war’ in Iraq. We went in, killed an awful lot of people, physically destroyed an entire country, its’ society and culture, and then declared that we’d reestablished peace.

What the Iraqis got out of it is unknown, because they’re still arguing over who should run the country we broke by going in and having a war based on no credible evidence of chemical weapons of mass destruction.

I’m not the only one who’s wary of another military action-the defense sector of the stock market is also lagging.

Guess it won’t be as profitable for them to supply a new war in Syria as it was in Iraq and Afghanistan. After all, Syria is a very small country with very few resources for us to plunder-excuse me, ‘liberate’-so I guess the people who would make the most money from such an expedition are not that keen on it this time.

The military is also exhausted. Right now, the casualty number for Afghanistan is 2,129 service people dead. That’s not including the ones who were injured, maimed or otherwise harmed in that war. Iraq’s casualty rate was just as bad, on both sides.

So I would like to know why this is considered a good idea?

Going in and attacking another country on the pretext of morally repugnant behavior is not good enough any more, and here’s why:

We supplied them the weapons and arms they’re using against one another.

Let’s not do this again.

I’m tired of useless war, death and destruction and the politicians who have nothing better to do than waste our time, money and people in one.

Why can’t we fix our own country first, for once? Would that be too hard?

Or is it not profitable enough?