Many of the concerns and facts listed here are well known, consolidated all in one place.  This is a summary outline, lengthy dissertation papers could be written on the subject, however, a lot of it has already been done.

Looking at the last 20 years or so, well known Middle East leaders:

• Yasser Arafat

• Saddam Hussein

• Hosni Mubarak

• Ayatollah Khomeni
  

• Muammar Qaddhafi

• Kings of Saudi Arabia

There is a situation in Syria.  One aspect that saliently sits out in the list of well known Arab Region or Middle East leaders, is the current leader of Syria is perhaps the youngest of the group.

Aside from Saudi Arabia, in Syria, the current Assad is in power perhaps to some degree due to that his father was in power previously.

The multitude of dynamics going on, Assad might be grappling with trying to juggle a bunch of different weights while the whole thing is on pins and needles, all while he might not have necessarily had the choice of selection of what everything is that was put on his plate, on the plate.  Reference to 'dropped in his lap'.

Over here in the U.S. many talk about Assad as if he is the only man in the government, this concurrent the reference to be a younger in age leader.  What this is broken down to in simpler words is, when anything happens, all fingers seem to point to Assad the individual. 
Is that the reality, does he himself deserve that treatment?


Synopsis on bombings and air strikes:
The U.S. still to this day has 2 big events in its history, that still drag around everywhere we go

• Napalm during the Vietnam War

• The bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima

Some in the U.S. do not wish to be viewed as the entity behind the massive ugliness of a pyrotechnics event, certainly not a renewed reputation of that, nor the wish to last another 100 years or so.  Therefore, some might feel, that if a solution can be found that does not involve nuclear, air strikes, or bombings, to do the absolute best to use those other alternates first.

In the U.S. today, it is an arrestable offense to even speak or shout out in a public place hat a person has a firearm or threatening the use of one illegally, even if hat person does not actually have a firearm in their possession; that was part of an effort to reduce firearm violence.

In similar vein, threatening the use of nuclear activity and other high powered from the air weaponry use, does not always sit well in the international community.

There seems to be talk of nuclear usage based on gleanings from news sites having to do with North Korea.

Incidentally, like in the Syria, the leadership of North Korea has perhaps dropped into the lap of the current leader post his father.

Accepted leader facts:

• Assad born mid 1965, in office since 2000, came to office in his 30s

• Kim Jong born in 1984, currently about the same age as Assad was when he came o power.  His childhood was at least  ten years after Vietnam, and over sixty years since the end of the Korean War summer of 1953.

That a younger leader, whether North Korea, or Syria, or anywhere else in the world, might have areas where sets of responsibility that were messy from the start up in nature set upon them, is not a situation where others taking full advantage of seizing the opportunity to chastise them every time something goes wrong, is ethical.

Human life and civilization is not a script from war games, or battleship board game.  Situations of land 'a' did 'x', so land 'b' does 'y' in response, in reality, having an assessment of fuller depth of all that is going on, is more respectable to have, than just knee jerk reaction, black-and-white action and reaction.  Sometimes the latter can appear superficial and even bullying.

There are a few developments that could happen which seems like they have not, or at least not all that pushed for, in regard to Syria and North Korea.  (Making no mistake, there have been inspections or the call to do so before.)

• Transparency to the decisions going on in the government as a whole, to monitoring entities
• Does everyone, for instance in the U.S., siting at their television sets and online news computer device, know, the names and faces of the top ten decision makers in the two governments, North Korea and Syria, as readily as they know Bashar Assad, and Kim Jong?
• Perhaps getting that accomplished first, then pointing fingers, as to who is performing activity they should not be, in that larger perspective; culling out who did what and who is responsible for what wrong doing might be more easily identified.

• Has an emergency talk taken place with all parties present, leaders of U.S., Russia, Syria, and Iran; one that the public can see and formulate decisions about?

• Major international law and rule changes and advents, such as mandatory embargoes, suspense of recognized government until inspections, transparent nuclear inspections, thorough investigations with 'something in writing' that attests to who pulled the trigger, who was in the airplane dropping gas, who was feeding women poison in prisons that cause them to die.  (Has that taken place to a furthered level?)
  

Events in the past 40 years thereabout:

• Oil embargoes here in the U.S.
• Remember the gas lines that wrapped around blocks, oil crisis of 1973?
• In series of events after events, could that be what could happen, if events in the Middle East keep unfolding
  

The courses of what happened next, after a Middle East country received air strikes from the U.S.

• Qaddhafi, and Libya, there was airstrike in about 1986; Qaddhafi was not deposed until about 25 years later

• Air strikes on Iraq; Saddam Hussein was not deposed until about 20 years later

• Post the bombing on the Japan islands in the 1940s, public outcry is still in existence, here are people alive today that were alive when those bombs were dropped; trying to develop a peace between nations is still ongoing, such as by leaders that had not yet yet seen their first days of childhood until well after that.
  
• Jean-Luc Melenchon running for French leadership, is already discussing America might be doing a 'criminal act'; seizing opportunity for criticism at the first sight of aerial weapons
• The last development the U.S. could want is condemnation from European allies
• The disaster, is a double whammy of condemnation, abandonment, and permanent scrutiny, by both European allies and the Arab World
  

• No blood for oil/ no blood for diamonds, slogans and campaigns
• Slogan/campaign used in the construct of South Africa during the apartheid era; diamond oppression ongoing in other areas of Africa today. War with Iraq.
• Some here in the U.S. do not want to be at the receiving end of criticism that what could perceived by others or taunted by outsiders as the root, base motivation of interaction with the Middle East at all, is oil, and now more missiles are seen flying over the Middle East, whether they be they are for the cause of justice or not
  

Assertions and seizing opportunities, 'kicking the cat' in the international leadership sphere:

• The world got upset when the Nazi power group took off too far in the late 1930s and 1940s, when they asserted themselves as powers that have the authority to cause casualties of masses and masses of people, and that the justification for those actions rests with themselves approving of it

• Left over weapons after strife or warfare, where traders attempt to seize the leftover materials, and use it to build weapons, or use the base material for sales to make money; this has occurred during or after:
• Vietnam War, ended roughly early to middle 1970s
• War between the Soviets and Afghanistan, 1970s on through at least a decade, and well known terrorist groups got a hold of some of the weapons
• Libya, ongoing

Lastly, proximity of missiles near Muslim Holy Sites:

• Already interwoven in the general thread of anything having to do with warfare in the Middle East, Arabian Peninsula, Arab lands or regions, one of the chief reasons why the suspense is so thick when weapons and fighting there or near there is a subject matter, is because of the sheer number of miles it is to Muslim holy sites.  The Muslim World simply is very wary of having missiles fly ever so slightly off course in the region, because of a concern that they could accidentally hit key sites.  Of course the closer missiles come to the sites, the more worried everyone in the Muslim World gets, from leader on to individuals walking through town, or who cannot even walk.

Afterword
These are the major points for now; this article might be revised or added onto
written and published Sunday April 9, 2017