> Like how US saved Haiti and Libya and Iraq, right?
Libya was a NATO intervention that was pushed and led by France, specifically Sarkozy's government.
Libya was a NATO intervention that was pushed and led by France, specifically Sarkozy's government.
It ended marginally better because NATO's intervention decisively tipped the scales against Gaddafi's regime.
The Syrian civil war has been in a stalemate for years, and only recently has Assad's regime been making inroads due to Russia's decisive and no-holds-barred military intervention.
And yes Syria is an intangible mess now, probably the same would have been in Lybia if it was left to own civil war for 5 more years.
Now, factor in the fact that Libya is now a failed state and the refugee crisis is largely caused by human traffickers using Libya as a staging area to send those countless lifeboats packed with countless unwitting victims, a great number of which end up dead in the Mediterranean.
Furthermore, non-intervention only meant no actual American troops in Syria, not staying out of the conflict: the US has funded, armed and trained much of the opposition from the start of the conflict, and US made and supplied anti-tank weapons are prominent in the rebels ability to counter the armoured forces of the Syrian army.
Any of the US involvement to Syria beyond verbal support occurred only years into the conflict, and even then it was minimal compared to meddling of Turkey, Arab states or Russia.