U.S. President Barack Obama despite the denials aims to overthrow Assad, even if international law is clear on this issue for any military action is indeed necessary "authorization" of the Security Council.

Western leaders have clearly said they are ready to do without citing in this regard the previous foreign interventions in order to protect the civilian population.

French President Hollande cited a provision, which in turn was inspired by the 1994 Rwandan genocide, the United Nations 2005 authorizing to intervene to protect civilians by their own governments.

Similar arguments have been used by NATO to bomb Serbia in 1999 following the killing of civilians in Kosovo.

The foreign minister of Britain Hague argues that its action is justified by the fact that we must at all costs prevent the Syrian chemical weapons could "fall into the wrong hands."

The civil war in Syria is now in its third year, has caused more than 100,000 deaths and it would seem almost certain that chemical weapons such as sarin and nerve agents have been used several times.

The United Nations is investigating and as long as the team led by Swedish scientist Ake Sellstrom is located in Syria is unlikely that the Western action shots, the attack should in any event be limited to a few days and done by drones and cruise missiles launched American ships in the Mediterranean.

It is up to Western governments consider carefully whether a regime increasingly besieged both inside and outside and able to inflict mass casualties, in case of attack does not lead to an escalation of violence, through the classic flick of the tail, that is, using chemical weapons on a massive scale against his own people.

© All rights reserved