Even Democrats are now critical of President Obama's approach to Syria. Former Bill Clinton ambassador and adviser Marc Ginsberg writes:
The White House is ever so reluctantly realizing that subcontracting out its Syria policy when the looming crisis demands mature, steady, imaginative, and alibi-avoiding strategies is doing more harm than good to everyone involved, except Mr. Assad. Administration officials keep gravitating to the simplistic assertion that when it comes to Syria, there is no Plan B since Plan B may compel direct U.S. military intervention.
Yep, there can be no Plan B when the administration resists having to come up with one. But I can drive a ten-wheeler between existing U.S. policy and putting boots on Syrian ground. I call that Plan C.
How did the U.S. get to the point where the White House has taken most options off the table, even those that minimize the risk of overt military involvement against Syria?
When the mayhem, murders and massacres were already numbering in the thousands, the administration's policy could best be characterized as a "punt" in football parlance. Now, in the wake of the Houla massacre of women and children at the hands of Assad's henchmen, U.S. policy is little more than a "Hail Mary!"
Whole thing here. And read Lee Smith on Obama, Russia, and Syria here.