conservative interpretation, ronald reagan was there while 244 american marines were blown up in a beirut terexand his answer to that was pull out. i think we are talking about some western movie idea of toughness here. the public has no feel for syria. you can blame the president for that. there is no public understanding of what the stakes are. peter hart, who did the "wall street journal/nbc" poll put it that people do not know the players or the history, and the u.s. support for military action is not there. so, it is an uphill struggle. the question comes down, and we have to be asking ourselves, do we want to live in a world where the promiscuous use of chemical weapons in warfare is tolerated, condoned and ignored for the first time in a century? >> colby? >> if you go from our criticism of so-called surgical strikes, to the broader and strategic interest that charles talked about, and you take on syria in the way of taking on iran and hezbollah and others, then you are talking about something that gets to the question, do we have the capacity to do that and sustain that kind of thing be