Isn't changing policy on Assad as a result of images of people attacked by chemical weapons the same as changing policy on refugees as a result of seeing an image of young Alan Kurdi dead on the beach after drowning in the Mediterranean Sea?

One image caused a "refugee crisis" whereby huge numbers of Syrians (and others claiming to be Syrians) engulfed Europe.

One "attack by Assad" (probably not by him) and Trump U-Turns, with possible collapse of Syria so it falls to ISIS entirely.  What security threat does Assad pose to the West, to NATO? None.

Think back. In times past the media was limited. Fewer televisions, less media propaganda, less bleeding heart liberalism, more isolationism. Yes, it could be hard-hearted, even lacking compassion, but without a barrage of film clips narrated by simpering voice actors showing starving kids in Africa, or showing bombed out places we'd never heard of in the Middle East did we think about these events?

No, we thought about our own country, its needs and its future.

And that's exactly what our leaders need to be doing now. Ignore the media clamour to police the world......