I can't even parse point 1, but on your second point, finding the smoking gun won't happen if that's what they're looking for. Do you even remember the un inspections of all those bread queue massacres and so forth that used to happen in Sarajevo, the Serbs got to the point where they could safely lob some mortars in from some disputed neighbourhood and the UN would say nothing could be conclusively proved which would inevitably get reported in the press as speculation that the muslims were shelling their own. THe red line had already been nicknamed the thick red line, and there's no stomach for it in the US, so this would likely result in a few tomahawks, and that only if the US can calm the Russians down. It certainly won't be enough to shift any balance of power given that it took a committed 7 month long air campaign to topple a much weaker regime in a less complicated internal conflict with a much simpler operating terrain and much less sophisticated AA capability. To me it seems far more obvious that if the jihadists are gassing rebel ares that this will result in Syrian rebels turning on them, they having the greater numbers and the local knowledge, ESPECIALLY given that's *exactly* what happened in Iraq, and that was provoked by a bit of high-handedness and a couple of zealous summary executions in the street. A willingness to bellieve a brutal secular governement that has massacred tens of thousands and employed murderous militias wouldn't do it but 'jihadists' would just sounds like the usual Islamophobia to me.