This is an inevitable consequence of a mercenary army. No, I'm not talking about the troops, who volunteer for many reasons, one of which is often the delusion that by doing so, they are protecting and serving their fellow-countrymen, but of the overt usage of military power to advance the agendas of the rulers, whatever the mood or needs of the nation. Divorce the military from defense (whatever one may symbolically or officially claim), and it becomes nothing more than the biggest gang on the block, trying to increase its turf at the expense of anyone who gets in the way. Hell, Smedley Butler explained this to us in the 1930s, and it was nothing new then.

For years, in many fields, we in the West (and in the U.S. in particular) have managed to delude ourselves into thinking that we have conquered history, that we have learned from the past, that "things are different now," and that we are Exceptional. We aren't, you know. (Hell, until WW2, we at least called a spade a spade and had a War department. What is this bull about "defense?" We haven't fought a "defensive" war since 1945) Unfortunately for those who stick their heads in the sand, there are a lot more people in the world than just us, and our society has never fully weeded-out those who are filled with lust, rage, and greed, and who will use any means to appease them, and can never be satisfied.

-- Mal

Since 2012, the war in Syria has lurched from one escalation to another. Syrians have been subjected to large-scale military force not only by their own government, but also by an array of rebel groups, Islamic State (IS), a US-led coalition and other states. The results have been devastating, as the recent bombing of hospitals illustrates in particular.

Most of the international interventions came in the form of air strikes, though this may change if reports that Turkey and Saudi Arabia are contemplating a ground invasion are true. Although these actions have triggered debate in legal circles, their repercussions for the way force is used haven’t got much attention.

The interventions in Syria may have deeply affected the norms that define the architecture of global security. Once military force becomes the rule rather than the exception, the general prohibition on the use of force is threatened. This changes established boundaries of what’s permissible, and therefore corrodes one of the core premises of global security in general.

The pursuit of state interests by military means is proscribed under the UN Charter, which contains an agreement on the general prohibition of using military force. That general prohibition and its two exceptions – self-defence and UN Security Council authorisation under Chapter VII – have become key guarantors of global security. They provide common standards regulating the use of force, and above all emphasise that force should only ever be used as a last resort.

http://theconversation.com/how-the-worlds-interventions-in-syria-have-normalised-the-use-of-force-54505

giving him JUST what he wanted.

So, that makes them the other side of the Bin Laden coin.