The war in Syria is a conundrum, a problem that appears to have no favorable resolution. The opposition, assaulted by a brutal dictator, plead for weapons to unseat Bashar al-Assad. Clinging to power appears to be Assad’s main goal in life, even if he must slaughter civilians to do it. The poorly-armed opposition asks for weapons to equalize the conflict.

Few Americans seriously entertain sending American troops into the Syrian maelstrom, but many question our lack of support for other nations to arm the opposition with weapons to shoot down Assad’s planes that sow such carnage.

The reason for our reluctance is the presence in the opposition of terrorist elements, perhaps a small minority, but we don’t know the extent. We fear that weapons will end up in the hands of the terrorist element. We fear, if they gain the upper hand, that they will replace Assad, not with a republic offering equal protection for all religious and ethnic groups, but with an Islamist republic akin to the theocracy in Iran. In a shooting war which changes daily, picking the good guys from the bad ones is difficult. The mixed results of other Middle Eastern countries who have thrown off dictators give us pause. Minorities in Egypt, for example, fear that the new constitution there may take away their rights.

Sometimes the happy ending, so beloved by Americans, is not possible in the short run. We make adult decisions, some would say moral ones, knowing the risks we take.