They’re the wrong ones:

Even if the administration wants to avoid military action (as it should if at all possible), it should be talking tough so as to help along diplomatic efforts to resolve the crisis and ease Bashar al-Assad out of power. Unless there are some visible sticks, a carrots-only approach is not likely to work. The president seems to have belatedly figured this out with regard to Iran, which presumably is why he is talking tougher about the mullahs’ nuclear project, telling Jeffrey Goldberg, “I don’t bluff. I also don’t, as a matter of sound policy, go around advertising exactly what our intentions are. But I think both the Iranian and the Israeli governments recognize that when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say.”

So why at the same time is the administration sending a signal to the Syrian regime it has nothing to worry about regarding outside intervention to end its horrific and indiscriminate violence?I guess it’s just more of the smart diplomacy we were promised four years ago.

I guess it’s just more of that “smart diplomacy we were promised four years ago.