Whose Side Are We On?

The United States is preparing military options to pressure the Islamic State in Syria, the U.S. military said on Monday, but officials cautioned that no decision had been made to expand U.S. action beyond the limited air strikes under way in Iraq. ... General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said last week that the Islamic State would need to eventually be addressed on "both sides of what is essentially at this point a non-existent border" between Syria and Iraq.

Dempsey's spokesman confirmed on Monday that options against Islamic State were under review and stressed the need to form "a coalition of capable regional and European partners."

"With Central Command, (Dempsey) is preparing options to address ISIS both in Iraq and Syria with a variety of military tools including airstrikes," Colonel Ed Thomas said.

I am asking a serious question.

We don't like ISIS because they're a bunch of murderous goons. I get that part. But in Syria, ISIS is fighting the Syrian government, whom we also don't like. Only last year, American Chickenhawks were advocating giving weapons to the Syrian rebels, including ISIS.

I also understand that part of the reason why ISIS is such a bother is because Prime Minister al-Maliki in Iraq effectively neutered the national army by purging officers not associated with his faction and promoting loyal Bushies officers based on loyalty, not on competence.

But if we bomb ISIS in Syria, aren't we inadvertently helping the Syrian government And aren't we also then violating Syrian's sovereignty? And if we're helping the Syrian government by bombing ISIS, do we then have to give weapons to the other Syrian rebels in order to cancel out the advantage we gave to the Syrian government by bombing their other enemies?

And why are we not talking about directly arming the Kurdish Peshmerga, which seems to be more capable than the Iraqi army?

Whose side will we be really on?