What I want to do is to say what I think of Maria Lipman's views on the matter in the BBC piece on viewpoints
"A villainous leader brutally killing his adversaries should be stopped"
Obviously she did not quite believe in what she said, because in the next breath she said
At first sight the moral clarity of this statement cannot be called into doubt
And then added
But on closer inspection, this sounds like an over-simplification. If "humanitarian intervention" implies use of force, then the intervening party assumes the role of god, as it were - as it decides that some people have to die. While sacrificing your own citizens' lives - in case of a war or other emergency - is a leader's legal prerogative, there is no such prerogative outside one's natural jurisdiction
Now, she forgot to mention whether in the first place Assad was or was no such a "villainous leader".
Apparently from the tenor of what she was saying, Assad was just fighting a war or an emergency and using his nice prerogative power to sacrifice his own citizens' lives.
Pretty, this one.
No need to say more.