Murdering Afghan and Pakistani Kids is OK; Murdering Syrian Kids Isn't

I couldn't bear to listen to Barry's trio of bellicose liars [the identical clones of George W. Bush's gang of bellicose liars, all of whom should be hauled before the International Criminal Court to be judged for crimes against humanity] delivering their prepared remarks on September 3, 2013. I either would have vomited my guts out or smashed my TV set.

So I hit the mute button and waited until the distinguished members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee asked their questions.

I identified four of them, three Republicans and one Democrat, who appeared not have guzzled Barry's poisonous Kool-Aid--so far--and tried to ask real, thoughtful questions.  They were:

Jim Risch [R-ID]
Tom Udall [D-NM]
John Barrasso [R-WY]
Rand Paul [R-KY]

As Kerry, Hagel and Dempsey--Barry's Three Stooges--and most of the Democrat senators, were slobbering crocodile tears over the dead Syrian kids, I could only think of the scores or hundreds of Afghan and Pakistani kids [not to mention their mothers and fathers, uncles and aunts, grandparents, siblings and  playmates] murdered in cold blood by Barry's assassination drones on a weekly basis.

Yeah, I get it: it's just fine for a Nobel Peace Prize winner to blast Afghan and Pakistani kids to smithereens with his assassination drones but--somehow--it's a crime against humanity for Bashar Al-Assad [or, maybe even the Syrian "democratic" opposition] to gas Syrian kids.

Can somebody please explain the difference?  Inquiring minds want to know.