Warships, submarines and aircraft from Britain, France and the US will come together, in the dead of night, with deadly intentions.
They will launch Tomahawk and Cruise missiles towards Syria, at key targets, with the inevitable outcome of civilians being killed.
Some of these missiles will find their intended target and no doubt damage the Syrian regime, others will miss the target, in the same way that so many of our politicians have missed the point.
The Arab Spring which promised so much, has delivered real change in the Middle East.
The map of the Middle East was drawn by the British and French after hostilities concluded in the First World War. With the exception of the creation of the state of Israel, it has remained unchanged in almost 100 years.
Of the 22 countries in the Middle East, only five can lay any real claim to democracy. The rest are a combination of military, royal or religious dictatorships where human rights and freedom of speech remain ambitions rather than realities.
The Arab Spring has been overtaken by a religious civil war, a war between Sunni and Shia Muslims across the Middle East, a war which has eclipsed even their mutual dislike of Israel.
The crux of what brought us to this point is the alleged use by Syrian leader Bashar Al Assad of chemical weapons against his own people.
United Nations inspectors will deliver their report on that event this weekend but you can be sure that its content will be appropriately fudged and inconclusive.
So too will be the advice received into the legality of military action, but it won't matter, we will bomb Syria anyway.
The use of any chemical weapons is abhorrent and hundreds of innocent civilians have been killed.
This war though is not new, it has raged for two and a half years killing more than 100,000 people.
We appear to have created a new moral boundary for the Syrian conflict in accepting that it's not how many die, but the means of their death, which determines whether we ignore it, or intervene.
The conflict has again highlighted the almost total irrelevance of the UN.
From Bosnia to Rwanda, from Egypt to Syria, its inability at act decisively, renders it pointless.
Less than half of all UN member states are democratic countries.
Around 75% of the Syrian population are Sunni Muslim, while 13% are Shia Muslim, of which most, 11% of the total, are Alawites, including leader Bashar Al Assad.
He inherited power from his father Hafez, whose regime reigned for 30 years and in 1982 undertook the massacre of 25,000 innocent civilians in Hama.
Bashar hasn't had to look far for inspiration. If he loses the civil war, he understands that the Shia population, particularly the Alawites, are likely to face atrocity, perhaps even, ethnic cleansing.
HIS key ally, Iran, will not stand idle if that happens. He has also threatened to bomb Israel if the West attacks.
The Arab League and The Organisation of Islamic Co-Operation have proven as ineffective as the UN in developing an appropriate solution to the Syrian dilemma, and Russia and China will veto any proposed Western military action.
In the powder keg of the Syrian Civil War we should also remember that atrocities are alleged to have been committed by both sides. The involvement of Hezbollah, Al Qaueda and Hamas further blurs the lines, making it difficult to judge who the good guys are.
And so, in step our politicians. David Cameron advocating early intervention, Ed Milliband waiting for the UN Inspectors report for cover, Nick Clegg changing policy every five minutes.
Our world needs more democracy, more accountability but not through the barrel of a Western gun.
The separation of religion and politics is not a luxury, it is the essential feature of democracy.
It is time for the great Western democracies to demonstrate the value of their freedoms and use wise council and negotiation to broker solutions in the Middle East.
We need the sharp dagger of dialogue, not the blunt instrument of the bomb, to bring us to a sustainable, long-term solution.