The intel that a conversation was intercepted indicating the Syrian government was behind the chemical use came from the same elements within the Israeli government that guaranteed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and was preparing to use them.
So members of the Obama administration wanted more evidence, but the evidence they accepted as strong is only the location of the attacks. Which were all rebel-held areas.
Many of the rebel fighters are coming from Sunni Saudi Arabia (think Catholic traditions and Holy Book hold equal authority) and happen to have connections to al-Qaeda. As a consequence of all these outsiders joining in the conflict, Syrias Shiite (think Protestants) friend Iran finances Hezbollah to join the side of the government. Hezbollah fighters proceed to kick butt and continue to kick butt.
If you are on an extended winning streak, why would you need to use chemical weapons against civilians? On the other hand, if you are on a losing streak, the French and United States governments have promised but never actually provided you weapons, and you are mercenaries from another part of the Middle East, what motive do you have not to use chemical weapons against civilians to gain sympathy and assistance for your side?
This takes the repeated dishonesty of the Israeli government out of the picture. Or does it?
The acknowledged most powerful lobby in Washington is an Israeli group. It is probable that money in their accounts is more a factor to some U.S. congressmen than solid evidence.
Especially those who have been in Washington a long time. Watch which ones are vocal hawks.
Feel free to connect the dots yourself. But be careful to not implicate any Jews. They are granted protected status by the American government no matter what they do.
Also, what are a few billion taxpayer dollars to replace used missiles? Are they not designed and manufactured in America? If not, who would make money on this misadventure?