Re: Why the contraditions in dealing with Syria?
The lack of military action by Muslim countries is simply quite logical.
Syria has never denied having chemical weapons. In 2012 it stated that its chemicals weapons existed for the purpose of deterring external aggression (and it vowed to never use them against its own population, a vow that it broke).
But this means that Syria promised that any country that attacked it would be hit with chemical weapons (of which Syria has plenty). All of the militarily powerful Muslim countries are within easy reach of Syria’s missiles and planes; any neighbouring Muslim country that allowed its territory to be used to host an invasion of Syria would find its armies and population under chemical attack.
The USA and Western European countries are the only ones that can do what the Muslim countries cannot - hit Syria, while remaining out of reach of Syrian retaliation.
If you demand that Muslim countries take action instead of the US, then you are demanding the deaths of hundred of thousands, if not millions, of Muslims from Syrian chemical attacks.