A good piece.
I cannot help objecting, though, that characterizing the war in Syria as apart from US aggression is extremely misleading. The US and Saudi Arabia moved in to destabilize Assad, then to fund and arm ISIS, and then to bomb ISIS and others.
Revamp that, and we have a far clearer picture:
The world has more refugees than at any time since WWII because of American petrol-related wars of aggression from North Africa through Central Asia, inclusive. This appears to be related to some power struggle between a very roughly US-European-Saudi-Israeli entity and apparently unaffiliated centers of power in Russia, China, India, and Brazil, probably in that order.
The primary decision-making group in this does not appear to correspond cleanly to any single nation or government, though the main executor appears to be the federal government of the USA, with minor roles shunted on to various NATO nations and allies, probably more to distribute culpability than anything else.
This picture fits fairly cleanly with what is known about CIA-mafia sorts of governance in "banana republic" company-town nations from their earliest capitalist development but particularly from the mid-20th century on. Since the same agencies are involved with the US government, including many of the same individuals that have been involved with CIA throttling of various nations, the circumstantial evidence strongly suggests rule by a loose more-or-less affiliation of what must be something like crime families, directing and manipulating energy and financial and social policy towards some moderately shared impression of self-interest.
For whatever reason, this more-or-less-official group or group of groups has no obvious compunction about killing or torture or driving millions from their homes. This is likely in part about what may be a more-than-rational urgency about maintaining and extending control.
So what does this leave us with? The last waves of American violence, particularly in and around Syria, and the provocation of Russia to the point that American and Russian troops are firing on the same battlefield. This is directed by some less-than-fully-identified group of more-or-less legal and illegal businesspersons for some poorly known and apparently ill-examined set of goals related to somebody's personal gain.
I don't suppose that the appropriate response is to dive off a cliff, exactly. But I should think we should by now have ruled out the option of pretending that we can stay where we are.