Does anyone actually think that their countries are going to "intervene" since it's morally honourable? No, the only grounds that they're going to intervene is to grow their own interests.
Russia and Iran help Syria since they're both good allies with Syria, which they need as a strategic site to have allies and to make sure that every country that isn't "allied" with America in the Middle East is wrecked aside from Iran.
The American and the like are to insure that the SAR gets wrecked, some Kurdestan independence and other good potential war-starters amongst already divided common opposition front. Some more chaos in some boroughs like Dimashq, Halab, and Homs? Wonderful.
Egypt: Serious internal problems in 2011, now most seen in Sinai. Strong enough to resist better.
Iran: Managed to stop most American strikes before it got serious, but is constantly bullied by America.
Iraq: Badly hurt in the Gulf War, wrecked in the Iraq War.
Israel: Allied. Mini-America of Middle East foreign policy.
Lebanon: Hurt in great domestic violence, but as its value as a strategic site went up, less and less problems.
Yemen: Allied, but after a long campaign, the IM eventually striked revolution, and the new government? Wrecked.
Anyhow, most folk here know my opinion and arguments on this.
You're right. Smart move by the SNP. If this bombing campaign stretches on indefinitely they can use it in the next elections to push for another referendum or at least demand even greater devolutions of power. At the same time I fear a reprisal attack on UK by ISIL/Daesh like the one committed against France in retaliation for the bombings. If that happens, then that could throw the current party alignments into flux. But in reality if the citizens of UK want a committed party against European foreign adventurism while standing strong for UK unity then UKIP is probably a good bet :P
First off, SNP's not a chance outside Scotland, and as for Scotland, they've got practically as much vote as they can. But it is a good choice. Also, UKIP? They say they think the wars in the Middle East have been very bad. But they're barely not true fascism - they're far-right far-authoritarian, which typically love war. Probably will invade Nigeria or Sudan, something like that.
That implies that Putin and Russia is a greater or equal existential threat to Western Nations than ISIL, and I don't think any rationally minded person could 1) argue this and 2) justify it.
Neither is a threat, both are targets.