Why the urgency? Downing Street recalled the House of Commons for a less than civil or even farcical debate on authorizing immediate military action against the Assad regime, intelligence for which the Prime Minister was totally lacking. In contrast, the Whitehouse refused to recall Congress in its "rush to arms," alternatively directing the State Department to contrive a "war powers" justification, while the preponderance of world opinion was contrary to the intervention.
Here are some potential consequences of the U.S. taking unilateral military action in Syria: Assad attacking Tel Aviv, Iran raining "thousands of missiles" on Israel, Hezbollah lunching a salvo of 200,000 pre-aimed missiles and rockets and at the Jewish State, other Islamic nations, if not all, preparing to attack their common enemy, and Israel rehearsing the Samson Option.
If this scenario fails to materialize, but U.S. complicity enables the Syrian rebels and its Al-Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood, and other radical Islamic constituency to deposed Assad, his strategic stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and associated delivery platforms would represent an unparalleled existential threat to Israel.
If Assad's Alawite minority regime disintegrates in the sea of Syria's Sunni Muslims, Alawites and their allies including two million Christians are marked for death. Although Alawites are quintessential anti-Semites, the consequential bloodbath will compel many to seek refuge in Israel. Although Israel has made provision for such a flood of refugees on the Golan Heights, the sheer numbers and/or Israel's concurrent struggle for survival could curtail those plans and incur the wrath of the court of world opinion.
Why the urgency, perhaps the solution of "the Jewish question"?