It's a snakepit, it's not a lionspit which makes it worse. It's a war pro or against Assad, not pro or against ISIS, being ISIS only the evolution of a creation of the USA, Turkey and Israel to remove Bashar Al Assad, legitimate President of Syria. The real teams will be these:
Pro Assad: Russia, China, Iran, Assad's army. And it's a good team.
Anti Assad: Turkey, UK, USA, Israel, France and "magic" syrian rebels who should do the dirty job on the ground. Plus the germans who will be there too, but not to fight according to "good"Angela Merkel, then what for? On holiday in Syria?
Of the latter team Turkey and maybe Israel give a little help to "their" ISIS fighters while pretending to fight against this ISIS/Daesh team. Angela Merkel is a rotten apple. She should resign instead of going on or at least pretend to be ill to be recovered in a luxury clinic in Switzerland, where many germans would rather pay for her to stay for a long holiday and keep her far away from anywhere near the Bundestag.
The syrian rebel army being the twin brother of ISIS with the balaclava - sometimes - of a different colour.
I'm glad that Italy won't be in. For once I agree with this crazy government, at least we don't go into that snakepit where at least two countries, Turkey and good old Israel, are shamefully double-gaming, the USA financed the anti-Assad forces that happen to be fierce anti-western islamists who chant "Allahu Akbar" any time a westerner or a generic white person like a russian or a french dies: these are Cameron's allies. If Cameron dies they'd chant Allahu Akbar. I hope nothing happens, but hope is not enough.
The others, the pro Assad team is more serious, so after killing civilians, bombing here an there, what will they do with Assad?
The war between anti Assad coalition: USA, France, Germany (?) Turkey and if Cameron doesn't retire UK Versus the pro Assad coalition: Russian Federation, China, Iran and of course Assad, the man we should all die for in this third world war. And who, moreover, is right and is the real "moderate" there in the middle while the syrian rebels are islamists, so the "West" is in fact supporting the islamists to kick away the moderate. Why?
I suggest the UK to stay out. If you retire in the middle of it they'll think you're cowards, maybe that's not the worst, the WWIII is the worst, but if right wingers and Tory MPs think twice and vote against entering this mess, their descendants may be thankful to them.
As for the real war on terror, we've got another great solution:
un-sign from the High Court of Human Rights of Strasbourg, listen to the Police, arrest and repatriate all the islamists we've got in our countries, block mass immigration and apply a sort of australian law about immigration and deportation.
It's the High Court of Strasbourg that's a mistake and gives too many rights to convicts, criminals and immigrants, once a country un-signs from it, and Italy must do it too, that country is free to take in or not take in and repatriate whom it likes. Which is more sensible than bombing around all middle eastern countries one after the other while in your own country you cannot say "Merry Christmas" or a soldier cannot go round wearing a uniform. Israel will pretend to be neutral, but it's Israel that's pulling the USA there against Syria. Because this is a war against the state of Syria, make no mistake, there's no post-Assad strategy because the strategy, the plan is precisely to disintegrate Syria into five micro-regions according to ethnical/religious lines. So technically it's a war against Syria. Israel will probably claim the legal property on the Golan Heights.