I agree that a direct US involvement should not be carried out but it should not seize to support the interests of Syrian people trying to fight against tyranny. A strike is certainly not the best action but providing some kind of aid to the Syrian rebels such as medical and food supplies would bring about a humanitarian response. However, there are problems with either action that the US decides to follow. If it does provide support to Syria, Russia might give greater support to the Syrian government. From this point on, the US would already be involved and it would all become a vicious growing cycle of violence. If it does not take action, then there might be a spillover of violence. Syria might go to war against Israel, which would then lead to a major scale war between Middle Eastern Countries, larger than it is now.
Expanding on what was previously mentioned, I think the US should seek the support of other countries in providing the Syrian rebels with humanitarian resources in order to counteract the actions of Russia. This way Russia might seem overwhelmed and remain with minor involvement or even neutral in this turmoil. It seems as if in the past, the US has decided to join conflict with all out war. Given this is a majorly humanitarian approach in providing aid to Syria; it is certainly their best approach.