This is a brief diary. From my perspective President Obama MUST get approval from Congress before he authorizes any strike against the Syrian government PERIOD! It doesn't matter if he gets authorization from the Arab League and all of our allies around the world he MUST still get approval from Congress for any military action. I will tabulate my reasons for hoisting this warning flag just below the squiggle.
The first and main reason that President Obama must get Congressional approval for any military action in Syria is that he cannot afford to give the Republicans any plausible complaints against him that could be used as grounds for IMPEACHMENT.
The public is finally becoming aware that there is a hard core politically motivated racist group that currently are circulating impeachment talk against president Obama. As Senator Coburn mused during his town hall, and I loosely quote, "that we can impeach the president, we just got to find the right reason". The White House must be keenly aware that the Republicans are expending every effort possible to do this. Just look at the many hearings Republican Representative Issa has held over the Benghazi incident trying desperately to pin some impeachable offense on the president. What is that famous saying, "it's not for the lack of trying"?
I have heard some measured words of caution from Republican Senators this weekend, that came through my ears as simple straightforward words of warning to the President. The tone suggested to me that the president holding a few conferences with members of Congress in an attempt to gain their support will NOT ALONE BE SUFFICIENT to go ahead with any air strike on Syria.
In plain English, those forces who want to get rid of Obama for simply being president while being BLACK will be sure to seize upon any military action authorized by the President without (a) the nation being in immediate danger, and (b) without the approval of Congress as an offense that rises to at least the level of "misdemeanors" in the language specified for impeaching a president.
The danger to president Obama in the current situation is that the Republicans ARE FULLY AWARE that there are many Democrats who are solidly against ANY military action authorized solely by the Executive branch of the government. Those Democrats eventually opposed the Bush 8 years of war in Iraq and they will certainly oppose any initiative by Obama regardless how "limited" and "surgical" any such air strikes will be in Syria. Likewise many of these same Democrats have long been highly irritated over the continuous expansion of the Drone program and its use throughout the Middle East and in particular inside Yemen by president Obama. It is my sense that the strength and solidarity of the Democratic members of Congress to protect president Obama from any Republican led bill of impeachment based upon unauthorized use of the military against the Syrian government would likely prove to be very soft on THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE.
Some may say given the severe anti-Obama attitude in the House of Representatives, Obama is unlikely to get Congressional approval for any military action against Syria, no matter how limited. First of all this is an assumption and not a given. Second if Obama does not get approval from Congress then he can step back with the full blame for inaction in response to the use of deadly gas by the Syrian government against its civilian population being placed squarely upon the heads of the US Congress. This would be unfortunate, but more importantly it would protect Obama's legacy as being the first LEGITMATE BLACK PRESIDENT who served two terms successfully in the White House. IMHO any limited air strike against Syria will only create minor damage on the ground for the Assad government. Considering the support it is getting from its allies (Russia, et al), such damage would hardly be equal to the loss suffered here at home in the current political struggle over the future of America if president Obama is impeached for "over-reach" in the current Syrian situation. Furthermore, will limited air strikes against Syria heal the extreme sectarian, political and military divisions within the current Syrian Rebel army? I think not. For an example of the speed of a rebel group's healing process look at the rebel group that we backed in Libya, which is still fractured even though they have been in control of the country for a considerable amount of time.
This is my opinion and those are the reasons why I raise this flag. What do you think?