George Of The Jungle, post: 101405, member: 3094 Wrote:The president of the US wasn't elected to stop atrocities, nor is the US military
or the National Security Council there to do that. Their job is to protect the
interests of America. You might be willing to go to war, but you only get to go to war
when they order you.

Same line of thinking circa 1930s, 1990s, now. You think allowing the use of chemical weapons protect the interests of the US? Imagine a world without US intervention.

George Of The Jungle, post: 101405, member: 3094 Wrote:The attack is probably not gonna affect the war
significantly. If that was the purpose of an attack, Obama wouldn't wait for
Congressional approval.

The reason I am able to type this message is illustrating that the President is waiting for congressional approval. I would pay attention to what initiatives that this White house has taken to limit the powers of the Executive Branch.

I would quote and respond to rest of your posts if I had time or if thought it would actually effect your opinion. The biggest threat to US security is a rogue cell getting WMDs. Syria is collapsing with WMDs. Our intervention would be an attempt to prevent terrorist groups/sympathizers from getting access to chemical weapons.