Possible Western military response to Syrian chemical weapons use

[Eraserhead]

Just saw Corker on MSNBC saying that he has already received the proper "consultation" that is required under the hideous War Powers Resolution. This is a done deal. Now we just have to wait.

Anybody want to venture a guess on when the attacks will start?

[Eraserhead]

U.S. could begin three days worth of military strikes "as early as Thursday". Wow.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/27/20209022-military-strikes-on-syria-as-early-as-thursday-us-officials-say

[Eraserhead]

Yes, you can make arguments against intervention. The "more pressing matters at home" one is not a valid one. It's simply a false dichotomy anyway. It's not like a few days of air strikes on Syria or even a full scale Libya campaign are going to make it impossible to implement Obamacare.

Do you support this meaningless cock-waving in the form of airstrikes?

[Eraserhead]

...you know, unless it's too inconvenient or expensive. then maybe again.

Do you support a full ground invasion of Syria then? Three days worth of airstrikes won't change anything.

[Eraserhead]

I don't see this ending well.

[Eraserhead]

Obama is boxing himself into a corner. I want to know what his response will be when chemical weapons are used again post-air strikes. 

[Eraserhead]

This just gets weirder and weirder (see Obama's press conference).

[Eraserhead]

Plus, he's already decided the attack will be launched at some point no matter how The Congress votes, so what's the point? To prove he's more popular with Congress than David Cameron is with Parliament? He may be in for a rude awakening.