After a week of build up in what looked like an almost certain U.S. strike against Syria, President Obama has taken a step back and now says he will seek authorization from Congress.
From the Rose Garden, Saturday, the President said he has decided that it is necessary for the U.S. to undergo military strikes against the Assad regime but will instead allow Congress to debate the issue when they return from recess. This is a major announcement when you consider the military build up over the past week.
The big question of course, will Congress authorize action against Syria? That will be an interesting debate as many members of Congress and even Congressional candidates are voicing their unwillingness for the U.S. to become involved in Syria. This decision by the President is certainly a political one and just about the only way for President Obama to save face after creating a “red line” for the Syrian government and then proclaiming through out the week that the line had been crossed.
I talked this week with Republican Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky who tells me that while he believes it is the duty and responsibility of Congress to vote on any act of war, he is concerned about how the vote will go.
“My gravest concern is that there are members of Congress in both parties who would support intervention in Syria and we should not be intervening in Syria where our interests are not clear at all.”
British Prime Minister David Cameron was blocked in his effort to intervene in Syria when the British Parliament voted down Britain’s involvement. President Obama had virtually no other alternative considering that the rest of the world has backed away from U.S. or Western involvement and the American people are overwhelmingly against the idea of U.S. intervention.
As we reported, this about-face by the President is a major victory for alternative media who have virtually stood alone while identifying the al Qaeda backed al Nusra Front as the “rebel” force to which the U.S. would be providing assistance.