Syria again

I feel bad for President Obama.  He received little support at the G-20 Conference, his support in the House for attacking Syria is minimal, and his presidency will be seriously weakened if Congress does not approve military action against Syria.

Nonetheless, feeling bad for the President doesn’t outweigh my opposition for military action.  

First, I’m not completely convinced the Assad government used poison gas.  I’m sure poison gas was used, but it could have been a rogue commander, or even the rebels.  Rep. Grey from Florida discussed the lack of clear evidence in today’s Times.

Second, many of the forces who oppose Assad are themselves fanatics.  If they came to power, they might be worse than Assad.

Third, I doubt if our missiles would make life better for the average Syrian.  

Fourth, suppose we use missiles and then Assad uses even more poison gas?  When does that end?

Fifth, we already know you can’t win a war with bombs alone. When do we know we won?  What exactly is our objective?

Finally, suppose we move unilaterally, and Iran reacts, and we have a regional war that spreads across the Middle East?  I can’t help thinking about how World War I began.

So, although I feel badly for the President, I would vote no on punishing Syria.  I am dubious about the whole administration policy.  What is wrong with “wait and see.”