What do you think ?
not sure I get the rationale. Obama has maneuvered himself into a bad position. Most of the public opposed a strike, but if he were to sit this one out, it would also reflect bad on him. So he is pretty much in a lose lose situation.
One more dictator Whatshisname of Wherever with no threat to the US chooses to massacre his political opposition to consolidate his power. I honestly don't care. If people are so appalled by it, then the people of Syria and the neighboring countries (which may actually be threatened) need to take care of this themselves. If they can't be bothered, why should the US or anyone else? And don't give me a sob story of how "they can't." The use of chemical weapons is rather appalling from a humanitarian standpoint so if they really wanted to kick this guy out it shouldn't be a big problem. But they clearly don't feel too thrilled to do so since there's no good choices for a successor. In any case, the US has a lousy record on its regime changes so far, so a limited strike is the most I would expect unless Obama wants to turn this into another disaster.
I'm actually hoping he'll do nothing since his strike won't do anything in the long term. Even if he destroys whatever stockpiles they have, they'll just make more and I doubt they will think twice about using them again.