It has become very clear with the protests around the country and even around the world, that many do not wish to see the US involved in the war against Syria. Of course, the broad anti-war sentiments are only one factor to consider while Congress debates whether or not to give President Obama the authorization he requested Saturday. But the president doesn’t really need congressional approval for limited military action. Civil War is the heart of Syria’s current turmoil, but it’s the innocent citizens who are paying the toll in the midst of chemical warfare. It is truly a harsh reality and Obama isn’t ready to accept the situation sitting on the sidelines.
In addition to the global protests against a possible US strike, the rebel groups and main opposition in Syria have even spoken out against Western military intervention. The collective disagreement towards US intervention may go a long way when Congress finally votes on the authorization requests. In fact, the Washington Post has put together a table discussing where exactly Congress stands on Syria. While the 166 representatives are currently undecided, 241 other representatives are either against military action or leaning no on the potential conflict. Congressman, Devin Nunes even stated “The ‘limited’ military response supported by President Obama, however, shows no clear goal, tactical objective, or in fact any coherence whatsoever, and is supported neither by myself nor the American people.” Other representatives have also directly cited the nation’s interest as the core factor in their opposition towards the intervention. Over the next few days, the debate over limited US military action will be well under way and the role of the American people is likely to sway the majority of Congress towards its nation’s interests. What happens after that mainly depends on Obama’s final reaction from the debate.