It is clearly becoming the biggest political risk he has ever taken after five years in office and could set the stage for even more dysfunctional strife and complete inaction with Congress in the last 39 days of this current session if his Tuesday night sales pitch fails with the American people.
After more than a week of vague classified references and high ranking politicians, of both parties, warning of an eminent threat to our national security, all the rhetoric eerily similar to the lead up to the Iraq war. It is clear where the people stand;the over whelming who have contacted their elected officials by email, fax, phone, and at town meetings, the American people want nothing to do with striking Syria and honestly seem to be much more cognitive of the unknown risks that could result from an unprovoked attack against Syria.
Americans are not unsympathetic to the plight of the Syrian people nor are they not shocked by the horror of more than 100,000 lives killed in this bloody civil war. It the simple realization that this war has spun completely out of control and the despot Bashar al-Saad is set on destroying his own country to stay in power and every willing jihadist is now or soon will be fighting in Syria to try to defeat him.
With that reality why would the United States ever want to jump into this awful civil war?
Now Obama's red line has turned into the world's red line and after leaving the G20 Summit in St. Petersburg Friday with his tail between his legs, it is clear the world is not in the mood for drawing any red lines either in Syria.
The biggest flaw in this dangerous contemplation is we have not even been presented the evidence by the Obama Administration yet and this as the world awaits the results of the U.N. chemical inspectors.
A rush in judgment could results in another decade of armed conflict for our country in the Middle East.
On Washington Week Friday Susan Davis of USA Today shared that AIPAC is ready to pound the halls of Congress next to win votes in the House for a military strike against Syria,
Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said it would cost " tens of millions" to support a military strike. This will surely jump to the hundreds of millions after Senator McCain's change in the language in the Senate Foreign Relation Committee Resolution on Syria which states " Whereas the objectives of the United States use of military force in connection with this authorization are to respond to the use, and deter and degrade the potential future use of weapons of mass destruction by the Syrian government;"
The key words are "degrade" and " weapons of mass destruction" which leaves the door wide open for a longer and more costly armed conflict. Just to put things in perspective it cost $40 million a week to keep the aircraft carrier U.S.S Nimitz in the Perisan Gulf with out firing one missile.
So for Obama is this a humanitarian or moral calling?
Or is it simply just another excuse to prolong and embed our country in the never ending war which only benefits the tentacles of the terrorist industrial complex?
Tuesday night you be the judge.
Photo courtesy of Greenwichtime.com