If it were a Republican president in office making the same decision, how many of us would still be against it?
First of all, the rebels used chemical weapons, too. Do we bomb them?
Second, there is no definitive proof Assad used chemical weapons. IIRC, when Saddam did it to the Kurds, his regime was boastful.
Third, what is our national interest in Syria? Do they provide us with an important natural resource? Have they launched an attack on Americans? Are they building nuclear weapons? Have they attacked one of our allies?
Fourth, why is it okay for Assad to shoot his guns at people, run over them with tanks, destroy buildings they’re hiding in....but the minute he SUPPOSEDLY uses a chemical weapon (which, by the way, could be bottles of bleach) then we have to get involved?
Fifth, how about a Congressional vote...like Bush did before Afghanistan AND Iraq? Clinton bombed Iraq as he faced impeachment...a clear “wag the dog” moment, without Congressional approval. Obama, I think, is also using this as a distraction.