Patriots and other liberty-minded citizens are already well aware of the fact that U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., have carried the water for Obama on his policy, or lack thereof, in the Middle East. Both support military strikes on Syria.
But today several news reports indicate that over in the House, Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and U.S. Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., have expressed support for Obama initiated military intervention in Syria, in spite of the fact that there is a plethora of evidence showing that the so-called "rebels" in the country are actually terrorists who belong to al Qaeda and other extremist Islamist groups.
Given that House Republican Whip Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., usually forms a triumvirate with Boehner and Cantor, it is expected that sooner or later McCarthy will also throw his support to the Obama attack on Syria despite his present reluctance.
The Republican leadership in the House and Senate is already well known for going mushy on issues that grassroots conservatives believe to be essential. But now their behavior has all the markings of water boys in a baseball game -- adolescents who do nothing but carry water for the main players, in this case, Barack Obama.
In this case, the Democrats are the ones showing some sanity in the U.S. approach to Syria, although there is definitely some selfish interest involved. By opposing Obama on military action, these particular Democrats, most of whom serve in districts that are loathe to think about military action of any kind, can bolster their reputations with their constituents just prior to the 2014 midterm elections.
But many Democrats have shown abject hypocrisy in supporting the president, given their past denunciations of any and all military strikes during Republican administrations.
No doubt many Republicans in Congress will support military action. Those who are hawkish never saw a war or a military operation they didn't like. But this is not the conservative-libertarian perspective. Constitutionalists support war only when there is a direct threat to the U.S. homeland or our allies with whom we have binding mutual defense treaties. We have no such treaty at play in Syria. This is a civil war with Syrians fighting Syrians. And the nation has not in any way remotely suggested any threat to the United States whatsoever.
What, then, is the Constitutional justification for going to war or conducting a military strike?
In the Syrian case, there isn't one. Thus, what Obama proposes, and what Republicans McCain, Graham, Boehner, and Cantor support, is entirely illegal.
SPECIAL NOTICE! BRAND NEW!
A brand new entry is now posted on my blog in the series, Musings After Midnight, titled, "Drastic Action: A Proposal and a Critique."
My popular series "Musings After Midnight" is now indexed at my blog, The Liberty Sphere.
You may also wish to visit my ministry site at Martin Christian Ministries.