Is The Syria Question Just More Politics?

With Obozo, one never discounts the political.

...The president couldn’t care less about the plight of Syrians, the 1,500 gassed to death — including nearly 500 children. It’s all about 2014. Win the House, reign supreme.

...The conventional wisdom is, as usual, wrong. Losing the congressional vote won’t be an embarrassment for the president, as all the talking heads are still parroting. A loss would be a double win. First, because a “No” vote would allow the foreign policy neophyte to walk away from his blundering “red line” declaration on chemical weapons (“I wanted to go in, but Congress said no”). And second, should Republicans who voted for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars now oppose Syria, the president would be armed with clear “evidence” that their opposition is purely political....

It's notable that the Administration is leaking intel (and the source of same) to gin up support for the War Resolution.  This info seems to confirm that Assad's kid ordered the gassing.

Even if that is granted as fact, the operative question for the US remains "So what?" 

We all know that Assad is a mini-Hitler, but there are a lot of them around running various 'countries.'  We all know that gassing civilians is a war crime--but then, 'collateral damage' happens with Obozo's very own drone war, too.

So.  War is bad for children and other living things.  Granted. 

That's not what Congress has to decide.  The question before them is this:  what vital national interest of the USA is at stake here?

And given the facts that neither Assad nor his AlQuaeda opponents are friends of the USA, it is clear:  there are NO US interests at stake.

So pPresident Obozo:  who shall be the first to die for your mistake?