The British Parliament first forced Prime Minister Cameron to put any military action in Syria to a vote of Parliament and then the Labour Party forced him to accept that two votes would have to be held - one tomorrow and one following the completion of the UN report - before any British military action could occur.
Now Speaker Boehner has sent a letter to President Obama which contains a series of questions about US military actions in Syria which migtht be an attempt to put President Obama into a politacally difficult situation.
•What standard did the Administration use to determine that this scope of chemical weapons use warrants potential military action?The full text of Speaker Boehner's letter to President Obama
•Does the Administration consider such a response to be precedent-setting, should further humanitarian atrocities occur?
•What result is the Administration seeking from its response?
•What is the intended effect of the potential military strikes?
•If potential strikes do not have the intended effect, will further strikes be conducted?
•Would the sole purpose of a potential strike be to send a warning to the Assad regime about the use of chemical weapons? Or would a potential strike be intended to help shift the security momentum away from the regime and toward the opposition?
•If it remains unclear whether the strikes compel the Assad regime to renounce and stop the use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people, or if President Assad escalates their usage, will the Administration contemplate escalatory military action?
•Will your Administration conduct strikes if chemical weapons are utilized on a smaller scale?
•Would you consider using the United States military to respond to situations or scenarios that do not directly involve the use or transfer of chemical weapons?
•Assuming the targets of potential military strikes are restricted to the Assad inner circle and military leadership, does the Administration have contingency plans in case the strikes disrupt or throw into confusion the command and control of the regime’s weapons stocks?
•Does the Administration have contingency plans if the momentum does shift away from the regime but toward terrorist organizations fighting to gain and maintain control of territory?
•Does the Administration have contingency plans to deter or respond should Assad retaliate against U.S. interests or allies in the region?
•Does the Administration have contingency plans should the strikes implicate foreign power interests, such as Iran or Russia?
•Does the Administration intend to submit a supplemental appropriations request to Congress, should the scope and duration of the potential military strikes exceed the initial planning?