As John in DC astutley points out, last night Bush mentioned in passing that syria/iranian targets were fair game if it meant stopping their support for the iraq civil war. Paraphrased.
Honestly, it's likely too late to get an enforceable resolution through congress to block the current escalation initiative of bush for iraq. blogs have lead the way in getting the US opposition to bush's strategy onto the front pages of every MSM venue.
I'd like to toss a suggestion out here in DailyKos and begin 'informing' our congress of what they CAN do with no political risk, that will prevent a further widening of this war beyond iraq territory, before we really have a WW3 (no exagerration!). If the US attacks iran and iran doesn't turn the other cheek as bush surely expects them to, then the world seriously may fall into a regional all out war, if not global considering iran's worldwide alliances in and out of the islamic countries.
My suggestion? Simply have congress vote on a BINDING resolution that NO military action is authorised by the President or US armed forces to attack syria or iran territory. This clarifies any misunderstanding bush may continue to have regarding his war powers. If he still goes on to bomb iran, then it is a crystal clear violation of law not only in our eyes here in the reality based community, but across the country. The US voters will applaud this move, and anyone that criticises it will easily be seen as a war monger.
This needs to be done IMMEDIATELY though, BEFORE bush and his neocon brigade really lay the PR foundation for attacking iran.
I propose this is a much better channel to focus our energy (and the energy of anti-war congressmen and women - eg, Kennedy) for congressional action at this time.