False. Even that claim is wrong. We have both U. S. civilians and military personnel on the ground in Syria. Are you saying that they're not at risk of a chemical attack.
And you want to talk of being intellectually honest?
The reason there's so much hostility here is because the "debate" is beyond settled. The facts of the President's power as Commander in Chief is woven into the fabric of our history for almost a quarter millennium.
There's simply no leg to stand on for those who claim such acts are unconstitutional. They are eminently Constitutional according to multiple criteria. Disregarding all that produces annoyance in passionate, red-blooded American Patriots...
“We have both U. S. civilians and military personnel on the ground in Syria. Are you saying that they’re not at risk of a chemical attack.”
Well, I don’t know of any Americans actually hit by CW. Even if so, it would still not fit the Barbarian analogy.
The real questions are:
Why do we have those Americans in Syria if not for war?
-and-
Which Syria was candidate Trump talking about? Is it underneath the one President Trump is bombing?
“... the “debate” is beyond settled.”
-AlGore
Thank God, we have not suffered a single war casualty since WWII because words mean more than blood.