The pro-war faction needs to stop their "Won't someone think of the children!" propaganda.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

They aren't concerned about the children. That statement is patently, demonstrably false.

First of all, the children were dying long before sarin started popping-up in word clouds. Yet, this drum beating only came about once the red line became an issue and there are plenty of conflicts currently raging were even more children require their presumed angst.

Secondly, the acts of war the President are proposing are pretty much meaningless. "Unbelievably small" I think is the most recent characterization of this vanity bombing. Lobbing missiles from a distance meant to protect your own troops more than inflict damage on an enemy's may blow things up but never conclusively.

Third, if there was a conclusive strike it would tip the balance in favor of insurgents who make blowing up women and children in markets a declared strategy objective.

Fourth, if they really wanted to think of the children they would be proposing enough soldiers on Syrian territory to enforce the peace while dominating any who dare break it. However, seeing as 70 to 90 percent of the US won't even sign-on to lobbing a few missiles from a distance meant to protect your own troops more than inflict damage on an enemy's their talk of protecting children rings hollow.

Whatever the motive "CHILDREN!" isn't genuinely one of them. So, please, stop parading around the bodies of women and children as if you care and we should be ashamed. Odds are the roles are reversed.

[dipsydoodle]

1. If they were concerned about children

they'd take issue with the use of depleted uranium shells of the type used in Falujah.

Plenty of google images if you're sick enough to want to see them.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

2. but what about the children?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

3. This is your war. Feel free to propose a course of action substantial enough to mean something.