John says... " The answer is, I spoke my conscience in 1971 and I'm speaking my conscience now in 2013."
No, that is not the answer. The answer your boss told you what to say. That's your JOB.

Have you heard/watched Kerry speak on this these last few days? He means it. He may be wrong, I don't know, but he IS passionate about it, he does not do it just because he has to (this may apply to Hagel, maybe...).

...truth. Period.

You may have noted that many noted how passionate Kerry was in his two speeches - far more so than Obama. While it was his job to advocate for Obama's position, he could have done it rotely -- not to mention, note he said that if it were an Iraq or Vietnam type engagement, he would NOT have been there.

He is SOS, but on this he speaks from experience and knowledge. One thing I have learned about SOS Kerry through the years-he is a visionary. I don't doubt for a minute that he does not believe this is the best action to pursue.

my recommendation is to tune it all out. That's what I'm doing. I think I have been pretty consistent here in my instinct that we stop meddling in the Middle East because even with the best of intentions it always goes badly wrong. There simply is no strategy here, like what do we want to accomplish? There are strange bedfellows in Syria, like Assad is protecting the Christians there, who may be slaughtered if Assad goes down (and no, I am not getting that from Rand Paul, but my study of the matter over the last year). The rebels don't strike me as an amiable bunch who will turn Syria into a stable state. So, again, it seems the only point of this is to "send a message" that it's not right to use chemical weapons. Sorry, that is not good enough.

I think it's important never to fully "trust" politicians. Sometimes they make the wrong call, as Obama and Kerry have done. I actually am happy that Obama is asking for Congressional approval, because I hope he gets turned down like Cameron did in the UK. I don't think this will hurt Obama long term. It will be a temporary setback from what is otherwise a great presidency. Kerry also has other things in the fire, like the Mideast peace talks, for which this Syria mess really doesn't have to impact (I suspect it is the main reason Kerry is so intent about getting involved -- he thinks it will help on the Mideast Peace front. I disagree, but frankly, it's the only way I can reconcile why he would recommend such a foolish move like getting involved in another war, when we just got out of Iraq and are trying to get out of Afghanistan.).

But as to the Republicans ... good Lord, what a bunch of hypocrites!! I don't care what they say, they are never friends of ours. In fact, this NYT article shows that Republicans are opposed to this war simply because a black guy is proposing it. I mean, geez, what a barrel of laughs these people are.

I trust their good intentions and their intelligence. And that also to the extent that I can trust somebody I do not know personally. Anybody can make wrong calls. And as I said in the OP, half (probably more than half...) of me SCREAMS that this is all wrong. But when I listen to Kerry or when I read the article I posted above, I become almost convinced... at least for a while.

My feeling, for the extremely little that it's worth, is that Kerry really means most of what he says about this whole issue. I watched most of the Senate hearing, snippets of the House one, watched the interview with Chris hayes yesterday... I think that he really thinks, rightly or wrongly, I have no idea, that this has the potential to turn into a Munich moment.

As to the Rs - saw an tweet earlier (you turned me into Tweeter if you remember, several years ago ), I do not remember the exact wording, but something along the lines of one of Obama's major achievements will prove to be having turned Rs into peacenicks.

viewpoint and even temperament as we do, but when it comes to tough decisions, I think we should trust ourselves as citizens participating in our democracy. So I can "trust" John Kerry to be an all and all good guy trying to do his best, but also not trust who he is listening to. The same with the President. I just feel like there is a pro-war mentality in Washington DC that is more powerful than one party or President. Bush has been out of town for over 5 years, yet the attitude that every problem can be solved with bombs remains firmly in place. I do not think Kerry is being exposed enough to people like me who are highly skeptical. I don't think you have to be a super expert in the M.E. to have pretty solid opinions about it. In fact, I have noticed that journalists who heavily embed in these countries tend to favor war more because they are exposed to so much anguish and desperation, they feel we must do something about it. Sometimes, having some distance from the conflict gives one better perspective. I think Obama, Kerry, Powers, and Rice are being advised by "experts" who are either of that pro-interventionist viewpoint or from forces inside Syria that are too close to the action.

I'll give an example. Read this article: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/29/youtube_syria

The images flooded in only hours after the Aug. 21 chemical attack in Damascus's eastern suburbs. And they soon reached the very highest rungs of the U.S. government: "As a father, I can't get the image out of my head of a man who held up his dead child, wailing while chaos swirled around him," said Secretary of State John Kerry in his impassioned Aug. 26 speech. "[T]he images of entire families dead in their beds without a drop of blood or even a visible wound; bodies contorting in spasms; human suffering that we can never ignore or forget."

...

The local activists who filmed these videos, then, have accomplished what years of hectoring from the official Syrian opposition have been unable to do -- bring the world to the brink of military intervention against Bashar al-Assad's regime. ...

The amateur Syrian videographers' accomplishment, however, came at a high cost. ...

"The chemical attacks, on the first day of the massacre, claimed the lives of many media activists in Zamalka coordination because they inhaled the chemical toxic gases," Murad Abu Bilal, the sole survivor, told Zaitouneh in an interview uploaded to -- what else -- YouTube. "[T]hey went out to shoot and collect information about the chemical attack, but none of them came back."

A really horrifying story about how the witnesses died documenting the chemical weapon attack. We can really identify with these people, rushing in so that they can upload videos to YouTube to show what happened, and then they became victims themselves! This makes you want to do something, doesn't it? But I feel like such a story, which is great journalism, should not be used to determine whether America goes to war, which a bombing attack is. So I'm saying I trust my own feelings before Kerry's, and my opinion is that we should not go in there alone bombing away without any strategy or plan of what is to happen in Syria, possibly making things worse and hurting the people we say we want to help. Sometimes we the people are wiser than our leaders. The Republicans may be hypocrites but I hope they come through and vote no, along with a decent caucus of anti-war Democrats.

I remember all the discussions on Libya. I wish with all my heart that someone can step in - maybe by getting Syria to turn over their chemical weapons to the US for an agreement that the US not attack (and maybe not provide any military aid to the rebels). That would address the issue of chemical weapons and the issue of the US being involved.

Did you see this article? http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/25/opinion/sunday/in-syria-america-loses-if-either-side-wins.html The author has supposedly had the thesis that the US makes these civil and regional wars worse when they intervene.

Obama and Kerry. I don't put a disclaimer on trust. You and I may have read and studied this issue, but I don't think both of us combined have the experience and knowledge the SOS has on this issue. I hope it passes through Congress or Obama acts without their politicized help. I respect your point of view, but I do not agree with it.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/09/05/1236702/-John-Kerry-Has-No-Shame-Claims-He-Opposed-the-Iraq-War

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1236702/51275585#c386

I notice the usual suspects who have hated JK for years weighing in. Yeah, I really don't like those type of lefties. Didn't we used to call them the Freeper Left or something?

They have never accepted JK and really didn't even when he tried so hard to reach out to them.