Only One Rule for Fight Club

President Obama's public, drawn-out therapy session on whether to strike Syria for using chemical weapons has violated the only rule about Fight Club--don't talk about Fight Club!

If President Obama believed he had the right to launch a small punitive strike in response to chemical weapons use, why didn't he just do it? He avoided Congress over Libya, after all. Why not just strike?

I mean, as I've argued before, who cares if it turns out Assad didn't use chemical weapons to kill the most recent 1,400 of the 110,000 who have died in the civil war so far? Assad deserves to be hurt--and overthrown--just for his basic conventional beastliness, no?

And if Congress protested a strike after it was over? Has nobody explained how it is often easier to get forgiveness after than permission before?

We'd also have avoided giving Putin the chance to pose as the adult in the room soberly arguing for peace (!), deliberate thought, and international law.

How bad does our diplomacy have to be to throw those cards to Russia in defense of chemical weapons-using dictator Assad who's been killing people for two years now with nobody in the sainted international community saying a word about it?

And this is aside from the military aspect that a quick strike prevents Assad from relocating assets to safer areas (parking them next to convents, hospitals, and puppy farms).

Honestly, you expect a learning curve for a new administration, but it has been five years! We'll get to a zero deficit before these ladies and gentlemen get a clue about foreign policy and defense matters.

Let me put it simply, paraphrasing a French leader if that makes you feel more nuanced than a Hollywood reference: When you start to bomb Assad--bomb Assad.