I'm not in a hurry to have a fixed position on the Congressional war vote
When the situation was imminent (this last week) I formed a view of opposing strikes.
This was not a categorical opposition to the use of force anywhere for any reason. It was because the strikes being contemplated were STUPID, in context.
And they will probably remain stupid, but I do not know that and do not want to invest too much ego in that prediction. The context can shift. I may even learn things didn't know, or come to see a perspective I had not seen. Could happen.
This case is not about one over-riding moral principle. It is about complexities of moral-principles in conflict with each other, and thus becomes very situation dependent.
My personal "guiding light" objective here will be to most reliably make the world a better place.
That is so nuanced an objective that there may even be Congressional resolutions authorizing use of force that I would favor, and others I would oppose.
I am curious to see what Congress says. It will probably be stupid, but there won't be any vote for at least 10 days (probably with no US bombs dropping during that time) no matter what my opinion today is, so I am willingly to see how things develop.