The idea was that wars need to be paid for, and Congress manages the money. Wars need to be led, and someone needs to be in charge. But the person in charge, who may want the war, needs to be subordinate to those who are not in charge, but have to pay for it.
With regard to Syria, to the extent we have a national security interest, it is staying OUT of Syria. Would it not be INTERESTING if one or more of our top generals, if they receive orders to deploy combat troops, tell Obama to his face that they will do so only upon receiving a declaration of war from Congress.
Now, by law, soldiers–including top officers–only have obey lawful orders. An order to initiate a war without Congressional approval is, therefore, an order which soldiers are not required by law to obey. Clearly, they could be sacked, but the political value of the exercise, in getting Executive power back in line with the Constitution, would be quite valuable, particularly if they made their case publicly, either directly, or via managed leaks.
Our troops have done enough. They have suffered enough. Obama lies about everything, of course, but he campaigned for peace, and it is impossible to say that if Iraq was NOT a justified war, how Syria comes within a hundred miles of meeting the standard.
We are not the errand boys for the Saudis, despite how beautiful our President may find the call of the Muezzin.