Would we though?
Who batted an eye when the Sentate passed a $700 billion dollar military budget? Trump touted a "historic spike" in military spending and his base-- including "mainstream" Republicans-- applauded. There were no protests in the street. Did people expect we'd just sit around and look at all that new stuff?
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/18/sen...-for-steep-increase-in-military-spending.html
We are currently in the midst of our longest war ever, and people hardly pay attention anymore.
There's a huge normalization factor. And even outrage fatigue.
In a post 9/11 world, Congress has ceded nearly unilateral power to the president in terms of military discretion (I had a Freudian slip and typed "military digression" at first) because they don't want their hands dirty.
That means there doesn't have to be a vote. There doesn't have to be a debate. There doesn't even have to be a formal declaration. It's a disgusting dereliction of duty. But, once again, people don't even notice anymore. It's become the "new normal."
I think there is a huge potential for this to be branded as merely a new front in the continuing (and continuous) War on Terror... in other words for mission creep. It wouldn't be called a "new war," but a "new phase" of the war. You know, THE war.
There would be some protests, sure, in big cities, in blue states... but so what? There were protests over Iraq in those places. There were protests over the "Muslim ban," too. There were protests over Charlottesville.
As long as GOP gerrymanders hold in 2018, what is the practical importance of Trump's approval rating dipping even further in already intensely liberal areas, such as big cities in blue states, where those protests would take place?