When to Strike: Syria Timing Is Complex for Obama Preparations for a highly anticipated strike on Syria could lead to an awkward decision on timing. Few doubt that President Barack Obama is preparing for a U.S.-led military action to retaliate for what the U.S. and its allies say was a deadly chemical weapons attack perpetrated by the Syrian government. But there are few good options for when to attack. Wednesday, for example, would make for an uncomfortable juxtaposition of themes: On the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, Obama pays tribute to Martin Luther King Jr. on the 50th anniversary of the nonviolent leader's "I Have a Dream" speech. Thursday is also problematic. That's when British Prime Minister David Cameron is set to convene an emergency meeting of Parliament, where lawmakers are expected to vote on a motion clearing the way for Britain to respond to the alleged chemical weapons attack. Days later, on Tuesday, Obama embarks on an overseas trip that will take him away from the White House for most of the week. Would Obama really want to be running a military operation from Sweden? Or from Russia, which vigorously opposes action against Syria? Compounding the pressure, some lawmakers and allies are urging Obama to proceed slowly and seek U.N. Security Council approval, while others are imploring the president to act quickly and decisively. After all, Obama's response earlier this year after the U.S. first concluded that Syrian President Bashar Assad had used chemical weapons was criticized as too little, too late. "The longer you wait, the less meaningful it becomes," said Barry Pavel, a former top national security official in the George W. Bush and Obama administrations. Lawmakers from both political parties have called on Obama to consult Congress before taking action - a step the White House says is now underway. Obama also is seeking buy-in from Western allies such as Britain and France, and from regional organizations like the 22-member Arab League, which has signaled its interest in justice for victims of the alleged chemical weapons attacks and blamed the Syrian regime. But those consultations, too, limit the haste with which the U.S. can act without going it alone. Britain added another wrinkle to the deliberations Wednesday by saying it would seek a U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing steps to protect Syrian civilians, although Britain's foreign secretary said the world has a responsibility to act even if the resolution fails; Russia is all but certain to veto it. Meanwhile, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged against immediate military action, saying U.N. inspectors need four more days to complete their work before evidence can be analyzed and then presented to the Security Council. Although Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel says the U.S. military is in position to strike as soon as Obama gives the order, the administration has yet to release a promised intelligence report formally linking Assad to the attack. That report would provide a key rationale and underpinning for the administration's assertion that a game-changing response was warranted. The report could be released as early as Wednesday, the same day as Obama's speech marking the anniversary of the 1963 March on Washington.