But to be more specific...
Obama claims he didn't have to go to Congress to act. I think he said that to preserve the President's capacity to act quickly in extreme situations without explicit approval of Congress.
But he also said in his address a couple of days ago that he thought Congress should give their advice and have a vote in this case since (roughly) "there isn't an immediate and direct threat to the US".
I don't think there's a contradiction in holding those views simultaneously. Congress needs to do its job and give its views on war and peace. But in some future time, that may not be practical or wise.
I think Obama is always looking at the long-term. He means what he says when he says that he doesn't want a world where CWs become easier to use. He wants them gone. (Just as he wants nuclear weapons gone - something that lots of people have forgotten.)
Obama has been clear, to me at least, about his views on big-picture topics. He said he was going to get bin Laden. He said he would go into any country without their approval if necessary to do so. When the generals and the chattering classes were saying that we had to stay in Iraq, he said no. He said CWs were a red line that would change his calculus about Syria. On these war-and-peace topics, he means what he says.
Has he and Kerry messed up their messaging on the Russia negotiations, etc.? Maybe. But on the big picture, he's been clear. Putin needs to understand that.
We'll see how it turns out.
Cheers,
Scott.