SYRIA - War on Assad

"Why Assad is winning the war in Syria" PBS NewsHour 4/14/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  With support from Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, the Assad regime has managed to consolidate power in most parts of Syria previously held by ISIS.  Apart from Friday’s joint missile strikes, the U.S.’s role has been limited to diplomatic talks, which has yielded few results in sustaining ceasefires in the seven-year-long war.  The New Yorker’s Robin Wright joins Hari Sreenivasan for more.

"U.S., Russia keep from escalating conflict after Syrian strike" PBS NewsHour 4/14/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Russian President Putin on Saturday condemned a series of strikes on Syrian targets, calling the military action by the U.S. and its allies "an act of aggression against a sovereign state."  Kimberly Marten, director of a program on U.S.-Russia relations at Columbia University's Harriman Institute, joins Hari Sreenivasan for more on Russia's reaction means and what may come next.

"Syrian people fight for survival as multiple powers face off" PBS NewsHour 4/14/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Syrians have continued to flee to neighboring countries and Europe as conflict in their country has intensified, and in Lebanon, nearly one in four people is a Syrian migrant.  Meanwhile, pro-Assad leaders have condemned the coordinated strikes on Syria, with Hezbollah calling them an “aggression.”  NewsHour Weekend Special Correspondent Jane Ferguson joins Hari Sreenivasan from Beirut for more reaction from the Middle East.

"Will strikes in Syria stop chemical weapons production?" PBS NewsHour 4/14/2018

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Syria's alleged use of chemical weapons last week spurred strikes by the U.S. and its allies in the war-torn country this weekend.  But what effect did the latest military action have on the country's weapons cache, and will it stop Syria from targeting civilians in opposition-held areas?  Douglas Ollivant, senior vice president at Mantid International, joins Hari Sreenivasan to discuss.

SYRIA - Chemical Weapon Warning

"White House warns Syria not to prepare another chemical weapon attack" PBS NewsHour 6/27/2017

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The Trump administration delivered a new stark warning about the use of chemical weapons to the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad, saying the U.S. had detected "potential preparations” to use the banned weapons again; an April chemical attack that killed dozens of people prompted the U.S. to fire missiles at an air base.  Chief foreign affairs correspondent Margaret Warner reports.

Assad War Criminal

OPINION - Shields and Brooks 4/7/2017

"Shields and Brooks on Trump's Syria attack, Senate's fierce partisanship" PBS NewsHour 4/7/2017

IMHO:  This opinion is WORTH viewing if you fear what is happening to our federal government today.

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks join Judy Woodruff to discuss the week's news, including a U.S. strike on a Syrian military target after a deadly chemical weapons attack, reports of disarray and power struggles in the West Wing, the long-term consequences of the bitter partisan fight over Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch.

SYRIA - Chemical Weapon Destruction Update

"Ongoing conflict slows chemical weapons shipments out of Syria" (Part-1) PBS Newshour 1/8/2014

GWEN IFILL (Newshour):  Chemical weapons are finally being shipped out of Syria.  But getting the stockpile of raw materials for poison gas and nerve agents destroyed has proven to be a uniquely complicated challenge.

Even as chemical weapons leave Syria, the deadly conventional war continues.  Outside Damascus today, men rushed to rescue children trapped in rubble after an airstrike blasted a house.  More explosions in Latakia province, where military helicopters buzzed overhead, dropping possible barrel bombs.  Miles away, in the port city of the same name, chemical weapon ingredients are arriving from across the country, brought by Russian armored vehicles.

But fighting has slowed the shipments, which were supposed to begin last month.  A Danish ship finally departed yesterday with the first batch, nine containers believed to hold about 700 metric tons of precursors for creating mustard and sarin gas.

MICHAEL LUHAN, Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons:  We're happy to see that there is finally movement.

GWEN IFILL:  Today, the group overseeing the effort, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, noting the delay, urged the Syrian regime to pick up the pace.

MICHAEL LUHAN:  Certainly, we are exhorting the Syrian government to intensify its efforts, so that we can conclude this critical part of this mission absolutely as fast as the conditions allow.

GWEN IFILL:  Under a U.N. plan, naval vessels from a number of countries will escort the chemical agents to an undisclosed port in Italy.  There, they will be transferred to a U.S. Navy ship, the Cape Ray.  It's been outfitted with a special chamber that heats chemical agents and renders them inert.

The U.N. has given Syria until the end of June to destroy its chemical arsenal and everything associated with it.

"In goal to destroy Syria's chemical weapons, security conditions are big unknown" PBS Newshour 1/8/2014

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  For Syria, a country at war with itself, the process of removing and destroying its dangerous arsenal comes with great and evolving challenges.  Gwen Ifill talks to Sigrid Kaag of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons about the logistical, diplomatic and security complications at play.

SYRIA - Destruction of Chemical Weapon-Making Facilities and Diplomacy

"Syria completes 'functional destruction' of chemical weapon-making facilities" (Part-1) PBS Newshour 10/31/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The Syrian government met a milestone Thursday as the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons confirmed the nation's chemical weapons production capabilities have been disabled.  Jeffrey Brown reports on next steps for disarmament and the state of diplomatic efforts to end fighting between rebels and Assad troops.

"Destroying chemical arms production ability is 'significant step' for Syria" (Part-2) PBS Newshour 10/31/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Destroying Syria's ability to produce and distribute chemical weapons has greatly reduced their capacity for damage.  What lies ahead to complete the destruction process by 2014?  Judy Woodruff talks to former U.N. weapons inspector Charles Duelfer for more on the chemical threat that remains in the volatile region.

SYRIA - The Consequences of Non-Compliance and Arming Rebels

"U.S. and Russia Disagree on Consequences if Syria Doesn't Comply With Arms Deal" (Part-1) PBS Newshour 9/16/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The United Nations confirmed that chemical weapons were used against Syrian civilians, but did not assign responsibility.  Secretary of State John Kerry traveled to Paris to rally support for a U.S.-Russia agreement that would force Syria to remove or destroy all chemical weapons by mid-2014.  Gwen Ifill reports.

"Chemical Weapons Declaration May Offer 'First, Key Tipoff' of Assad's Intentions" (Part-2) PBS Newshour 9/16/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The Syrian government said it will comply with the U.S.-Russian deal, which puts the burden on Syria to declare the size and location of its chemical weapon stockpile.  Gwen Ifill talks to Charles Duelfer, a former UN weapons inspector, about likely complications and the new UN report confirming a chemical attack near Damascus.

"Free Syrian Army Chief:  Foreign Weapon Donations Will Go Into the 'Right Hands'" PBS Newshour 9/16/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The Free Syrian Army, the rebels who have been fighting the Assad regime for two years, have criticized the U.S.-Russian road map detailing the removal of Syria's chemical weapons, believing it lets the Syrian government off the hook from foreign military intervention.  Gwen Ifill talks to the Free Syrian Army's Gen. Salim Idris.

SYRIA - Assad's Empty Pledge on Chemical Weapons

DO NOT drop our threat.  Assad is afraid, and dropping the threat will only give him more time to kill Syrians without consequence.

"Syria Pledges to Give Up Chemical Arms if U.S. Drops Military Force Threat" (Part-1) PBS Newshour 9/12/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  President Bashar al-Assad announced the Syrian government is applying to join the Chemical Weapons Convention and is willing to hand over the country's chemical arsenal, but wants the U.S. to drop their threat of force.  Judy Woodruff reports on talks between Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart in Geneva.

"What Issues Have Stopped the U.S. and Russia From Seeing Eye to Eye on Syria?" (Part-2) PBS Newshour 9/12/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The U.S. and Russia have been at loggerheads for years over Syria.  What makes the countries seem more willing to work on a solution together now?  Judy Woodruff gets debate from Angela Stent of Georgetown University and Andranik Migranyan of the Institute for Democracy and Cooperation.

OPINION - President Obama's Public Thinking on Syria

The more open President....

"A Rare Public View of Obama’s Pivots on Policy in Syria Confrontation" by PETER BAKER, New York Times 9/11/2013

Excerpt

When President Obama strode into the Rose Garden last month after a week of increasing tension over Syria’s use of chemical weapons, many assumed it was to announce that the attack that had been broadly hinted at by his own aides had begun.  Instead, he turned the decision over to Congress.  And when Mr. Obama appeared on television Tuesday night, a speech initially intended to promote force made the argument for diplomacy.

Over the last three weeks, the nation has witnessed a highly unusual series of pivots as a president changed course virtually in real time and on live television.  Mr. Obama’s handling of his confrontation with Syria over a chemical weapons attack on civilians has been the rare instance of a commander in chief seemingly thinking out loud and changing his mind on the fly.

To aides and allies, Mr. Obama’s willingness to hit the pause button twice on his decision to launch airstrikes to punish Syria for using chemical weapons on its own people reflects a refreshing open-mindedness and a reluctance to use force that they considered all too missing under his predecessor with the Texas swagger.  In this view, Mr. Obama is a nimble leader more concerned with getting the answer right than with satisfying a political class all too eager to second-guess every move.

“All the critics would like this to be easily choreographed, a straight line and end the way they’d all individually like it to end,” said David Plouffe, the president’s former senior adviser.  “That’s not the way the world works for sure, especially in a situation like this.  I think it speaks to his strength, which is that he’s willing to take in new information.”

But to Mr. Obama’s detractors, including many in his own party, he has shown a certain fecklessness with his decisions first to outsource the decision to lawmakers in the face of bipartisan opposition and then to embrace a Russian diplomatic alternative that even his own advisers consider dubious.  Instead of displaying decisive leadership, Mr. Obama, to these critics, has appeared reactive, defensive and profoundly challenged in standing up to a dangerous world.

“There’s absolutely no question he’s very uncomfortable being commander in chief,” Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, a Republican who worked with the White House to support force against Syria, said in an interview.  “In personal meetings, he comes across very confident.  I wish I could deliver a speech as well as he does.  But it’s like he wants to slip the noose.  It’s like watching a person who’s caged, who’s in a trap and trying to figure a way out.”

For good or ill, and there are plenty who argue both points of view, Mr. Obama represents a stark contrast in style to George W. Bush.  The former president valued decisiveness and once he made a decision rarely revisited it.  While he, too, changed course from time to time, Mr. Bush regularly told aides that a President should not reveal doubts because it would send a debilitating signal to his administration, troops in the field and the country at large.

OPINION - Shields and Brooks on President Obama's Syria Speech

"Shields and Brooks on Obama's Syria Address, Building the Case for a Strike" PBS Newshour 9/10/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks join Gwen Ifill and Judy Woodruff to discuss President Barack Obama's address to the nation on the Assad regime's chemical weapons attack in Syria, the state of diplomatic efforts and prospects for Congressional authorization of a U.S. military strike.

AMERICA - Public's View on Syria Strike

"Polls:  Few Americans Believe Strike Would Dissuade Future Chemical Warfare" PBS Newshour 9/9/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Two new polls show that most Americans do not support the idea of a limited military strike by the U.S. government against Syria for conducting a chemical weapons attack on civilians.  Michael Dimock of the Pew Research Center and Jennifer Agiesta of the Associated Press join Gwen Ifill to look closely at public opinion.

SYRIA - Russian Proposal, IF It’s Real

For this to be 'real' will depend on Assad and how long he will dither to give him more time to murder Syrian citizens.  If he agrees, I suspect it IS a stalling tactic, just like Iran on nuclear program.

"Is Push for Syria to Forfeit Chemical Arms a Stalling Tactic or Serious Move?" PBS Newshour 9/9/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The Russian government spoke out today about a proposal to Syria to hand over and destroy their chemical weapon stockpile.  Judy Woodruff talks to Vitaly Churkin, Russia's ambassador to the United Nations, about the possibility of preventing a U.S. military strike and the positive response by Syria.

  From PBS NewsHour on Vimeo.


"Obama: Diplomatic Solution to Syria 'Overwhelmingly My Preference'" PBS Newshour 9/9/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  President Barack Obama sat down with Gwen Ifill to discuss reports that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad might consider handing over chemical weapon stockpiles to international control.  Mr. Obama said he favors diplomacy over military strikes and is encouraged that the U.S. can work with Russia on a diplomatic solution.

"Obama Backs Idea for Syria to Cede Control of Arms" by MICHAEL D. SHEAR, MICHAEL R. GORDON, and STEVEN LEE MYERS; New York Times 9/9/2013

Excerpt

President Obama on Monday tentatively embraced a Russian diplomatic proposal to avert a United States military strike on Syria by having international monitors take control of the Syrian government’s chemical weapons.  The move added new uncertainty to Mr. Obama’s push to win support among allies, the American public and members of Congress for an attack.

In a series of television interviews with six cable and broadcast networks, Mr. Obama capped a remarkable day of presidential lobbying for military action and a dizzying series of developments at home and abroad.  Sergey V. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, said early Monday that Syria could avoid an attack by putting its chemical weapons in the hands of monitors and agreeing to ultimately eliminate its massive arsenal of poison gas.  It was an idea that was quickly praised by top officials in Syria and some lawmakers in the United States.

“It’s possible,” Mr. Obama said on CNN of the Russian proposal, “if it’s real.”

AMERICA - Historical View of the War Powers Act in Context of Syria

"Can Past U.S. Military Engagements Shed Light on the Syria Conundrum?" PBS Newshour 9/6/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  As Congress prepares to take up the difficult debate over how and whether to punish Syria's Assad regime for the use of chemical weapons, Gwen Ifill talks to presidential historian Michael Beschloss and Richard Norton Smith of George Mason University about the history of American war and what past conflicts can teach us.

JEFFREY BROWN (Newshour):  As we have heard, the president will make his case about Syria to the nation next week.

Gwen Ifill gets some historical perspective on the War Powers Act and a commander in chief's ability to sway public opinion.

GWEN IFILL (Newshour):  As the White House and Congress debate how the U.S. should handle the situation in Syria, what can past military engagements teach us about what we face today?

For that, we turn to presidential historians and NewsHour regulars Michael Beschloss and Richard Norton Smith.

EGYPT - Reaction to U.S. Military Action in Syria

"Egyptians Opposed to Strike in Syria Dismiss Distinction of Chemical Weapons" PBS Newshour 9/6/2013

JEFFREY BROWN (Newshour):  And to our second take on how Syria is impacting the wider region.

Margaret Warner is in Egypt.  I spoke with her earlier today.

Margaret, the president is out seeking support from the global community.  What are you hearing from officials and key players there?

MARGARET WARNER (Newshour):  Well, Jeff, let's take the major players, starting with the Egyptian government.

They're clearly opposed, as they made clear in the Arab League this week.  The deputy prime minister said to me yesterday, the Egyptian government simply doesn't believe that this will significantly affect Assad's behavior.  They don't think it will help the Syrian people.  He said, we really are not persuaded by the intelligence, especially after what happened over the Iraq war intelligence.  And he said, finally, people in this region, our constituents, are very weary of war after the last two years.

Then I went to see a figure in the Muslim Brotherhood, and he said much the same thing.  He said, it's not logical, is the way he put it, for President Obama to be so concerned about 1,000 people killed in a chemical weapons attack, when 100,000 have been killed, have been slaughtered by Assad in the last two years.

And, basically, people, Jeff, here, do not accept this distinction that the president's trying to make between the use of chemical weapons and the wholesale killing of Syrian civilians by aerial bombardment and artillery.  They see it as an esoteric argument about some international weapons convention treaty that just has no relevance to their lives.

JEFFREY BROWN:  And, on the streets, what are you hearing about Syria?

MARGARET WARNER:  Jeff, to a man or woman here, I am hearing the same kind of vehement opposition.

We interviewed the co-founder of one of the youth movements that got all those millions into the streets, that helped lead to the ouster, the military ouster of President Morsi.  And he was violently opposed.  He said, why is President Obama supporting the terrorists in the ranks of the rebels?

And I can also tell you that American officials here are braced for the possibility of a violent reaction from the streets if and when a strike occurs.  And they're counting on the Egyptian security forces this time to do a better job of protecting the American Embassy here than they did last 9/11, when, in fact, mobs stormed the American Embassy and some even got over the wall.

JEFFREY BROWN:  Well, give us a brief preview of what you're working on for next week.

MARGARET WARNER:  Well, Jeff, we're working on whether Egypt, the country in this region that seemed to have a successful Arab spring revolution, seemed to make an evolution to democracy, it has now seen it go up in smoke, and whether they're going to be able to resolve their differences here without resorting to the kind of violence between the two really fiercely opposing camps that we have seen in Syria.

JEFFREY BROWN:  We will look forward to that.

SYRIA - G20 Not Supporting Military Response

"Obama Leaves G-20 Summit Without Strong Support for Military Strike in Syria" PBS Newshour 9/6/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  At the G-20 summit in St. Petersburg, Russia, 10 nations as well as the United States signed a statement accusing Syria of using deadly chemical weapons against civilians, but stopped short of urging a military response.  Jeffrey Brown reports on the "heavy lift" President Barack Obama faces finding support for a Syria strike.

OPINION - Syria, Yes for Limited Strike Resolution

"Ten Reasons To Vote YES For The Syria Limited Strike Resolution" by Cliff Wilson, Cliff's Notes 9/7/2013

1.  The President of the United States, with the authority to engage in limited military action under the War Powers Act has asked the Congress to “authorize” a strike against the user of chemical weapons.  We did not fight Hitler because he gassed millions nor did we fight Saddam Hussein when he gassed Kurds and Iranians.  That we blinked twice is no reason to ignore this violation of the post WWI prohibition on use of chemical weapons.  The Chemical Weapons Convention was ratified by the U. S. Senate and we should enforce it.  Children died in their sleep gassed by a madman against all the norms of the civilized world and all its religions.   Surely at least one nation has the capability and the will to stand for those norms and if no one else will then let it be the United States of America.

2.  The fact that the Security Council of the United Nations is stymied by Russian and Chinese vetoes and cannot do anything about this should not prevent us from joining with our allies France and Turkey and taking action to degrade Assad’s ability to use chemical weapons against those of his people who are not of his religious sect.

3.  At the close of WWI the world looked to the United States for leadership.  All the major nations adopted and joined the League of Nations and our Congress said no.  We drew into ourselves and began a twenty year period of isolationism and Fortress America.  As late as 1937 the Congress refused to join the World Court which had been a TR-Taft idea.  I believe that was the last vote of the US Congress where isolationism won.  After 76 years Congress should not go back to isolation.

4.  After WWII America accepted the world’s call to leadership and in fact led the free world in a forty + year Cold War with Communism eventually becoming the world’s only superpower when the Soviet Union imploded in part due to the pressure of the arms race with the US.  If Congress rejects this Presidential request we abdicate that leadership and I guess we hand leadership over to China which practices its’ own form of isolationism, i.e. involvement only when it benefits her economically (sort of like the turn of the century American dollar diplomacy).

5.  If the Congress now votes NO on the President’s request we send a green light to the two bit dictators of the world to do what they want when it comes to chemical weapons and nuclear weapons.  Assad will use the chemical weapons again and with a demoralized rebel opposition he will ultimately retain control of Syria.  His alliance with Iran and Hezbollah will pose a threat to the security of Israel.  When the Syria-Iran-Hezbollah troika attacks Israel what will we do?  Hold another debate in Congress while Assad gasses the Israeli’s, and then send in troops.  Or if they first invade the Sunni Muslim states do we do nothing because we don’t want to get involved?

6.  When Iran produces its’ nuclear weapon and the world draws a line in the sand will anyone in Iran believe that any nation will enforce that line.  Not China which is engaged in economic trade with Iran; Not Russia which is trying to recapture Putin’s imagined good old days of the USSR; Certainly not America the new paper tiger.


7.  When the boy dictator of North Korea pushed to the wall by the starvation of his people and the collapse of his economy looks south will he hesitate to invade and use his nuclear weapons because of the U. S. commitment to South Korea and the presence of our troops?  And when he invades do we then refight the Korean War?

8.  In the 1930's decent Americans opposed involvement in European affairs because they had been lied to during WWI by the false propaganda of the Allies about German atrocities (which of course proved true in WWII).  And, similarly many opposed tough action against Japan in China because some believed that the Japanese were being provoked and anyway we were protected by the two great oceans - well then came Pearl Harbor and millions of Americans had to go to war.  That we were lied to about Iraq is now incontrovertible but we must not make the mistake of now not believing the truth when presented to us.

9.  The President shouldn’t have tossed the ball to Congress.  But, he did.  So now it’s the responsibility of the Congressmen and women to do the right thing.  The easy vote is NO.  That’s what the polls show (by the way a war never won a poll in this country before it started).  A YES vote is much tougher because one would have to explain to a skeptical public that this limited strike is “limited.”  Of course if the Congress votes a limit and the President ignores the limit he could and should be impeached and removed from office.  Similarly if the Congress votes No and he acts anyway he should be removed.  But it’s never that simple -- we will probably see either one house vote in the affirmative and the other in the negative or one house not cast a vote.  Whichever, Congressional inaction will be ambiguous and put the entire matter back on the President’s desk - where, as Harry Truman said, the buck stops.

10.  In the 1990's President Clinton engaged in a 78 day air war against Serbia to end that state’s attempt to exterminate the Kosovars.  At the end of that air campaign, no American soldiers had died, the Serbs bounced the communists and began a democratic experiment and Kosovo was free.  The Clinton intervention in Kosovo succeeded - the Obama one in Libya did also.

Since its founding the United States has been a symbol of many things.  To many it has stood as the Statue of Liberty stands in NY harbor as the symbol of freedom and liberty for all and progress for mankind.   As a nation we haven’t always done the right thing and we have our historic blemishes (treatment of Native Americans; paternalistic attitudes toward our Caribbean and Central American neighbors, failure for one hundred years to enforce the civil rights of many of our citizens).  But, usually we have been on the right side of history - even when it took a while - emancipation of our slaves; participation in and leadership of world organizations; standing against fascism, Nazism, militarism and communism; and the liberation of countries without attempting to then govern or control them (Europe after WWII, Japan, Libya, Serbia and Kosovo).

Winston Churchill said that you could count on the Americans to do the right thing after they tried everything else.  Couldn’t we just once prove him wrong?  Couldn’t we stand tall in Syria against the use of chemical weapons and against the madness of dictators?  Some say we should have moved two months ago; while others say wait and see what happens.  It is already later than it should be - but it is not too late to do the right thing early.

SYRIA - Congressman's View, Representative Alan Grayson

"Rep. Alan Grayson:  U.S. Has to Stop Focusing on Sending a Message on Syria" PBS Newshour 9/5/2013

Excerpt

JEFFREY BROWN (Newshour):  And we come back to Syria and the debate in Congress over a military strike.

We have had one-on-one talks this week with two senators, Michigan Democrat Carl Levin and Nebraska Republican Deb Fischer.

Tonight, the view of a House Democrat leading the charge against using force.

Florida Representative Alan Grayson serves on the Foreign Affairs Committee.  I spoke with him from Capitol Hill a short time ago.

Well, thanks for joining us.

Ah!  Another isolationist who would have voted to keep America out of WWII if he had been there.  Some of his arguments were the same ones used previous to Perl Harbor attack.

Isolationist views like this DO NOT protect the U.S., sometimes we need a pro-active stance.

SYRIA - President Obama Takes Argument Abroad and IF Assad Goes Unchecked

"Arguing World Credibility at Stake, Obama Seeks Support for Syria Strike Abroad" (Part-1) PBS Newshour 9/4/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  President Obama took his case for a possible military strike in Syria overseas, appealing to Russia to stop blocking United Nations Security Council action.  Gwen Ifill reports on remarks Mr. Obama's remarks in Stockholm, plus the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's approval of a resolution authorizing the limited use of force.

"Natl. Security Official:  If Assad Goes Unchecked, He'll Use Chemical Arms Again" (Part-2) PBS Newshour 9/4/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  With bipartisan support mounting, Deputy National Security Adviser Tony Blinken says "the momentum is there" to win approval from Congress to use force in Syria.  Judy Woodruff talks to Blinken about the goals of a military strike and the increased assistance now being sent to the Syrian opposition from the U.S. government.

AMERICA - U.S. Congress on Syria Strike

"House Leaders Express Their Support for Syria Strike" by MARK LANDLER, MICHAEL R. GORDON, and THOM SHANKER; New York Times 9/3/2013

Excerpt

President Obama won the support on Tuesday of Republican and Democratic leaders in the House for an attack on Syria, giving him a foundation to win broader approval for military action from a Congress that still harbors deep reservations.

Speaker John A. Boehner, who with other Congressional leaders met Mr. Obama in the Oval Office, said afterward that he would “support the president’s call to action,” an endorsement quickly echoed by the House majority leader, Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia.

On Tuesday evening, Democrats and Republicans on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee agreed on the wording of a resolution that would give Mr. Obama the authority to carry out a strike against Syria, for a period of 60 days, with one 30-day extension.  A committee vote on the measure could come as early as Wednesday.

Uncertainties abound, particularly in the House, where the imprimatur of the Republican leadership does not guarantee approval by rebellious rank and file, and where vocal factions in both parties are opposed to anything that could entangle the nation in another messy conflict in the Middle East.

Still, the expressions of support from top Republicans who rarely agree with Mr. Obama on anything suggest the White House may be on firmer footing than seemed the case on Saturday, when the president abruptly halted his plans for action in the face of growing protests from Congress.

Mr. Obama is now headed to Sweden and Russia, where he will try to shore up an international coalition to punish Syria for a chemical weapons attack and will probably encounter some of the same debates that are cleaving the Capitol.

Before his departure, the White House intensified what has become the most extraordinary lobbying campaign of Mr. Obama’s presidency as it deployed members of his war council and enlisted political alumni of his 2008 campaign to press the argument with the public.

“This is not the time for armchair isolationism,” said Secretary of State John Kerry, who answered sharp questions and defended the administration’s strategy for Syria in nearly four hours of sometimes sharp exchanges before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Mr. Kerry stirred some confusion about the potential scope of American military involvement when he tried to carve out an exception to a proposed Congressional prohibition on the use of ground troops in Syria — something Mr. Obama and other officials have long ruled out as a general principle.

If Syria were to fall into complete chaos and if the chemical weapons of President Bashar al-Assad’s government there were at risk of falling into the hands of a militant group like Al Nusra, Mr. Kerry said, “I don’t want to take off the table an option that might or might not be available to a president of the United States to secure our country.”

Later, under questioning by Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, the ranking Republican, Mr. Kerry walked back his comment, insisting that he had only been speaking about a hypothetical case.  “Let’s shut that door now as tight as we can,” Mr. Kerry said, without quite doing so.  “There will not be American boots on the ground with respect to the civil war.”

The Senate resolution — released on Tuesday night by Mr. Corker and the committee’s chairman, Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey — would limit the president’s options and prohibit the use of ground forces.  Any strike, it says, should be “tailored” to only deter Syria from using chemical weapons again and to cripple its capacity to do so.

"Obama Secures Key Support, but Still Faces Fight Over Military Strike in Syria" PBS Newshour 9/3/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  President Obama continues to court Congress on the issue of a U.S. military strike in Syria.  Judy Woodruff reports on what Secretary Kerry and Secretary Hagel told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, plus response from lawmakers.  Gwen Ifill speaks with Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., about supporting the authorization of force.

SYRIA - The View From the Arab World

"Refugees Feel Let Down by Foreign Caution for Military Action in Syria" PBS Newshour 9/2/2013

JEFFREY BROWN (Newshour):  Amid the focus on possible U.S. military action, there was word today that the Syrian refugee problem has become even more desperate.  The United Nations reported some seven million Syrians have fled to other countries or been displaced within their own borders.  Many are now appealing for outside military action.

We have a report from Martin Geissler of Independent Television News.

MARTIN GEISSLER:  Jordan's biggest refugee camp gets busier by the day, the streets here lined with people who have lost everything, forced to flee their homes and their country in a bloody civil war.

They saw foreign intervention as their only hope.  Now they will tell you the whole world has let them down.

"If no one stops Assad, he will kill five million," says Ahmed. He can't understand why the West is backing away.

MAN (through interpreter):  Assad has used chemicals 14 times at least.  What is the matter with the world?  Are they sleeping?  Are they drunk?  Are they on drugs?

MARTIN GEISSLER:  Almost 150,000 Syrian refugees now live in Zaatari camp.  None of them want to be here, but there's a depressing sense of permanence about the place.

This is now the second biggest refugee camp on Earth.  What's striking about this swarming, swelling mass of people is the fact that across the border in Syria almost the same number of lives have been lost in a conflict that is just two years old.

With the airstrikes now delayed, at least, these people say the regime they hate will be emboldened.

"If Obama doesn't strike Assad, he will look weak," says this man.  "The world will think it is acceptable to use chemical weapons."

"If you won't send missiles, just send us guns," he says.  "We will go and fight Assad."

The people here keep telling you the world is playing a game with Syrian blood.  They all know more of that will be spilt before any of them can go home.

"Distrustful of U.S. Motives, Many in the Arab World Oppose Syria Military Strike" PBS Newshour 9/2/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  Margaret Warner reports from Cairo, where she has been gathering reaction from Egyptians and from around the Mideast on the crisis in Syria.  She talks to Jeffrey Brown about the "unanimity" of opposition she's encountered against a possible U.S. military strike.

OPINION:  We (U.S.), and the West as a whole, are behaving in an immoral and despicable way.  The real issue is not just chemical weapons but that Assad is still in power.  Syria will continue to bleed as long as he is there and allowed to murder his own people.

SYRIA - International Debate, Evidence, Opinion

"Possibility of Strike Over Syria Chemical Weapons Sparks International Debate" (Part-1) PBS Newshour 8/29/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  As United Nations inspectors wrap up their investigation into alleged chemical arms use by the Assad regime in Syria, U.S. legislators are demanding Congressional approval of any American military action.  Jeffrey Brown reports on the state of international debate among European allies Britain, France and Germany.

"World Waits for 'Slam Dunk' Evidence That Assad Regime Used Chemical Weapons" (Part-2) PBS Newshour 8/29/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The world is waiting for United Nations inspectors to announce their findings over the alleged use of chemical warfare in Syria.  What are inspectors looking for?  And how would they be able to tell if the weapons came from the Assad regime?  Jeffrey Brown gets analysis from former UN and U.S. weapons inspector Charles Duelfer.

The Rachel Maddow Show
MSNBC 8/28/2013

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy