being a tape about syria. just the basics, though. and it only takes two minutes. we'll leave it at that. and that's it for reliable sources. if you miss a program, you can find us at itunes or cnn.com. and if you you have comments, tweet them to you us. join us next sunday for another edition of reliable sources. state of the union begins right now. a picture is still worth a thousand words but will it sway a nation? today, u.s. intelligence agencies authenticate a series of horrific videos of what appear to be victims of sarin gas attacks in syria. a dvd designed to punctuate the president's argument that the u.s. must strike. >> we may not solve the whole problem but this particular problem using chemical weapons on children, this one we might have an impact on and that's worth acting on.

>> in a pivotal week that includes top secret briefings and hearings and a political speech to the nation. the latest from chief of staff denis mcdonough and can a speech from someone as gifted as this president overcome this. >> i think we should stay the hell out of there. >> when are we going to start dealing with major problems in this country? >> it's shaping up not as republican versus democrat or hawks versus doves but as washington versus the rest of the country. joining us, three members of congress who feel heat in their districts and our political panel on what gets back burnered while syria boils and refugees pour into neighboring countries. dr. sanjay gupta reports from lebanon. this is "state of the union." good morning from washington. i'm candy crowley. we'll bring you our interview with white house chief of staff denis mcdonough in a minute. first the shocking videos

obtained by cnn documenting the chemical attacks in syria. these are graphic and gruesome and children apparently dying from a sarin gas attack. these videos have been shown to members of the senate intelligence committee to bolster the administration's case to intervene in syria. joining me now dana bash and jim sciutto. welcome to cnn. i haven't had a chance to tell you that. it's good to have you. dana, the videos. clearly meant to drive the vote. is it? >> at this point it's hard to see how it will. i'll just tell you what their plans are. as you said they played it in the senate intelligence committee. the chairwoman of that committee, dianne feinstein asked it to be distributed widely. it will be played tomorrow night at a big classified briefing in the house. and it's on the website. the problem is that of course this hits home the moral objective which is to make sure this doesn't happen again.

but that's not the issue for so many of these members of congress who are undecided and leaning no. they know it's bad. they know it's horrible. there are questions that are unanswered from the administration and all of those classified briefings, public hearings as well, what is the military objective? what happens the day after the strikes? what is our goal there? they're not getting these answers and you have that up against what you just played which is overwhelming opposition from the people back home and people are just saying i don't know how to do this. the combination of hawks versus liberals is just stunning and frankly very telling. >> underwhelmed by the intelligence and full-court press in the hearings last week. general dempsey, secretaries kerry and hagel. general dempsey the reluctant warrior. i hear the point that risk weapons fall into terrorists hands and will be used making the threat more immediate than iron and north korea. secretary kerry said if we don't

act they could be used on a daily basis by anyone anywhere. trying to hit home to americans. >> the other concern for many members of congress is what if you do hit and you get some of the chemical weapons but not all of them and then he does it again, then what does the u.s. do? >> which has been a question up there for a long time. we just keep going back. let me ask you. international support has been about the same as the domestic support saying this was terrible but they just -- secretary kerry working very hard but what he's got is it was terrible. >> the president's coalition is no bigger today than it was last week. in fact, you have some pullback. france and eu now saying they're not going to act until the u.s. issues its findings. some support intervention but they evade saying they support military action. >> thanks for joining us. as i mentioned, we spoke a

little bit earlier to white house chief of staff and the first question was about international support. joining we now dennis mcdonough, chief of staff at the white house. thanks for joining us. if the u.s. should launch a strike, is there any country anywhere that would provide military equipment or military personnel to help us? >> it's important to see the statement released by the g-20 on friday where we had several countries joining us in calling for the syrian regime to be held accountable. >> but not supporting a u.s. strike. let's make that clear. >> to be held accountable for an instance that nobody is debating. nobody debates the intelligence which makes clear and we have high confidence about this that in august the assad regime used chemical weapons against its own people.

a former iranian president has indicated that he believes that. the entire world believes that. we're talking to congress about that now. so congress has an opportunity this week to answer a simple question. should there be consequences for him for having used that material. there will be a lot of interest in the answer to that question in tehran, among hezbollah and in damascus. >> i want to ask about tehran in a minute. let me get to this point. right now the president has talked about it's the world's red line. the president talked about the neighboring countries that are threatened by what assad has done and his use of chemical weapons. are any of them willing to provide military equipment or military personnel. do you have a firm commitment from anybody? >> we have commitments as you have seen from the statements and series of statements since including yesterday out of brussels where the eu came out and said that the syrian government should be held to account. >> moral support. it's not specific support for the strike at this point.

>> not at this point but it is specific support for holding him to account and it is a recognition that it happened. we are no longer debating whether it happened or whether it didn't happen. that's important. but we do have plenty of friends who are standing with us. let's remember why the president said it's an international red line. going back almost 100 years, 1925, the geneva protocol against the use of these terrible weapons, that's been in place for almost 100 years. >> it's a protocol that does not include and here's the punishment if it happens. we should say that. the answer is no at this point. >> it's a protocol that allowed us to ensure that our people, our troops, men and women in uniform have not been subjected to attacks with chemical weapons since world war i. that's the important issue here. we want to continue to have it that way. >> let me put it to rest, no firm commitments from military personnel or military equipment from any other country.

>> we have plenty of support. i'm not going to get into who is going to do what in any particular operation. we feel very good about the support we have. we'll continue to build more. >> at this point more moral support than anything is what you're talking about. >> you're trying to get me to say that and i'm not going say that. >> will you wait until after the u.n. inspectors come out with their report on the chemical weapons before a strike? >> obviously we're interested in what the u.n. inspectors have to say. let's remember a couple things. one, they're not going to be able to tell us because mandate will not allow them to tell us who is responsible for the attack. it could be interesting corroborative information. everyone i have spoke to believes he used chemical weapons in august against his own people. >> the question comes from the eu in their statement seem to indicate we want to see this u.n. report. >> it is very important to our

friends in europe and other friends as well. so we've indicated as secretary kerry said yesterday, we indicated to our friends that we'll continue to work with them. we'll see what comes out of new york. we're right now focused on washington and trying to get congressional support for this. >> would you wait for the eu? >> right now the time line seem to work consistent with one another. we'll see how this works. the president will make this decision in consultation with congress on our time line as best suits our interest. >> when the president speaks on tuesday night, do you have and will he reveal a direct link between bashar al assad and these chemical weapons being used? >> well, i'm not going to front run the president's address. here's what we do know. >> is there one? does intelligence show a direct link? >> here's what we know. here's the common sense test. i won't talk to you about intelligence. here's the common sense test. the material was used in the

eastern suburbs of damascus controlled by the opposition for some time. it was delivered by rockets. rockets which we know the assad regime has. and we have no indications that the opposition has. and you've now seen cnn ran these videos yesterday. you've seen the video proof of the outcome of those attacks. all of that leads to as i say, a quite strong common sense test irrespective of the intelligence that suggests that the regime carried this out. do we have a picture or do we have irrefutable beyond a reasonable doubt evidence? this is not a court of law. and intelligence does not work that way. so what we do know and what we know the common sense test says is he is responsible for this. he should be held to account. >> i want to play you something the president said friday when he spoke about why he asked for a congressional authorization of this. >> i think we will be more effective and stronger if in fact congress authorizes this

action. >> is the opposite also true that if congress does not authorize this action it will be less effective and weaker? >> look over the course of our history. that's the strength of the war powers resolution. that's the strength of the constitution. >> without congressional approval, would the president's hand be weaker? would a strike be less effective? is the opposite of that statement true? >> the statement stands on its own. there's no question about it. together we're stronger. history shows us that. not only in damascus and syria but in iran and other places as well. >> i want to play a little bit for you of an ad from moveon.org. they put out an ad urging congress to vote no on a strike in syria. >> what should america expect if we rush into syria alone with no plan for the consequences?

we already know. it gets worse. congress, most americans oppose missile strikes in syria. don't lead us down this road again. >> it argues that we didn't think we'll be in iraq for as long as we were there. we didn't think we would be in afghanistan as long as we were. we are still there. why is this different? >> let's go back and look at any number of things. i just told you there's not a single member of congress debating intelligence with us right now. fact is that was not the case in iraq. i was there and i saw that one up close and personal. we are very disciplined about what we're talking about here. we're not talking about regime change. we're not talking about occupation. we're not talking about boots on the ground. the president has been very clear that there will be no boots on the ground. this is about targeted limited consequential action to deter and degrade so he doesn't carry out terrible attacks. the attacks that you showed here on your station throughout the day yesterday.

>> so the mission is to deter chemical attacks and degrade his ability to do so. let me just quickly ask you about this iran component. i'm confused by in idea that somehow the u.s. backing up words with a missile strike into syria sends a message to iran. we went to iraq with more than 100,000 troops. we took out a leader. it didn't affect their behavior at all. why would a missile strike in syria do so? >> a couple different reasons. number one, let's remember the iranians have a particular history with chemical weapons. the receiver, by the way, of attacks of chemical weapons and not sender. they are very focused on what's happening in syria. we have plenty of reason to believe that they are very uncomfortable with what their ally chose to do here. as importantly, when we lay down and international community lays down a red line as we have now seven times in security council resolutions against the iranians saying they cannot develop nuclear weapons and they continue to do it, we have to make sure they don't

misinterpret where the west is and misinterpret how we react to syria that they have greater operating space or wiggle room as it relates to the nuclear program. >> they didn't seem deterred when we went into iraq. let's talk about the risk. you are right. i don't care people saying i'm not sure this evidence is strong enough. here's what i hear. what's the mission. you just defined that. what are the risks? what did the president weigh when he decided a strike was something he needed to do? >> the risks are many fold. one, the risk that somehow we get dragged into the middle of an ongoing civil war. for more than two years now, the president has been very restrained. his restraint is evidence of our strength in this. we have to obviously be very careful and very targeted and very limited in our engagement so we do not get dragged into the middle of this. and then there's obviously risk of reaction and retaliation against our friends. we are obviously providing for it and planning for every

contingency in that regard and we'll be ready for that. but part of why we are being very clear about the targeted limited nature of this, no boots on the ground, this is not iraq or afghanistan, this is not libya. this is not an extended air campaign. this is something that's targeted and limited and effective so as to underscore that he should not think he can get away with this again. >> you have said a couple times as has the president no boots on the ground. will there be pilots in the air over syria? >> i won't get into operational details like that. >> so neither yes or no. secretary kerry said history will judge us all extraordinarily harshly if we turn a blind eye to a dictator's wanton use of weapons of mass destruction against all warnings. in the end, all of you from up to and including the president have said the president can do this without congressional approval. given what the secretary of state has said are consequences

here, it is difficult to believe that you all aren't signaling that, yes, you will go ahead regardless of what congress does. >> look, i would say two things. in terms of turning a blind eye, i hope before any member of congress makes his decision on how to vote, they take a look at that video that you all made available to the world yesterday. take a look at that and try to turn away from that. that's one. two, our consultation with congress and the president's request for authorization is not an empty exercise. you have seen what we're doing. you see the effort that we're going through. >> given the stakes you are outlining and secretary outlined, how can you do anything other than strike even if congress tells you not to. >> this is what the president said. if members of congress want to answer that question to say there should be consequences for this action, then they're going to have to vote yes. >> thank you for joining us. >> nice to be here. >> reality is votes are not there. 25 senators indicate they'll

vote yes. 20 are opposed to intervention. 55 still undecided. in the house, passage looks more remote. 24 members backing the president. 123 opposed. that includes 23 democrats and 100 republicans. 288 house members are still undecided. i'm joined now by three members of the congress. jerry connelly, barbara lee, chris coons. i want to start with you, congress him would, and ask to react when he says i challenge anyone going to vote no, which you have said you intend to do, to take a look at that video of the children dying of what appears to be of a sarin gas attack and think about their vote. has that video given you pause? >> candy, for me, first of all,

these crimes against humanity, these error risk attacks, the use of chemical weapons, it's who are ren dwu horrendous, outrageous. so i don't think any of us would say we don't support an effort to bring those accountable and it appears and i think the evidence is very clear that it's the assad regime, that we do not hold them accountable in a very forceful way. these images, the tragic deaths, the terrible violence that's taking place is unconscionable. what i worry about is more retaliation, more use of force. more efforts to escalate the war by other continues in the region. so i worry that the unintended consequences could even be more stark and dire. >> senator, you intend to vote in favor of a resolution to

strike syria. are you convinced that there is direct intelligence that links this regime in damascus to these chemical weapons attacks? does that exist? >> yes. and candy, as a member of the foreign relations committee who came back last week to participate in a number of classified believings, i think it was vital for me to move to a place of support first that we had intelligence briefings that answered my questions and my skepticism about whether or not the assad regime was responsible, but second that we amended the resolution. i had not have supported it as it initially came over, but we acted to narrow it so that it was clear no boots on the ground, limited in terms of scope and limited in terms of purpose. as you've heard, there is now clarity. is this about deterring another chemical weapons use. >> and congressman connelly, when you look at the house vote chemical weapons use. >> and congressman connelly, when you look at the house vote, what is your expectation in

terms of what will bring you aboard? or have you looked at the evidence and said i'm in? >> no. words mean something. open-ended resolutions are not welcomed and will not pass the house and i won't vote for they will. and i include in that the white house resolution submitted to the congress. it's too open-ended. so the wording matters a lot. i've drafted with others a restrictive resolution that only addresses this tragic incident and only on a limited basis. whether anything can can pass the house frankly is quite problematic, but let me just say i frame shall this issue as a matter international law. i recognize the united states as the indispensable player whether we like it or not, and that the consequences of doing nothing are profound, moral and will be for generations. >> quickly, senator, but the fact is all of these countries that think this is so horrible,

none of them will stand on that line with us at least so far with any personnel or equipment. >> well, i'm hopeful that what we'll hear from the president after the g-20 conference is that they have persuaded a number of our allies to stand with us. it did cause me grave concern that the british are not standing with us. and i've heard from many of my constituents that they're really concerned. but i'm increasingly comfortable that we have addressed legitimate questions about whether this is a repeat of iraq. we've amended the authorization. and we've pressed the administration to a place where this is not a repeat of the mistakes of iraq. >> we'll get back to this conversation. when we return, saying no to the president and what that means for the united states position in the world. that's up next. transitions® lenses automatically filter just the right amount of light. so you see everything the way it's meant to be seen. maybe even a little better.

visit visionworks today to ask about our newest lenses, transitions vantage and transitions xtractive lenses. experience life well lit. ask which transitions adaptive lens is best for you. you know who you are. you can part a crowd, without saying a word... if you have yet to master the quiet sneeze... you stash tissues like a squirrel stashes nuts...

well muddlers, muddle no more. try zyrtec®. it gives you powerful allergy relief. and zyrtec® is different than claritin® because zyrtec® starts working at hour one on the first day you take it. claritin® doesn't start working until hour three. zyrtec®. love the air. ♪ and i'll never desert you ♪ ♪ i'll stand by you yeaaaah! yeah. so that's our loyalty program. you're automatically enrolled, and the longer you stay, the more rewards you get. great! oh! ♪ i'll stand by you ♪ won't let nobody hurt you ♪ isn't there a simpler way to explain the loyalty program? yes. standing by you from day one. now, that's progressive.

as you've been hearing, the president has quite a tough sell on capitol hill. >> i knew this was going to be a heavy lift. i said that on saturday when i said we're going to take to congress. >> what it will mean if congress rejects the president's request with our lawmakers next. [ male announcer ] shaq versus pain.

shaq 1, pain 0. [ male announcer ] new icy hot advanced patch with 50% more medicine. pain over.

back with our panel. we left off with you, congressman connelly. the president is going to give his address we're told now at 9:00 eastern on tuesday night. it is going to be covered by all the networks. obviously cnn will be covering it. does he not have to say here's how i know the syrian government did this to its own people? >> yes, i think he does in much more detail. i think he also has to help the country understand the analogy of iraq while totally understandable is not the right analogy. the right analogy is something more recent in our history, which is kosovo and the war in the balkans. that, too, was controversial and it took u.s. leadership because the europeans were wringing

their hands. did it work. did those strikes work. the answer is yes. the war ended, genocide ended. so there are models that can work even though they involve risks. >> congresswoman, let me ask you, if tuesday night the president can say anything to you that you might change your mind. >> the president has been very methodical, very deliberate, and i have to applaud the president for coming not only to congress to seek an authorization, but to the american public. what i have to say, however, is that i believe and the president and the secretary of state have said that, that we have to get to a political and negotiated solution to this terrible, terrible, one, civil war and also to the use of chemical attacks on the syrian people. to get to that negotiated and

political settlement, i worry that military strikes and using force against syria in terms of even targeted force leads us further away from the possibility of a negotiated and political settlement. and so i'm very reluctant to authorization the use of force because i think the ramifications and the unintended consequences could be very brave and head us in the opposite direction of seeking a political settlement. >> and let me just ask you quickly, this is the biggest foreign policy request that this president has ever asked of you all. you are a member of his party, you are a strong supporter. he is the president. he's the commander in chief. he's the leader of the we weste world and the only super power and you'll have to look him in the eye and say no. do you worry that a defeat for the president cripples him in a way that also cripples the country and its prestige in the

world? >> i have supported the president from day one. let me say this what i worry about is becoming even more isolated in the world if in fact we do not have the full backing of the international community and in fact if we don't give this time to look at all of the nonmilitary approaches and strategies that could lead us to a political and negotiate settlement. i don't think the public wants to see anymore violence and death and destruction in syria and also inserting ourselves into a civil war i think would be very, very dangerous for this administration. >> senator, i'm sure you have heard from your constituents that it doesn't bring us any closer to the peace table to lob missiles into syria. that there are just unintended consequences. that in fact none of our allies are with us. >> yes, i've heard a lot of concerns from folks all over the country that we not repeat the

mistakes of iraq. and we did initially say no to the president in terms of adopting his authorization as it was sent over. we've modified it, we've narrowed it. i do think that we know what the consequences of inaction will be. that we know that assad, one of the worst dictators who has used some of the worst weapons in world history will continue to use cluster bombs and scud m missiles and chemical weapons. the film you showed at the beginning demonstrates to the american people who will likely happen if we don't act. our challenge as members of congress is not to look at the partisan politics, not to weig t whether this is good or bad, but it's in the best interests of the united states. >> you all have quite a week in front of you. thank you all. when we return, new alliness as form on capitol hill, liberal democrats and conservative

republicans find common ground. the political panel is next. and later, dr. gupta reports from lebanon. - hugs from beneful baked delights... - [ barks ] are crispy, oven-baked dog snacks with soft savory centers, made with beef and cheese. beneful baked delights: a unique collection of four snacks... to help spark play in your day. to build the keystone xl pipeline through america's heartland. but sometimes, washington politics gets in the way of real-world facts. so, we're taking a closer look at keystone over the next four weeks. i'm tom steyer. i evaluate investments and help companies grow. being successful means learning the difference between a good investment and a bad deal. today, we look at who profits if keystone is built. here's a hint -- it's not america. we're on the gulf coast near one of the largest refineries in the world, owned by royal dutch shell and saudi refining.

it's where the tar sands oil piped from canada will be refined and loaded on ships to be sold overseas, to countries like china. here's the truth. keystone oil will travel through america, not to america. in fact, when congress asked transcanada for a commitment to sell that oil here in the u.s., transcanada said no. deals have been cut, and america is cut out. foreign oil companies will make nearly $4 billion off keystone... and foreign countries will get more access to more oil to make more products to sell back to us, undercutting our economy and our workers. you don't have to dig deep on keystone to see it's a bad deal for america. next week, we head to arkansas for that part of the story. see you there. ♪ you know who you are.

you can part a crowd, without saying a word... if you have yet to master the quiet sneeze... you stash tissues like a squirrel stashes nuts... well muddlers, muddle no more. try zyrtec®. it gives you powerful allergy relief. and zyrtec® is different than claritin® because zyrtec® starts working at hour one on the first day you take it. claritin® doesn't start working until hour three. zyrtec®. love the air. let's just say americans are giving congress an earful on syria. >> we sent you to stop the war. >> i think we should stay the hell out of there. >> this is not the first red line that we have drawn and he's crossed. he's been crossing red lines for 2 1/2 years. >> i say we bail out and say you guys are on your own. >> the possibility of primary challengers and voter backlash may affect their vote on syria. our political panel is up next.

what's this? uhh, it's my geico insurance id card, sir. it's digital, uh, pretty cool right? maybe. you know why i pulled you over today? because i'm a pig driving a convertible? tail light's out.. fix it. digital insurance id cards. just a click away with the geico mobile app.

joining me now, david frum, ana navarro, stephanie cutter and van jones. cross fire day boos tomorrow night. you're up first with newt gingrich and we'll see you tuesday night. they will go back and forth. so be sure to watch that. let's talk about public support for this. is there anything this president can say on tuesday night that is going to move this mountain?

>> the president has already put himself into a desperately bad situation. he said this is a free vote for you. your constituents don't want you to go to war. but there's a part of you that wants to do something about chemical weapons. i'm telling you that if you can vote no and i may still do it any way. so the line of least resistance for the careerist and unheroic member of congress and there are some of those is to vote no and hope the president goes ahead any way. >> we have seen this president give good speeches when he's on. he hasn't been on. all he's done so far is tell us everything this is not but not tell us why we're doing this and what we're doing and how we're affecting the world. i think the president he's got is the timing is a killer here. there is already 100 plus announced no votes in congress. i think that even if he levitates and speaks in tongues on tuesday night, the no votes will not change.

>> should you agree the president is not great on pushing this? >> he's tried to be half hawk and half dove. he's not hawkish enough for doves and not dovish enough for the doves. half hawk half dove doesn't fly in washington d.c. that's what we're seeing. >> half hearted about it all. >> fair enough. i am shocked to hear republicans -- my whole adult life i never heard of a war they didn't like or military strike they didn't like and to now you have this president adopting mitt romney's policy in syria and republicans are deserting him on mitt romney's muscular policy in syria. there's something that doesn't smell right to me. i'm against the war but to see republicans suddenly finding every excuse in the book not to be there for the president is weird. >> republicans opposed kosovo and bosnia for similar reasons. republicans go to war for national security interests. when you have a war like kosovo where the president says we're going here for the general good of humanity but not for something america gets,

republicans get queasy about that. >> republicans have turned the page. time for you to turn the page. it's disingenuous to make this a partisan argument. >> there are democrats voting for it because it is president obama. it's politics, okay. that's fine. it's part of the equation. >> does it matter if public opinion runs against this? should it matter? >> of course it matters. of course it matters. when you are using military action, we are not launching a war here. this is a limited strike to as denis mcdonough said on your program to deter assad from using again but also deter others watching this closely prosecute using chemical weapons so the united states means what it says. there are consequences to violating this international

norm that's been in place for a very long time with 98% of the world population signed onto. now, you always want to use military strikes with the american people behind you. let's face reality here. this is a fatigued country when it comes to war for very good reason. we've been at war for over a decade. some of it was fumbled. i'm not trying to place blame on a previous president, those are realities that we're dealing with. that's particularly why the president went to congress. he knows how grave the decisions are and wants american people behind him. now, does commander in chief have the ability to act even when the american people aren't behind him or without congressional authorization? yes, he does. will this president do that? i don't know. >> let me ask you a question here. let's say congress says no. forget what the president then does. what does that do to him for the rest of the agenda? >> it means his intervention which he can still go ahead with and has legal right to do it, but it had before be 100% successful. it will be even worse if he goes

with support of one house where his party is majority and loses the other. in that case, the deal will be if this works exactly the way stephanie said it would be, limited strikes, precisely stated end and do not put united states into a situation where either the syrian regime falls leaving with us a mess or it doesn't fall inviting america to go in deeper but the coin lands exactly on its edge and stays there, he's a big winner. if that coin lands heads or tails and we get outcome that the president says he does not want, he'll have political trouble. >> there are other things on the agenda. >> he's going to have to act. domestically if he doesn't, at that point congress knows what a weak president he is. he'll go to establishing a new high bar to what it means to being a lame duck. it would be devastating for rest of his agenda. >> do you agree with that analysis? >> i think that this is not a

static debate. one thing i do agree with if congress does not approve this resolution, it's a blow to the united states. not a blow to the president. it's a blow to the united states authority all over this world. it's a blow to our authority all over this world. and unprecedented. that's why you're going to see some members of congress vote for that particular reason. some said they're voting for that particular reason. i believe that's your position as well. >> let me say a couple things as well. if he does not get this vote, he should not go to war. he shouldn't treat the congress of the united states like a focus group. however, things will continue to change. >> that's not what the president is doing. the president is doing this so that we can approach this issue, this problem, this threat to our own security with one voice. we're stronger when we do that. he's not using congress for a focus group. that's insulting. >> i don't think the president of the united states uses congress as a focus group. there will be other beats in the story. the president should preserve the ability to respond to those. >> any way the president cannot go if congress says no?

john kerry is comparing assad to hitler and saying history will never forgive us if we don't do something. >> do you remember john kerry's speeches before the president made the decision to go to congress. we all thought action was imminent. i think if anything we learned not to try to predict what this president is going to do. >> action was imminent. the president then decided to go to congress so that this country would be speaking with a stronger voice. what is true then is still true now. assad has used chemical weapons in violation of an international agreement and the president never made an argument that there was an imminent threat. kerry never made an argument there was an imminent threat. >> secretary kerry went on sunday shows last sunday to praise the president's decision as courageous and that's not a compliment. >> we didn't go to war until march of 2003. and that was argued to be actually an imminent threat unlike this particular situation.

>> if he changed his mind, he went on a 45-minute walk with mcdonough. >> they were discussing on whether or not to go to congress. >> nobody knows how this president operates. >> thank you all for coming. to be continued. when we return, 2 million syrian refugees fled their war ravaged country across the border with lebanon. our own dr. sanjay gupta gives us a firsthand look at what they face. that's next. so we provide it services you can rely on. with centurylink as your trusted it partner, you'll experience reliable uptime for the network and services you depend on. multi-layered security solutions keep your information safe, and secure. and responsive dedicated support meets your needs, and eases your mind. centurylink. your link to what's next.

because of a migraine. so they trust excedrin migraine to relieve pain fast. plus sensitivity to light, sound, even nausea. and it's #1 neurologist recommended. migraines are where excedrin excels. it's back to school time. and excedrin wants to make sure your child's school is equipped to help your child excel. purchase excedrin for a chance to win one of 5 $10,000 donations to your child's school. go to excedrin's facebook page to enter. at humana, our medicare agents sit down with you and ask. hanging out with this guy. he's just the love of my life. [ male announcer ] getting to know you is how we help you choose the humana medicare plan that works best for you. mi familia. ♪ [ male announcer ] we want to help you achieve your best health, so you can keep doing the things that are important to you. keeping up with them. i love it! [ male announcer ] helping you -- now that's what's important to us.

coming up from standing on the sidelines over iraq to standing side by side over syria. france is backing obama on military strikes. and the civil war creating camps for refugees. they are being charged to stay there. sanjay gupta reports from lebanon. thank you orville and wilbur... ...amelia...

neil and buzz: for teaching us that you can't create the future... by clinging to the past. and with that: you're history. instead of looking behind... delta is looking beyond. 80 thousand of us investing billions... in everything from the best experiences below... to the finest comforts above. we're not simply saluting history... we're making it. imagine if you could always see life [music] in the best light. every time of day. outdoors, or in. transitions® lenses automatically filter just the right amount of light. so you see everything the way it is meant to be seen. maybe even a little better. experience life well lit, ask for transitions adaptive lenses.

overshadowed in the debate about syria is what's happening to millions of people who are fleeing their war-torn country. dr. sanjay gupta has been

getting a firsthand look at their plight in the refugee camps on the syrian/lebanon border. >> reporter: the constant she shelling was becoming too much. it was after this occurred to her middle son, 4-year-old yusif, she knew she had to leave. it was an explosion, she told me, that led to these burns. she packed up her three sons and what little she had and traveled 12 hours, mostly by foot, to arrive here at this camp. it's one of the largest along the syrian/lebanese border. the youngest son allah is 8 months old and is severely malnourished even though he's breast-fed. how difficult is it to get food? it's tough when the mom hasn't gotten the food she needs.

today they get medical attention and vaccines thanks to unicef. make no mistake, lebanon is buckling under the weight of the refugees who arrive here every 15 seconds. in this country of over four million, the united nations say there are some 720,000 registered refugees but doctors here believe the number to be more than twice that. >> it's very, very a lot. very a lot. >> reporter: more than one in every four people in lebanon is a refugee, he tells me. and it's the people living in these surrounding communities that is sending messages to the refugees in these camps. this will never be your home. this can never be your home. the children's smiles belie an awful way of life. and not being wanted or adopted in their home country. there are no fixed water facilities or sanitation. instead, just the steady stream of sewage snaking its way through this 5,000 person camp. they have lost everything, their

material possessions, their dignity, their permanence. to simply live like this, aid groups say refugee groups are required to pay 100 u.s. dollars a month to the town share. the only way to work is to send these young kids into the field to work for $2 a day. it is heart wrenching. within these camps, there's a constant friction between two groups, those who support the syrian regime and those who hate it. but they do share something in common. they all want to go home. a are. kin and her three sons, they can't wait to leave. >> so sanjay, totally understand but looking at those conditions and how long some of them have been there, that these refugees do want to go home, do you get any sense that they have a feel for what we believe is an impending u.s. strike?

do they support it, not support it? >> you know, it's interesting because unlike the rest of the world, they don't really have much access to news. a lot of what is happening there in terms of their own information is by word of mouth. but you don't hear a lot about that as much as you hear this notion again at the end of the piece that they just do want to go home. i don't know that they know it's going to happen or what difference is will make but the difference they are in now is not tenable for that. >> sanjay gupta, thanks for being there for us. to find out how you can help the more than two million syrian refugees, visit cnn.com/impact. we'll be right back. you can part a crowd, without saying a word... if you have yet to master the quiet sneeze... you stash tissues like a squirrel stashes nuts... well muddlers, muddle no more. try zyrtec®. it gives you powerful allergy relief.

and zyrtec® is different than claritin® because zyrtec® starts working at hour one on the first day you take it. claritin® doesn't start working until hour three. zyrtec®. love the air. woman: everyone in the nicu -- all the nurses wanted to watch him when he was there 118 days. everything that you thought was important to you changes in light of having a child that needs you every moment. i wouldn't trade him for the world. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners,

and they matter most to us. if you're caring for a child with special needs, our innovative special care program offers strategies that can help. we've always been on the forefront of innovation. when the world called for speed...

♪ ...when the world called for stealth... ♪ ...intelligence... endurance... affordability... adaptability... and when the world asked for the future. staying ahead in a constantly evolving world. that's the value of performance. northrop grumman. does your dog food have? that's the value of performance. 18 percent? 20? new purina one true instinct has 30.

active dogs crave nutrient-dense food. so we made purina one true instinct. learn more at purinaone.com

thank you for watching "state of the union." i'm candy crowley in washington. head to cnn.com/sotu. tomorrow at 6:00 p.m., the president will sit down with wolf blitzer and at 6:30, it's the return of crossfire to cnn. monday's hosts are newt gingrich and stephanie cutter. and at 10:00 p.m. tomorrow

night, ac 360 later hosted by n anderson cooper will make its debut. find us on itunes, just search state of the union. fareed zakari gps is next for our viewers here in the united states. this is "gps," the global public square. welcome to you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria. we're going to get you one step ahead on understanding the crisis in syria. we have put together our own war room, a national security council of senior officials from recent administrations that is assembled and ready to take us through the path ahead for president obama. we have general wesley clark, james steinberg, paul wolfowitz, and nicholas burns. then, a critical question. can president obama take action without congress? should he have even asked it or did he weaken the powers of his office?