edition of all in. we will see you back here tomorrow at our normal time, 8:00 p.m. eastern. good night. >> as recently as yesterday morning, president obama was expected to persuade the american public and members of congress to support his call for an american, punitive military strike. since then, just in the last day, syria has said it will declare its chemical weapons arsenal for the first time ever and sign on to cooperate in an international effort to declare and hand over and destroy their chemical arsenal. developments change expectations for president obama's remarks. with no advance excerpts leaked to the press, rare for any

presidency, particularly for this one. what the president will say tonight about this ongoing crisis is unknown. we don't know what he will say. a big deal. the speech is expected to last 15 minutes. delivering it from the east room of the white house from which he has previously given three addresses to the nation since he has been president. the east room where he announced the death of osama bin laden in may 2011. the east room is also where he announced the draw down of american troops from the afghanistan war. the east room is also interestingly where he laid out the case that congress should raise the debt ceiling. but at this point, what we are waiting -- awaiting from the president is his remarks on the syrian situation. again tonight a blank slate. here now is the president of the united states. >> my fellow americans, tonight i want to talk to you about syria. why it matters and where we go from here.

over the past two years, what began as a series of peaceful protests against the repressive regime of bashar al assad turned into a brutal civil war. over 100,000 killed. millions have fled the country. in that time america has worked with allies to provide humanitarian support and shape a political settlement. i have resisted calls for military action because we cannot resolve some one else's civil war through force. particularly after a decade of war in iraq and afghanistan. the situation profoundly changed though on august 21st. when assad's government gassed to death over 1,000 people including hundreds of children. the images from this massacre are sickening. men, women, children, lying in rows killed by poison gas. others foaming at the mouth, gasping for breath.

a father clutching his dead children imploring them to get up and walk. on that terrible night, the world saw in gruesome detail the terrible nature of chemical weapons and why the overwhelming majority of humanity has declared them off-limits, a crime against humanity, and a violation of the laws of war. this was not always the case. in world war i, american g.i.s among the many thousand killed by deadly gas in the trenches of europe. in world war ii, the nazis used gas to inflict the horror of the holocaust. because these weapons can kill on a mass scale with no distinction between soldier and infant, the civilized world spent a century working to ban them. in 1997, the united states senate overwhelmingly approved an international agreement prohibiting the use of chemical weapons joined by 189 governments that represent 98%

of humanity. on august 21st, these basic rules were violated. along with our sense of common humanity. no one disputes the chemical weapons were used in syria. the world saw thousand of videos, cell phone pictures and social media accounts from the attack. and humanitarian organizations told stories of hospitals packed with people who had symptoms of poison gas. moreover, we know the assad regime was responsible. in the days leading up to august 21st, we know assad's chemical weapons personnel prepared for an attack near an area where they mix sarin gas. they distributed gas masks to their troops. then they fired rockets from a regime-controlled area into 11 neighborhood that the regime has been trying to wipe clear of opposition forces. shortly after those rockets

landed, the gas spread. and hospitals filled with the dying and the wounded. we know senior figures in assad's military regime reviewed the results of the attack. the regime increased their shelling of the same neighborhood in the days that followed. we have also studied samples of blood and hair from people at the site that tested positive for sarin. when dictators commit atrocities they depend upon the world to look the other way and until those horrifying pictures fade from memory. but these things happened. the facts cannot be denied. the question now is, what the united states of america and the international community is prepared to do about it? because what happened to those people, to those children, is not only a violation of international law, it is also a danger to our security.

let me explain why -- if we fail to act the assad regime will see no reason to stop using chemical weapons. as the ban against these weapons erodes, other tyrants will have no reason to think twice about acquiring poison gas and using them. over time our troops would again face the prospect of chemical warfare on the battlefield and it could be easier for terrorist organizations to obtain these weapons and to use them to attack civilians. if fighting spills beyond syria's borders these weapons could threaten allies like turkey, jordan and israel. and a failure to stand against the use of chemical weapons would weaken prohibitions against other weapons of mass destruction and embolden assad's ally iran which must decide whether to ignore international law by building a nuclear weapon or to take a more peaceful path. this is not a world we should accept.

this is what is at stake. and that is why after careful deliberation, i determined that it is in the national security interests of the united states to respond to the assad regime use of chemical weapons through a targeted military strike. the purpose of this strike would be to deter assad from using chemical weapons, to degrade his regime's ability to use them and to make clear to the world that we will not tolerate their use. that's my judgment as commander-in-chief. but i am also the president of the world's oldest constitutional democracy, so even though i possess the authority to order military strikes, i believed it was right in the absence of a direct or imminent threat to our security, to take this debate to congress. i believe our democracy is stronger when the president acts with the support of congress. and i believe that america acts more effectively abroad when we stand together.

this is a especially true after a decade that put more and more war making power in the hands of the president and more and more burdens on the shoulders of our troops, while side lining the people's representatives from the critical decisions about when we use force. now, i know that after the terrible toll of iraq and afghanistan, the idea of any military action, no matter how limited is not going to be popular. after all, i have spent 4 1/2 years working to end wars not to start them. our troops are out of iraq. our troops are coming home from afghanistan. and i know americans want all of us in washington, especially me, to concentrate on the task of building our nation here at home. putting people back to work. educating our kids. growing our middle-class. it's no wonder then that you're asking hard questions. so let me answer some of the

most important questions i have heard from members of congress and that i read in letters you have sent to me. first, many of you have asked -- won't this put us on a slippery slope to another war? one man wrote to me that we are still recovering from our involvement in iraq. a veteran put it more bluntly. this nation is sick and tired of war. my answer is simple -- i will not put american boots on the ground in syria. i will not pursue an open-ended action like iraq or afghanistan. i will not pursue a prolonged air campaign like libya or kosovo. this would be a targeted strike to achieve a clear objective. deterring the use of chemical weapons and degrading assad's capabilities. others have asked whether it is worth acting if we don't take out assad?

some members of congress have said there is no point in simply doing a pinprick strike in syria. let me make something clear. the united states military doesn't do pinpricks. even a limited strike will send a message to assad that no other nation can deliver. i don't think we should remove another dictator with force. we learned from iraq that doing so makes us responsible for all that comes next. but a targeted strike can make assad or any other dictator think twice before using chemical weapons. other questions involved the dangers of retaliation. we don't dismiss any threats. the assad regime does not have the ability to seriously threaten our military.

any other retaliation they might seek is in line with threats that we face every day. neither assad nor his allies have any interest in escalation that would lead to his demise. and our ally israel can defend itself with overwhelming force. as well as the unshakeable support of the united states of america. many of you have asked a broader question -- why should we get involved at all in a place that is so complicated and whereas one wrote to me those who come after assad may be enemies of human rights. it's true. that some of assad's opponents are extremists but al qaeda will only draw strength in a more chaotic syria if people there see the world doing nothing to prevent innocent civilians from being gassed to death. the majority of the syrian people and syrian opposition we work with just want to live in peace with dignity and freedom. and the day after any military

action, we would redouble our efforts to achieve a political solution that strengthens those who reject tyranny and extremism. finally, many of you have asked why not leave this to other countries? or seek solutions short of force? several people wrote to me, we should not be the world's policeman. i agree. and i have a deeply held preference for peaceful solutions. over the last two years my administration has tried diplomacy and sanctions. warnings and negotiations. but chemical weapons were still used by the assad regime. however, over the last few days we have seen some encouraging signs. in part because of the credible threat of u.s. military action. as well as constructive talks that i had with president putin, the russian government has indicated a willingness to join

with the international community in pushing assad to give up his chemical weapons. the assad regime admitted it has these weapons. and even said they joined the chemical weapons convention which prohibits their use. it's too early to tell whether this offer will succeed. and any agreement must verify that the assad regime keeps its commitments. but this initiative has the potential to remove the threat of chemical weapons without the use of force particularly because russia is one of assad's strongest allies. i have therefore asked the leaders of congress to postpone a vote to authorize the use of force while we pursue this diplomatic path. i'm sending secretary of state john kerry to meet his russian counterpart on thursday and i will continue my discussions with president putin. i have spoken to leaders of two of our closest allies, france

and united kingdom. we will work together in consultation with russia and china to put forward a resolution at the u.n. security council requiring assad to give up his chemical weapons and to ultimately destroy them under international control. we'll also give u.n. inspectors the opportunity to report their findings about what happened on august 21st. and we will continue to rally support from our allies from europe to the americas, from asia to the middle east who agree on the need for action. meanwhile, i have ordered our military to maintain their current posture to keep the pressure on assad. and to be in a position to respond if diplomacy fails. and tonight i give thanks again to our military and their families for their incredible strength and sacrifices. my fellow americans, for nearly seven decades, the united states has been the anchor of global security. this has meant doing more than

forging international agreements. it has meant enforcing them. the burdens of leadership are often heavy, but the world is a better place because we have borne them. and so to my friend on the right, i ask you to reconcile your commitment to america's military might with the failure to act when a cause is so plainly just. to my friends on the left, i ask you to reconcile your belief in freedom and dignity for all people with those images of children writhing in pain and going still on a cold hospital floor. sometimes resolutions and statements of condemnation are simply not enough. indeed, i would ask every member of congress and those of you watching at home tonight, to view those videos of the attack. and then ask -- what kind of world will we live in if the united states of america sees a dictator brazenly violate international law with poison gas and we choose to look the other way?

franklin roosevelt once said "our national determination to keep free of foreign wars and foreign entanglements cannot prevent us from feeling deep concern when ideals and principles that we have cherished are challenged." our ideals and principles as well as our national security are at stake in syria. along with our leadership of a world where we seek to ensure that the worst weapons will never be used. america is not the world's policeman. terrible things happen across the globe. and it is beyond our means to right every wrong. but when with modest effort and risk, we can stop children from being gassed to death, and thereby make our own children safer over the long run, i believe we should act. that's what makes america different. that's what makes us exceptional.

with humility but with resolve, let us never lose sight of that essential truth. thank you. god bless you. and god bless the united states of america. >> president obama, addressing the nation tonight from the east room of the white house. this is the only ninth formal address off to the nation of this kind he has made during both terms of his presidency. the president said tonight, saying that the united states is an anchor of global security. saying those burdens of leadership are, national leadership are often heavy, but the world its a better place because we have borne them. chris matthews is in washington tonight. chris, what is your reaction to the president's remarks? >> a strong moral argument to act. of course it leaves out an interesting connection point. between what we don't like having been done by the assad regime. use of chemical weapon. and what our action would do to prevent it from happening again

around the world. they didn't try to connect within our punitive attack, what he is talking about, which would if large enough to create the damage he talked about tonight would kill a lot of people. that would be seen as a bilateral attack, unilateral attack by the united states against syria. that would be a big story. would it re-establish the norms internationally against using chemical weapon. that's why i don't see the connection. unless the international community found a way to move together. you don't create an international norm. i believe the only way to spread the use of chemical weapons an international norm has to be pursued. i know it sound retro. through the united nations. not a unilateral attack. that will kill more people, this attack, as big as he says, were killed by assad using chemical weapons. we will kill a lot of people if this is as big a bang as he promised. >> the fundamental paradox in

the argument. the president led with the argument, the president believes, john kerry believes, his braintrust believes. the reason this is in vital american interest is to reinforce a precious international norm. if allowed to degrade in front of us will lead to deployments and use of chemical weapons. the problem, international norms can not be enforced by unilateral reaction in contravention of the united nations charter that outlines two appropriate lawful uses of force. direct self-defense or united nations security count sichlt -- council. the president like atlas holding the globe keep an international norm in place by fiat of american power while there is not official buy in to maintain. if you are talking about the long term viability of this norm which i've think we all believe is important. that is not a long term sustainable means. >> that was more the argument before tonight. tonight now the argument is we will do this if we have to. we will put it on the back

burner while we try legitimate international response. that could happen. >> he did say we are special. he talked. am can exceptionalism. >> he also may the moral argument, he mentioned children. any number of times. and i'm any dispatching secretary kerry to meet with the russian, russian counterpart. and i'm going to postpone the vote. he is giving himself time. not an immediate move. i want to put this out there. and i think this is a much different message than we were prepared for 4 hours ago. >> the anchor of global security. not the world's police officer. what are we? >> he is saying we have been that anchor. it means that we have difficult responsibilities. >> he talked about a moral obligation without saying moral obligation. he asked the american people be touched by the video. if you play to our better sensibility and emotion as a free people. we have to intervene.

he said with modest effort and risk. >> let me bring in andrea mitchell, chief foreign affairs correspondent, and host of "andrea mitchell reports." what is your reaction to the speech? and what news the president made tonight? >> first of all there are some real problems ahead with reliance on putin, negotiation that are coming up on thursday in geneva with foreign ministry lavlav. i was talking to diplomats from france, great britain tonight. they have been blocked to day by russia at the u.n. they and the french were working to get the security council to what russia proposed and syria according to their foreign minister and back it up with the use of force if necessary to force compliance. russia forced them to cancel that meeting. and has been blocking them at every turn. the president is clinging to a hope of a diplomatic way out. gets russia out of a box.

gets him out of the box. gets congress off the hook. they didn't want to vote. they didn't ask for a vote. the president unilaterally decided to bring them into the mix. and everyone would be happy except that russia is still not going to be -- i would predict that right now. >> in terms of the difficulty of moving ahead. i don't think any body underestimates how hard it will be in terms of agreement and compliance. and verification at the ground level at syria. haven't we just leapt forward light years. just by virtue of the fact that syria is admitting it has chemical weapons. implicitly this far. saying they will sign on to the treaty. haven't they come farther than anybody thought possible in the last 36 hours. my hopes don't feel dashed yet? >> well they have

acknowledged -- implicitly that they have these weapons for the first time. russia seems to have lost patience with them continuing in this -- way to use the weapons against civilians. that said they can sign anything. they didn't have to live up to it. we have seen that before. we have seen in north korea. we have seen that elsewhere. and how do you enforce it. how do you go into a war zone and in the midst of the fighting send in those u.n. white vans and get -- something equivalent to what they did successfully in iraq. in the 90s in iraq got rid of the chemicals saddam used. that's why we didn't find any, false pretext for war the they got rid of them, did it safely under the dictator, saddam huls -- saddam hussein. how in onfighting, hot war with al qaeda elements there. do you go in and transport chemicals out with al qaeda terrorists trying to attack those vans, very recognizable vans and grab those chemical weapons. and the -- the dirty little

secret here is that the united states is the best -- best equipped, best capable, all over the world. to getting biological chemical weapons out. they have done it in the former soviet union. under the law. they have done it all over the world. this will be perhaps not american boots on the ground. but if this actually worked, it would be american advisers under the u.n. flag with blue helmets going into syria to do this. >> nbc chief foreign affairs correspondent andrea mitchell. thank you, thank you very much. chris matthews. you want to jump in. in terms of the difficulty andrea mitchell is talking about. in terms of making this work. my personal take on this is that of course this is going to be difficult. but this is exactly the hard thing that we should be working on. it is to the point of the real

fact that has been proven and accepted if most people don't agree we should be wading into the syrian civil war in a broader way. >> andrea do you believe the russians have an interest in preventing the spread of chemical and weapons of mass destruction to islamists? >> we can answer that. andrea can't. andrea is on nbc. to your point. i think that russia has an interest, but they have never felt like pressing it before. they had the same interest all along. but now all of a sudden then feel look doing something about it. whether we can push them in the direction makes the difference as to whether or not this gets resolved? >> a face-saving middle path. if it is possible to take custody of the several dozen chemical weapons sites to destroy them in the midst of a hot war zone. everyone is sketching out the possibility.

it is possible to have a face saving agreement that amounts to we are not going to do this again. they sign on to treaty. what could happen, signing on to a treaty. not using chemical weapons which would essentially be a short term win. that's the thing that we are saying is over the line. >> deterrent. no question about that. i think the president made headway tonight. i think there will be congressional members that are going to say, you know what? i am going to fault on the side of the president. stand with him on this. he is going to need congressional support. even if he doesn't get a vote in the short term. he is going to need people out there working with him on this. i think he is going to pick up some of those tonight. and a short term victory is a victory that you don't want to let go. and if you can keep assad from using chemical weapons -- this may empower his, his opponents where, they could -- >> you can't downplay the short

term victory that he got an admission and that he now has pushed the vote back. now, yes it is going to be difficult. there is not going to be a miracle here. but i'm the preacher around here. confession comes before conversion. we have got the confession. now the difficulty is do we convert them. we may end up right back where we were 48 hours ago. but we are not as bad as we were. >> i spoke to a no vote. his point in all of this. on the russians now. russians are now involved. an admission by the russians there are chemical weapons there. for them to say we will work with them, with the resolution, present it. the russians saying yeah, we know we have got it. and now we will try to keep them from using it. a lot on the russians. the president didn't go that far tonight. but the international community now has an opportunity to see if the russians are truly going to be honest broker here.

are they really concerned about the point chris was talking about. chris matthews saying, the wrong people getting their hand on the chemical weapons which could be disastrous. >> i think we saw today, how russians are going to play this. right? they were obstructionists in terms of what the french and british were trying to do in the u.n. and they're not going to be easy on this. i don't think the i mean, i think, anybody who thinks it is going to be smooth sailing, dealing with the russians, and, and a brutal syrian regime that we want gone. still trying to figure out how we make a deal and keep a deal with this regime that we want to eliminate basically. we want them to go away. >> well, internationally the way it works. it is not just the government of a country that signs up to an international treaty like this. that government goes away. the agreement goes away. that's why our senate has to

ratify it. all those things. president to president. no issue. so i think. >> this is different kind of because, they're trying to, the rebels are trying to destroy the state of syria as constituted by assad's father. >> the government of syria and replace it with themselves. if in the process of doing that. international involvement, syria is brought into the agreement, and declare, hand over and get rid of chemical weapons. that's progress. that's progress for us in terms of worrying about the chemical weapons getting into the black market and dispersed around the world. it is progress the syrian war, and they're agreeing with an international demand on something. has never happened before in the civil war. >> you pave a path towards it, again, you have a u.n. mandate to go in narrowly tailored, for custody of chemical weapons. what happened, their mandate did not allow them to intervene. you can imagine a situation. there is a narrow mandate for a u.n. force to do chemical weapons custody. standing by a factory while people are getting murdered, killed, brutally with conventional weapons. we have to watch it.

that is of course an open door to further involvement. it is very hard to imagine how the current war in syria does not suck more people in. people start to get on it. >> you have to take into account, the possibility. one of the things the russians are trying to do with this. is reinforced the agreement with the government of syria. which is something that we reject. and, the other nations reject. and but the russians, believe me, they want them to stay. >> they will try to turn it into that. i don't think it legitimizes assad. >> chris matthews? >> they can do us a favor. let's be optimistic about geneva on thursday. good things have happened in geneva. it carries a first rate diplomat. the foreign minister is worth. we'll find out within a number of hours now. my concern, we are better off than we would have been.

had this sailed through or squeaked through the senate, through the vote and the procedural votes. had the house squeaked it through thanks to the good work and good offices of nancy pelosi. we would have been bombing and killing a lot of people, the way the president described the big thing tonight. he says it would be moderate, moderate effort, and a moderate risk. we can say it is not an act of war. for days there after, the pictures of every international television program and social media would be pictures of people in hospitals. and the american people would have killed so many hundreds of people. and the picture of us is some how the humanitarian country that cared about breaches in international norms would not sell.

i am with chris on that. and anybody who says, killing does not make the killer look any worse if you are killing those people. it doesn't work that way. what works is international norms. and i think we have to go back and try them again. i want to see us fighting every day in the u.n. every day, we are for ending chemical weapons. we dare the soviet union not to stand in the way. we want the chinese involved. we want to win the battle. we would be the great guys. why don't we become the champions of finding weapons of mass destruction. i think that would be a great cause. i think it would win the international argue far better than putting kids in hospitals by the hundred. that would not sell the world. >> reaction to president obama's address about the crisis in syria including impressions from senator joe manchin from west virginia coming up next. stay with us. >> this is not a world we should accept. this is what is at stake. that is why after careful deliberation, i determine that it is in the national security interests of the united

to respond to the assad regime's use of chemical weapons to a targeted military strike. la's known definitely for its traffic, congestion, for the smog. but there are a lot of people that do ride the bus. and now that the buses are running on natural gas, they don't throw out as much pollution into the air. so i feel good. i feel like i'm doing my part to help out the environment.

oh! that's a lot of water up there. ♪ go. go. that's a nice shot. [ male announcer ] share what you love with who you love. kellogg's frosted flakes. they're grreat! man: sometimes it's like we're still in college. but with a mortgage. and the furniture's a lot nicer. and suddenly, the most important person in my life

is someone i haven't even met yet. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. as you plan your next step, we'll help you get there. loses his computer, exposing thousands of patient records to identity theft. data breaches can happen that easily. we don't believe you should be a victim of someone else's mistake. we're lifelock. we constantly monitor the web so if any of your personal information is misused, we're on it. ♪ ow. [ male announcer ] call 1-800-lifelock or go to lifelock.com today. with an ultra-thin coating and fast absorbing advil ion core™ technology, it stops pain before it gets worse. nothing works faster. new fast acting advil. look for it in the white box.

>> many of you have asked, why not leave this to other countries. or seek solutions short of force. several people wrote to me, we should not be the world's policeman. i agree. and i have a deeply held preference for peaceful solutions. over the last two years, my administration has tried diplomacy, warnings, negotiations, but chemical wep -- weapons were used by the assad regime. over the last few days we have seen encouraging signs. in part because of the credible threat -- >> president obama speaking at the top of the hour about the progress made against syria's arsenal, since the threat of using force against syria after their alleged chemical weapons

attack in late august. late last week, senator joe manchin of west virginia said he would vote against president obama's request to tautsize use of force against syria. along with democratic senator, heidi heikkamp. he introduced a resolution. renouncing the use of chemical weapons and signing the international chemical weapons convention. today, syria's foreign minister announced syria is prepared to do just that. joining us now, senator joe manchin. senator. thank you for your time. >> how are you? >> i'm good. >> what is your takeaway overall how president obama laid out the problem tonight and america's role in a potential solution. how did you feel about it. >> -- about it? >> he came to the senate today

at noon. we had a frank discussion. and i applaud the president for coming to congress. i really do. i implored him to come to congress. it was the right place to be for this most critical issue. which basically could lead to a war that none of us want to be entangled in again. i have said this, rachel. if military might and money would change the course and direction of that part of the world. 12 years, $1.6 trillion. thousand of americans have lost their lives. more have been maimed. we haven't made that much of a change over there. that's what was holding the american public back. that's what was holding west virginians back. they didn't want to repeat the same thing we had come through 12 years. with that said. nine days ago. ten days ago. we had the first briefing. secretary kerry, hagel, on the

phone, all the senators. senator heikkamp called me. she said what do you believe? i said heidi there has to be an option. something different. than an imminent strike. i believe it did not rise to the level of imminent danger to the united states of america. or to the threat of our country our our people. with that being said -- my heart goes out to all of the suffering and the carnage that we are seeing over there. something has to be done. but, even the president said it would not be -- a military solution. and if it is not going to be a military solution, and we never heard any body saying they were going to secure their weapons. that were causing all of this horrific carnage. with that being said, we brought all of, i went to all the meetings. i cut my week in west virginia short. canceled everything, came back. went to all of the hearings. and listened to everybody. i finally said, listen.

there is an awful lot of people that came to help us. diplomats, military. people, past, present, who have been in the situation. i said there has got to be a solution. fine, if chemical weapons is a problem. we have to secure chemical weapons. how do you do it? you give the gentleman, assad, demen that he may be. a time table to comply. if you don't comply. then the president would have the power to use what he believes is necessary to protect the united states of america and our interests. that tea all we said. we said, mr. president during the 45-day period. lay out a plan, what syria would look like. if we strike. don't strike. have diplomatic success. that's what we are asking for, rachel, we thought was the most reasonable approach. we, basically, rolled that out wednesday. i took it down and imed me yacht -- immediately in the foreign relations committee. they were in the process. nothing happened there. we finalized it thursday. and by friday, a final product. we shared it with the white house. i had a chance to talk to the president today when he was at

our meeting. i even gave him the proposal. i am most pleased. we are in a better place today than we were yesterday. the day before. definitely last week. >> senator, now, sorry to interrupt you. now that we are hearing the syrian government saying they will sign on to the chemical weapons convention. they're reacting favorably to their ally, russia, saying they ought to, not only declare, hand over. and destroyed all the weapons now. it seems possible. they agreed to it. we are starting to hear how difficult it would be. a hot war. getting inspectors in would be difficult. how will we find them. how will we verify. how difficult would this be in practical terms? >> we were facing imminent strike last week. i believe would lead to reaction which had been, just unimaginable to us. now, we are, everyone saying, okay. now we have a chance. and all of the naysayers say it can't happen. it is very easy to call a cease-fire. it's very, i would think, very plausible for that to happen. i would look to see, cooler head prevail. the bottom line, they are admitting to the world. the international world.

international community. we have the weapons. we are willing to turn them over. we are willing to get rid of them. russia is saying we are willing to take responsibility. the bottom line is -- rachel is the community, the -- chemical weapons commission has a process in place. it has a sequence of events of how to disarm, take these off the shelf. and basically you have to identify, secure, dismantle manufacturing. that takes time. i know that. i sure don't believe the regime will use the weapons again with the eyes of the world on top again. we were able to bring that about. diplomatic. not dropping bombs and missiles on them. i just believe this is the right action for us to take the i hope that we continue. i applaud the president, i know the pressure he has had. to -- imminent strike. strike last week. we don't need congress. he found out support is not there. the support its just not there. that means we have to find other

options. this is an option we thought was viable last week. now i have other of of my colleagues. looking, refining. i don't have pride of authorship nor does heidi. or ownership. anybody that can make it better. fine. but we have moved the ball from imminent strike to an option of a -- diplomatic resolve. >> senator joe manchin of west virginia. thank you. >> rachel, if i can say this, heidi and i have talked about this and everything. military, the superpower does not mean that military might is what defines a super power. you have to have super -- super patience. you have to have -- super negotiating power. diplomatic resources. and you have to super humanitarian aid where needed. we have the possibility of doing all of that. but we were resorting to the first attack, showing how strong we were. after 12 years, all the carnage, suffering we have given there. time to use diplomatic resources i hope we move down this course.

i think we will. >> senator joe manchin, thank you very much for your time. >> thank you, rachel. appreciate it. >> more to come including the reaction of one republican who initiated the call for president obama to engage congress in the debate. this is msnbc special coverage of the president's address off to the nation. stay with us. when does your work end? does it end after you've expanded your business? after your company's gone public? and the capital's been invested? or when your company's bought another? is it over after you've given back? you never stop achieving. that's why, at barclays, our ambition is to always realize yours. 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. to your child's school. wit's hard to find contractors with the passion and the skill, and that's why we use angie's list. online or on the phone, we help you hire right the first time with honest reviews on over 720 local services. i want it done right. i don't want to have to worry about it or have to come back and redo it. with angie's list, i was

able to turn my home into the home of my dreams. for over 18 years, we've helped people take care of the things that matter most. join today. could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. yep, everybody knows that. well, did you know the ancient pyramids were actually a mistake? uh-oh. geico. fifteen minutes could save you...well, you know.

>> even though i possess the

authority to order military strikes, i believe it was right in the absence of the direct or imminent threat to our security to take this debate to congress. i believe our democracy is stronger when the president acts with the support of congress. and i believe that america acts more effectively abroad when we stand together. this is especially true after a decade that put more and more war making power in the hand of the president and more and more burdens on the shoulders of our troops while sidelining the people's representatives from the critical decisions about when we use force. >> president obama speaking tonight on why he went to congress on the issue of syria. before the president made that decision to bring the syria issue to congress, it was a republican congressman from virginia named congressman scott ridgel who spearheaded a letter to the president asking him to do that. saying at the time, although the congress was on vacation, they stood ready to come back and start debating and making decisions on this issue.

due to their constitutional burd tune make the decisions for the country. what happens now between the president and congress now that we are in a different space in our relationship between our country and the problem in syria, joining us is congressman scott ridgel, republican of virginia, a member of the house armed services sxhe. -- armed services committee. good to have you back tonight. thank you. >> thank you. >> the president, he talked about why he wants congress to authorize the u.s. use of military force in syria. but also why he wants to give the diplomatic offers a chance. what is your reaction to the speech tonight? >> well with full recognition of the track record of the syrians and the russians, i still am encouraged by -- this recent development. and i am actually surprised that -- how it came about. someof what a light, flippant moment in the interview in the press secretary with secretary kerry. the idea was floated as you know. i would like to think there was a range of options. weren't just given two, for a strike or for doing nothing. and i just rejected that that was -- the two, well, the full

range of options. i am glad this one has come up. and again, with a full recognition that that, the russians and the syrians don't have a great track record with following through. >> however this came about. president obama and president putin, discussed the matter at the g-20. they met privately. gave a long ticktock. this might have been borne publicly -- as a champion of this issue being resolved in congress, what do you make of the president now saying that congress should delay its vote until we see if this is going to work. delay voting on, on the authorizing use of military force to see if it is needed. >> i think that is a wise call. now i think the political reality here, rachel. i take no pleasure in saying this. i think the reality is that the votes just weren't there. now i applaud the president for coming to congress. and as you know, i held -- hold the view, and, did earlier on,

that the real constitutional path, that the president had to follow, was to come to congress. i looked at -- what happened in libya. and that was very instructive to me. 221 tomahawk missiles were launched. 700 other ammunitions. that didn't rise to the level of hostility defined in the war powers act. then what would? as we headed into syria, and i saw things escalating, about 2 1/2 weeks ago, we drafted the letter that you mentioned. i was so encouraged when so many democratic colleagues and my friends, signed on with us. it was a pretty strongly worded letter. it really said that we thought that his action in libya was actually unconstitutional. now i know that, people -- argue that point. and good people, republicans are

telling me, scott, you know you're holding too strict a view there. but i really believe absent that we are under attack. we are -- an attack is imminent as in this case. the president really must come to congress. and i -- i applaud him for that part of the decision. >> congressman, from virginia, thank you for your time talking to us tonight. good to have you back. thank you. >> thank you. >> let me ask you, ed, on scott ridgel's point. we said ahead of the speech. we don't know what the president was going to ask of congress. now that we have heard the speech is it clear what he is asking for? or are they in wait and see mode? >> the president will slow down. there is no rush to war at this point. the fact that the russians are involved. and syrians have admit they'd have got it. that's progress. also the fact that -- there is a pretty good case to be made that

they're not going to use chemical weapons. so there is now a real window of opportunity for the president to state the case to the american people. play on the emotions of the american people. and also, say, i have the authority to strike. let's not get into any gray area here. it's been done before. and i will do it. he is going to have to keep that pressure on. to keep the -- the negotiations and all of the conversation going forward. >> i don't know if he does have the authority to strike. i tend to believe that -- he doesn't. but, maybe the effect of it is saying, saying that you think you do. means that you will. and that's the effect that -- and that's the effect that are looking for the he did it in

libya whether or not he had authority to do it. and other presidents have done it. when any the last time a president asked congress to deep claire war. it was, i believe, world war ii. >> that's right. >> it's been a while. i think the president did, buy some time tonight. he bought some time, not just to influence congress. public opinion. >> a lot to consider tonight. our coverage continue thousands, we'll be right back. to prove toe is the better choice for her, she's agreed to give it up. that's today? [ male announcer ] we'll be with her all day to see how it goes. [ claira ] after the deliveries, i was okay. now the ciabatta is done and the pain is starting again. more pills? seriously? seriously. [ groans ] all these stops to take more pills can be a pain. can i get my aleve back? ♪ for my pain, i want my aleve. [ male announcer ] look for the easy-open red arthritis cap.

for my pain, i want my aleve. [ female announcer ] some people like to pretend a flood could never happen to them. and that their homeowners insurance protects them. [ thunder crashes ] it doesn't. stop pretending. only flood insurance covers floods. ♪ visit floodsmart.gov/pretend to learn your risk.

no two people have the same financial goals. pnc investments works with you to understand yours and helps plan for your retirement. talk to a pnc investments financial advisor today. ♪ ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] 1.21 gigawatts. today, that's easy.

ge is revolutionizing power. supercharging turbines with advanced hardware and innovative software. using data predictively to help power entire cities. so the turbines of today... will power us all... into the future. ♪ >> we're back with msnbc special coverage of the presidential address on syria tonight. chris matthews what happened next? >> we have the thursday meeting in geneva, russian foreign minister and john kerry, both very competent. we ought to use the security council as a platform, courtroom. make our case. we will lose our case on moral grounds the minute we attack syria. as long as we can argue that we

are the champions of ending the use of chemical weapons or ownership of them, we're the good guys. the minute we attack syria, we lose the status. >> can we be the champion of that after the iraq war, though? honestly. this is, not imminently after the iraq war. ten years since we started it. did we forever poison the well? >> i think we did poison the well. but i think what we have seen tonight, that is a little different. one we, have seen now. assad and them admit they have weapons. big thing in iraq going after weapon that were not there. assad said yes they're here. yes there are locations. secondly we have a president that has gone to congress. he is saying i don't need to go but i am going and he is quoted -- he actually stated that we're the oldest constitutional government in the world. and i'm going to, abide by the constitution.

i think he did what he should have done tonight. i hope we never go to war. but i think he is trying to use that threat to set the tone for negotiation. i hope we to the window to do it. because we do need to stop the use of these kind of weapons. >> chris, did the president locate our authority in the right place by making our case that way? >> yeah, i think he located the authority in the right place in seeking a diplomatic solution. most impressive thing the president has done so far is to take yes for an answer. at least an initial yes for an answer. the thing about iraq, that everyone knew the u.n. process was a charade. going to congress was a charade. they made up their mind to go to war. a genuine sense in all of us watching this unfold. the president doesn't want to go to war in syria. no one around him does. he has opened to a nonviolent solution. >> when you look at the speech. you look at the notes. all of his arguments for taking action, the strongest, and the one he spent most time on was the moral argument. >> yes. >> and i thought tonight he laid out the case. >> the capital spin on this will disfocus the country. it is jobs and the economy.

what effect will this have on the economy? >> president referencing that in the speech. important point. chris matthews. al sharpton. i want to thank you all for being here tonight. chris hays back in an hour for a >> on the eve of the 12th anniversary of 9/11, president obama delivered his ninth special address off to the nation explaining what he thinks the next steps should be on syria. >> over the last few days we have seen some encouraging signs. in part because of the credible threat of u.s. military action, as well as constructive talks that i had with president putin. the russian government has indicated a willingness to join with the international community in pushing assad to give up his chemical weapons. the assad regime has now