or to stop asaad's forces?to go hand in hand because it is the war against the syrian people. the advances on the ground, without stopping the air vehicles of the government, against the civilians. they are show nothing interest in fighting the isis. despite into zuma. this is why we -- you can't fight isis and leave him to continue his war against the people. the number of casualties now exceed quarter a million. what is the international community and the u.s. waiting for more and more without actually having the strategy, to end the asaad government with the same time. honing the space to the transition. and last interview that the asaad show no concessions whatsoever to accept the reality that it should be negotiation to end the crisis. >> still relieve that this is the all this is a war against. >> we are running out of time, we will have to stop you there. thank you for your insight. the director of the syrian center of the strategic center. >> now a group of women have rallied in we men's capitol calling

special envoy said on tuesday that president asaad had expressed a willingness to stop bombing for six weeks. that esh under now illusions that he has a lot of uphill work to do. >> 220,000 people killed. 1 million wounded feeling of dispair, and knock can be done that's exactly the feeling in syria at this moment. so a dim of hope make as big difference secondly, it isn't just a distant. actually what i was authorized to say yesterday, it is a commitment to stop all area bombing all shelling all over the city. and then we will focus with the aid in one district to prove that this makes a difference the problem is will this hatch? as you know, all of these issues can be very tricky. and secondly, will your position understand also, that it is in the interest of the people, not to do mortar shelling or rockets which you will then break this type of hope. >> can you trust president asaad? >> see the u.n. and my job is to actually give a chance to every opportunity to reduce the violence in syria, and therefore try to find an entry point for some type of political process. t problem is no

what you find is for a lot of coalition partners, getting rid of asaad is the highest priority.or the states at the moment, getting rid of i.s.i.l., and al qaeda linked groups, posing a threat to u.s. center. interest. it's our top priority, and not that we don't want bashar al-assad to go, but we are concerned with the overthrow, with no plan b in place. quickly, very quickly, when the war is over, what does jordan security? >> jordan, foremost, really needs stability. jordan needs i.s.i.s. contained, preferable preferably it would pref it goes, but like the united states, it's concerned with i.s.i.s. and instability. it needs the cop nilent to end, and turn the refugees in jordan. i think it's the second-largest in the world. enormous stress. jordan needs the conflict to end so refugees can return. they can reduce the threat of i.s.i.s. that's ultimately the end game. for others, turkey, saudis, getting rid of assad is where you see the strains of united states interest. >>> we heard from the jordanian interest, he was looking at iraq and a need for the permanent solution to t

to host training camps and barack obama said the situation will only be moved forward by president asaadng removed by the whole discussion of what happened next in syria. there were talks too about iran, and what is happening with the nuclear talks in geneva, they have brought up to speed on that. how to combat first of all their funding to try to make sure that that is blocked off certainly barack obama said that most countries had a lot in common. there were concrete discussions and that the white house briefing in the last half hour, the white house said while the two don't always agree, there is a lot they did agree on, and the talks indeed were constructive. >> yeah, and it is an important relationship for both of the countries isn't it. >> it is, because the earn manies have a large number of service personnel, in qatar the use quite extensively enwith it comes to organizing operations around the middle east certainly we know before he came to the white house for the first time, he wrote for the new york times and he said the one thing that has to be addressed is this idea that isl

and barack obama said the situation here would only be approved by the removal of president asaad.re was talk about isil, how you combat them militarily, after coming to the white house, they rout for the new york times he said many people would like to see radicalize lamb was responsible for what he described as terrorism in many cases it was hope lessness. that young people felt across the middle east, and hope lessness in the united states as well. he also thanked president obama for his continues efforts to try and arrange a peace process between the israelis and the palestinians say that was of concern to many countries around the world to many people around the world this was considered to be a constructive discussion which covers many bases and both sides have said that it will continue those discussions particularly with so many issues concerning both countries. the u.s. president has veto add bill. whether the keystone pipeline would serve the national interests. it has become a flash point in the national debate about climate change. the man acquitted of murdering an unar

this is the position because if they are not doing this russia is becoming like asaad the butcher. because according to german security sources - i don't know where they get this information - 50,000 killed. many others in america claimed that bashar al-assad is a butcher. nobody is telling petro porashenko he's a pucker. he has to stop shelling and this artillery and multiple rocket launchers, launching the rockets and killing the civilians. >> you are shaking your head. >> i am. petro porashenko is defending his country, of course there'll be casualties on his side. this war, at this point, is being fought on all sides dirty, because there's no rules for the war. very little humanitarian assistance intervention. sort of to respond to him here. russians sight that the russian language is in trouble. no one is attacking the russian language if not forbidden everyone could speak russian, as for the fascist forces that are taking over. mostly the conversations is about ultra nationalists which has less than 1% in the whole opposition movement. this is a convenient argument that you t

. >> translation: now we are in a village and we freed the down from asaad's gangs and the iranians. >> reporter: many men were lost some belonging to al nusra front, an al qaeda-affiliated group. al qaeda is fighting for control. it withdrew from some suburbs, but remained a threat. it has important supply roots for the rebels and government forces. winning the battle in aleppo would be psychologically important for any side in the fight. >> it's a big city. the biggest in syria, it has incredibly strategic lengths to turkey in the forth. to the heartland in the center towards lebanon, to i.s.i.l. controlled areas kurdish areas in the east. it's an important symbolic issue that the government and the rebels are willing to fight to maintain their control or the areas that they control, because the city is divided. >> cultural heritage is being wiped out. these images taken from a drone camera shows what little is left in the old city one of the six u.n.e.s.c.o. sites. it is a difficult place to live - people are without water, electricity and have little access to food. many hospital

this is the position because if they are not doing this they are becoming like asaad the butcher. because according to security sources. i don't know where they get that information. 50,000 killed. after 10,000 in america and others claim that yasser arafat he's a butcher. no one is telling petro porashenko he's a butcher. he has to stop shelling and the rt ill -- artillery and rocket launchers. >> i see you shaking his head. >> petro porashenko is defending his country, of course there are casualties on his side. the war is fight dirty on all sides, because there's no rules for the war as we have been seeing. little humanitarian assistance intervention and whatnot. but russians cite that the london language is in trouble. no one is attacking the language. everyone can speak russian, as for the forces in kiev that are taking over. mostly the conversations about the right sector is about, indeed ultra nationalists. with less than 1% in the whole opposition movement. this is a very convenient argument that you take one little point, one time mentioned and blow it out of proportion a

policy there's a clear attempt to have a major burr person with iran and if you look at yemen and asaad i know we have been two different machinations bear there but the administration is content to leave aside their and so if you are just the average sunni-arab wanting to figure out should you work with the americans and whatever forces we may be supporting or should you work with some of the sunni jihadist groups if they see us as a facilitating shiite domination of the region is not going to push some of the sunni arabs who are not necessarily jihadist into the arms of the more radical sunni groups? ambassador? >> absolutely which is why we can't pick a side in the sunni-shia struggle anymore than we can pick a side in the christian muslim struggle in the balkans. we have to have a set of values and friends who will accept them and go after a buddy who is violating them whether they are coming out of mosul or coming out of damascus. >> of you have for example isis fighters threatening the outer baghdad belts and you have shiite lishan groups which we have considered to be terrorists

they're split on whether or not they're going to focus on asaad. that's a complication. you begin to do one thing and you lose some. you do the other, you lose others. how do you hold them together? that was not the problem. with respect to the challenge of whether or not you had to beat the folks in the pacific and win in europe at the same time in world war ii. >>> so there is a huge difference there is a huge difference in what their economic power is and what choices they have. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >>> mr. secretary, one of the things that i read was that the largest democracy encouraged us to get rid of the embargo with cuba. that it would help the relationship. i'm just wondering why some of these countries are not speaking up. how come they don't say anything about the human rights abuses. if they encouraged us, it seems like we were left alone. and i just think they're fearful of cuba stirring up the yumpbts students in some of these countries. >> i don't know if that's the reason they don't do it. but i disagree with you. and not only in this hemisphere,

no one should be surprised that dictators like asaad would cross the president's red line because henows the president won't even defend the line that separates our nation from mexico. there are no real consequences when dictators and adversaries defy america and this must change. for american to be safer america must be strong. for america to be safer, our border must be secure. gangs smuggle weapons and people. they are a clear and present danger to the health and safety of all americans. any conversation, any conversation about comprehensive immigration reform must begin with comprehensive border security. that's exactly why last summer, i told the president, i looked him in the eye, if you will not secure the border between texas and mexico, texas will. second point and i want to be very clear today, the conservative movement must be a great agent of reform. to lead this country, we must offer a vision of change. our nation is $18 trillion in debt so every agency of government, every department out there, they must account for every dime that they spend, for the first time in ame

no one should be surprised that dictators like asaad would cross the president's red line because hehe president won't even defend the line that separates our nation from mexico. there are no real consequences when dictators and adversaries defy america and this must change. for american to be safer, america must be strong. for america to be safer our border must be secure. gangs smuggle weapons and people. they are a clear and present danger to the health and safety of all americans. any conversation, any conversation about comprehensive immigration reform must begin with comprehensive border security. that's exactly why last summer, i told the president, i looked him in the eye if you will not secure the border between texas and mexico texas will. second point and i want to be very clear today the conservative movement must be a great agent of reform. to lead this country, we must offer a vision of change. our nation is $18 trillion in debt so every agency of government, every department out there, they must account for every dime that they spend, for the first time in american his

and that's asaad. >> you spoke today about the impact of our sanctions on russia. to what extent is the concern of the administration that there may be linkage? particularly the following question. to what extent are we relying upon russian cooperation for successful result with iran? >> >>. >> it's a really interesting question and one that we've been looking at. again, it's a malter of self interest. when it comes to the iran nuclear negotiations, the russians have been a con struktsive partner and they remain a con struktsive partner. them tried to vangs in the course of these negotiations. so the profound difference that we have over them in the ukraine has not bled into the iran nuclear negotiations. i would say similarly, that has not been especially problematic u either. i think what one can take from that is, in part that where russia concludes that a particular issue and cooperation in the context of that issue advances its own interest, it's going to keep doing it irrespective of what's going on with crew yan or anything else. tlooesz that's