motion followed mounting allegations of a mass chemical attack near damascus largely being blamed on assad government the sarah firth that crucial session in london last night. defeated and she merely ate it that's how the prime minister is being portrayed today after that major political play with parliament voting against military action it means that the prime minister's decision essentially to recall parliament to bring this nation against possible military action in syria has backfired spectacularly now i'm not standing here and saying those some peace or some pieces of intelligence that i've seen all the gypsy in the world won't see that convinces me that i'm right and anyone who disagrees with me is wrong i am saying this is a judgment we have to reach a judgment about what happened and who was responsible to prime minister what has convinced you where is the evidence that an action by the international community would cease the use of chemical weapons within syria in the end there is no one hundred percent certainty about who is responsible you have to make a judgment it's not goin

one hand, assad has to go. on the other hand, if we take military action, we're not pushing him out. today the president said we have to look out for the allies, jordan and israel, that could be attacked as well as turkey. turkish prime minister erdogan a few moments ago put out a statement saying he is concerned that the policy should be regime change, and in fact, as one of our key allies, he thinks the goal of any military action should be taking assad out. here is one of our allies that president obama is citing in turkey, and they're saying the opposite of what he is whether or not regime change would be the goal. >> we're three years into civil war in syria, 100,000 believed to be dead. now all of a sudden, the administration believes the chemical weapons killed 1400 people and it is go time. what's the whisper when go time is in washington, d.c.? i am scratching my head trying to figure out what's the rush. we need to spend time finding out what's happening there first. >> reporter: the assumption is it

he thinks that get rid of assad. and i think better to cope al-qaeda on the ropes. >> many thanks to tom bevin and ralph ports. appreciate your insights. >> just the beginning of our look. and what is happening in the unite the nations and what is happening in the middle east and what we expect now in the white house. >> we know where the rockets were launched from and what time. and we know where they landed and when. we know that rockets came only from regime controlled areas and went only to opposition controlled and contested neighborhoods. humans. we are beautifully imperfect creatures living in an imperfect world. that's why liberty mutual insurance has your back, offering exclusive products like optional better car replacement, where if your car is totaled, we give you the money to buy one a model year newer. call... and ask an insurance expert about all our benefits today, like our 24/7 support and service, because at liberty mutual insurance, we believe our customers do their best out there in the world, so

to attack bashar al assad. though some of them are concerned that he may try to take this opportunity to also attack some al-qaeda linked rebels who have grown if size and in scope and in numbers, particularly in opposition held northern syria. wolf? >> and this is a huge dilemma for the u.s. right now. they know if they punish the regime of assad, his military, one of the winners potentially could be some of those al-qaeda supporters among the opposition. the rebels. some of those islamist groups that the u.s. has identified as al-qaeda purposes. not the free syrian, army, which is much more acceptable to the u.s. and turkey and to others, but that al-qaeda element. how significant is that element among the opposition to assad? >> these hard line islamists groups like the mush rough front have grown from small groups that in some cases in some areas, they have completely eclipsed what was the free syrian army a year and a year and a half ago. it's gotten to such an extreme, there are former syrian government s

regime -- the assad jeffrey goldberg today rights, why would the assad regime launched its biggest chemical attack on civilians at precisely at the moment when a u.s. inspections team -- un inspections team was parked in damascus? the answer is easy, because it suggests that no one will do a damn thing to stop them. there is a good chance that he is a correct. is the u.s. going to do anything to stop them beyond what is done? >> there are a number of steps that we have taken i have walked through what those steps are. those involved humanitarian aid, close coordination with our allies, important conversations with regional partners. and it involves some assistance to the syrian military council. there are a range of things that we have done already. in terms of additional assistance that could be -- that i certainlyvided, would not rule that out. but again, that is something we are considering on a very regular basis. the results of this investigation or the results of the assad regime is seeking to inhibit this investigation will results in calculated measures later. >> will the president

president assad knows that.y ample proof and examples in the strikes that you mentioned, a few of them in the last six months, how much israel knows about what is happening in syria and what israel is capable to do. he wouldn't like to open another front in addition to the u.s. campaign that is assumed would be ran against him. so i think the chances of israel being involved in the current confrontation between the united states and syria are extremely slim. as aviv mentioned, yes, people are scared but with no reason that israel would be involved. however, in such a confrontation things might slip, might get out of hand if for example hezbollah in lebanon would initiate some sort of a retaliation against israel trying to align with syria, possibly with iran, israel with force to retaliate. but i do not see president assad take the chance and getting israel involved in this kind of war. >> the prime minister of israel, benjamin netanyahu, saying this week if that were to happen, if israel were attacked, israel h

al assad is a mystery to many.ung, only 41 years old. he was appointed president after his father died in 2000. but how does he actually think? >> brian todd spoke to a man who gained access to bashar al assad's inner circle and he calls the president the master of deception. >> reporter: bashar al assad, some analysts say, may have badly misread the signals, believed it when his cronies told him president obama wouldn't enforce his red line on chemical weapons. a staggering miscalculation, experts say, driven by assad's own unpredictable swings of behavior. >> bashar al assad, unlike his father, is moody, he goes from one side to the other. bouts of rationality and irrationality. >> reporter: andrew tabler worked with assad's wife, running a charity in syria and has met with bashar al assad. he describes assad as delusional, conspiracy minded, but also persuasive, coming across as the antithesis of a murderous dictator. when christiane amanpour asked him in 2005 about reports that he threatened lebanon's prime min

we could try to send assad to the international court. think the president is pursuing a delicate deliberate path saying that we probably are going to use these military air strikes, but he's got to take all these fact tomorrows into consideration. the worst thing we can do is go in without a plan, without a strategy, without an effort to really detour assad and his continuation of these war crimes. >> general hayden, the problem is, nobody is quite sure what the plan is, and president obama hasn't committed to what the plan may be and that plan may have to dramatically change if british forces will not be involved and that sets a bandwagon running around, say, the french and other international forces to say, look, we can't take part in this. would america consider unilateral military action and how risky is that to america's interest interest? >> president obama made this for the jiets aunited states and fo himself, frankly a year ago. i can't conceive he would back down from a very serious course of action in which these actions have s

assad and syria. not because they particularly like mr. assad. legitimate president or legitimate leader of syria. >> and russia now claims there's little difference between president obama and president george w. bush and they predict if assad falls, what comes after him could be even worse. wolf? >> jill dougherty with that report, thank you. >>> up next on our special report, the deadly effects of a poison gas attack. when we made our commitment to the gulf, bp had two big goals: help the gulf recover and learn from what happened so we could be a better, safer energy company. i can tell you - safety is at the heart of everything we do. we've added cutting-edge technology, like a new deepwater well cap and a state-of-the-art monitoring center, where experts watch over all drilling activity twenty-four-seven. and we're sharing what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. our commitment has never been stronger. everybody has different ideas, goals, appetite for risk. you can't say 'one size fits all'. it doesn't. that's crazy. we

it's assad.oned before, if assad indeed did not do that, he would have welcomed the international inspectors in immediately to try to prove his case. the fact that syria kept these international inspectors out of their country for four or five days before they allowed them to come in, to me it's proof positive with all the other evidence we have that it was assad murdering his own people with poison gas. >> i know that you are going to be leaving this conversation in just a few minutes to go and be part of a classified phone call briefing with the white house. what do you expect to hear? >> well, i think that the president is obviously making his decision or has made his decision and i think that they are going to tell us what the president is going to do or is about to do. the president and the white house have kept us, members of congress have kept us informed with conversations from the very, very beginning, and tomorrow, there is a classified briefing at the capitol in washington to tell us s

i guess we want to punish assad and maybe deter assad from using chemical weapons and three we mighta sisnal to anybody else that might want to use them. but what happens if our goal, secretary kerry and secretary hagel and president said we're not talking about a military action? we're not talking about a limited strike. it is frankly nothing more than a spanking. it doesn't destroy chemical weapons. what if assad does it again? lori: you raised some good points. we're in the middle of ticktock here. we heard the secretary of state laying out the case and presenting all the evidence and we're expected to hear from the president at 2:15. maybe we're in the middle of unfolding events and we will get more details as to a specific plan. we know we heard from the president the other night on pbs saying they're looking to do a shot across the bow and deter chemical weapons and we'll learn more in terms of timing momentarily littlely. >> the problem with that, by telegraphing in advance to the syrians and american public, what we'll do, largely limited and symbolic. we'll not remove assad

i say that if you don't punish assad for this war crime -- and by the way, do you believe that assadsed the poison gas? both the colonels are skeptical. do you believe he did? >> i have no reason to believe otherwise, and the fact that different intelligence services and the doctors who don't have an axe to grind one way or another on this -- you're never going to have 100% proof of anything in the world, and you have to make decisions. that's what foreign affairs is all about. look, i don't deny this is a choice between hitler and stalin. we chose to support stalin. the second worst man of the century to defeat the first, and we had to spend 50 years in the cold war undoing the strengthening of the bolsheviks. that's always true, history never ends. you defeat one enemy, there are always others who come again. if you have to choose between undoing the iranian empire, leading its support, and the pupp puppets in syria -- you do it by the fall of assad, you humiliate iran, you cut off hezbollah, we have a tremendous strategic advance in the fighting of islamic extremism. that's why it

assad in power.they are afraid of losing the conduit into the middle east, conduit of arms to hezbollah and neighboring lebanon. saudi arabia, qatar, sunni country, one turkish, two arab, as well as the united states and others, of course, have been supporting the opposition to varying degrees. saudi arabia, in many ways, takes the lead because they are afraid of what they view as the shiite presence developing in the middle east from iran through syria, which is 75% sunn iring's, but there's an offshoot of islam, and the most powerful group is hezbollah, shiite organizations, and so, you know, they want to break that up. the u.s. wants to break that up. israel wants to break up that. the fall of assad is desirable in that sense, although they don't want syria to emasculated plod all together and break up causing a free-for-all of the powers causing regional and international conflicts. that's the danger in this. inside syria it is very, very sectarian. the longer this goes on, the more sectarian it

the assad regime collapses. you have al qaeda, the news reel folks, islamist extremists, grab the city of damascus. one of the most important cities to the arab world. then what does the president do? i don't see any strategic interest of the united states in syria whatsoever. >> your reaction to that? >> the facts don't support what colonel peters is saying. that's in northern syria, consolidating what they're doing, not much involved in the fighting any more. they're involved in imposing radical islam on the people. the people are demonstrating against them on a daily basis. the fact of the matter is the monitors are geographically separated from radicals. we can provide arms to the radicals. >> the moderates? >> arms to the moderates, absolutely, strengthen their hand considerably. we can't guarantee an outcome post assad. >> what's the end game, let's say you do what you said, what's the end game here? what's the strategic interest of the u.s.? >> the strategic interest of the u.s. is a stable regime in syri

is it to see assad step down immediately? it to engage in a prolonged transition that allows the alawites to still have a role in power? there are extraordinary challenges in getting that diplomatic effort and military strike may make it harder. >> when we look at the role in this of china and of russia, two countries that would veto the security council and yet at the same time they have to be brought on board in some shape or some form of -- they have to be neutralized if you like in terms of preventing something from happening. so what do they want out of this process? >> well, i think there are a couple of bigger issues for both countries, and one of them is that they don't want to set a precedent as happened in libya. where the international community can decide that a leader is unpopular and therefore that justifies the world community to engage in military action to oust them. they're worried about that kind of operation ending up affecting their own sovereignty, playing out at home, and secondly, they're very concerne

-- from assad's regime,t they weren't a slam dunk. what does that mean? >> that is a throwback to do thousand two, when intelligence supposedly conclusively proved iraq had weapons of mass destruction under saddam hussein. as we know, that was later proven to be false. that expression came about referring to false and incorrect intelligence information. from the british prime minister david cameron, he is saying there is not a 100% conclusive intelligence that assad did use chemical weapons. this expression really does refer to the supposes conclusive proof that assad had chemical weapons. a number of questions still have to be answered. not only whether or not assad carried out the chemical attack, but also who owns the chemical weapons at the moment inside syria. >> you are joining us from lebanon, a country that has been caught up in the growing syrian crisis. what are you hearing from people in beirut about their country's role and the conflict just next- door? >> i spent several hours this afternoon in the palestinian camp here i

jon: the president said more than a year ago assad has to go. isn't that supposed to be the goal ultimately of any strike? >> he is saying morally and politically he has to go. he did not say we will have him leave his palace. that's a big difference. the fact his administration did not act in 12 and 11 when we were in iraq and when al qaeda was not penetrating the opposition. we missed 2011. we had elections in 2012. we're two years 1/2 after. so definitely the price of having assad leave is going to be much higher than before. jon: the president is facing this one almost alone. i mean even our steadfast allies, the british, have said they are not going to get involved in any kind of military campaign against syria. what does that say? >> that is really a problem for the administration, not having at least the british, maybe the french will be with us. again this is going to be a limited strike. it is not going to change definitely the balance of power inside syria. what is important now is to look at the big design. not just about those chemic

what is the thinking of president assad? what will he do. >> thank you. i want to bring in wolf blitzer out of washington to talk more about the analysis and, wolf, i have to ask you here because you have a timetable. we talked about it earlier in the week, the president is scheduled to go to st. petersburg, russia, for the g20 conference on tuesday and we have been watching the british parliament, the debate taking place, and they have a couple of votes processed to go through before they sign off on whether or not there will be a military strike. what is the president, what is his timetable here? is it even possible that could be completely moved and at a later date after the g20 summit? >> he could do it whenever he wants obviously. he could do it without the british on board. he could do it before the g20 summit in st. petersburg, russia, and wait until he gets back at the end and very end of next week, and it is very interesting, suzanne, the british prime minister david cameron in parliament today he said before britain were to go ahead with any mil

the assad fighters have been making advances on the ground. what is keeping these advances often is the fact that they they are the ballistics missiles capabilities. once these capabilities are taken county attorney the situation will get better on the ground for them. you bring coats from one of the fighters, i can bring you ten coats that are supportive of any measure that they would take against assad and his killing machine. no one said this is a simple problem to solve. we've been screaming our lungs out for at least two years that we have problems of legitimacy. we have problems of rising extremism. we have problems with many problems that we need the international community to empow us to deal with and resolve. i hope at the time that this particular moment in time that it's not too late that we can start basically as the international community dealing with bashar al-assad as the criminal that he is, send serious messages that what he is doing is not tolerated and empower and invest in the mainstream, the overwhelmingly basically reaso

what will the response be from assad and from his allies?> well, i do favor attacking those refineries because they are the cash cow that pays for this russian weapons that he's using against his own people. let's not mistake about it. that $15 million a month is important to the survivability of the assad regime. so that's why i'm in favor of this. the aftermath, of course, remains to be seen. i don't believe that in the end assad is foolish enough to attack israel in retaliation or hezbollah do the same because the israelis will basically kiss his entire air force good-bye and ruin his air defenses. the israelis are not going to play any games here. they're not going to wait for authorizations or diplomatic niceties. if he attacks turkey, he then prompts the british, who were on the sidelines, to be able to respond under article five of our nato treaty. believe me, prime minister cameron will not have to go to the british parliament if turkey's attacked by syria. so what else are assad's options? call in the russians to attack u.s. naval f

if it is just to punish assad, i do not think it is going to work.he does not need chemical weapons. why he used them is a mystery. he can accomplish his goals without them. >> patricia, you say you are not for an intervention until we have the evidence. you are suggesting al qaeda is responsible. what about people saying the rebels allied, should there be an equal element to punish those people? >> of course. we have to punish -- i do not like the name punishment. punishment is like children. when we are at war it is not a punishment when so many people are dying. we do not know what is going on after bashar al-assad. we have no exit strategy. we have nothing. when i say al qaeda, i am speaking about an islamist group linked to al qaeda who could fill the vacuum after assad could be toppled. >> and talking about i question and what comes next and what could result, you wanted to add something. >> for the time being, there was a geneva convention, in october. so now if we are going to strike, striking damascus now, what is going on with geneva? are w

i would suggest that assad, and i have no access to classified cables, but assad has probably already disbursed his aircraft. they might even be in iran right now. >> it does look like the window for any kind of action is now. >> it's imminent. it's imminent. even if we don't support the president, even if we don't like the way he did it, even if we have all kinds of ideas about his conduct the last 2 1/2 years, i think it's very interesting when you take a look at the president and his chief lieutenant in this war, in this effort, and that's secretary kerry. secretary kerry has been very moving recently. he's spoken of the morality of this issue in a very gripping terms. but there's something very interesting, this is penance for him. because john kerry, in 2009 and 2010, was the pointman for the administration's courtship of bashar assad. the administration, the obama administration came in and said, bashar is a reformer. he likes the music of phil collins. he lived in england. and the on-- so we courted bash for two years. and when the rebellion broke out in march of 20 11, we took

how can assad take us seriously?opped by the pentagon on the way here this morning and chatted with old friends. there is not a single u.s. military officer i spoke to in the last two days that thinks this is a good idea. there is apparently none of them with the guts to stand up and say so publicly. i'm not talking about lieutenant colonel or lance corporate. i'm talk about people with four stars on the shoulders. ought to be standing up to tell the president in the white house situation room today this is not a good idea. here is why. hagel should back them up. >> uma: you think this is having credibility after being boxed in a corner? >> he put himself in corner, went off script and created the problem for himself. having done that a year ago. at the least he should have started to line up, okay. if he does it again, what are we going to do? he didn't do that. he played golf and cards. this is a totally failed foreign policy. of the president of the united states that is going to increase the jeopardy to the unite

the way assad will construe it. people to live up to their claims indeed assad was responsible. and remember, here, the most important element that will prove whether or not the president can get this vote is not that the chemical weapon attack occurred. but the highly secret intelligence that is still class fade, even though it leaked out. that assad's commanders were held, were found to be from the intelligence that we gathered, have ordered the attack. is that going to be sufficient to convince everyone had a already is reluctant to support this. and that this information is secret. and how far will this secret information, michael may know much more about this than me. >> i want to you weigh in here. >> it is undoubtedly true that iran, assad, will look at this as domestic weakness from the president. the one thing we know from the region, we have to be in it and have congressional support in the long game. the problems in syria, throughout the region, will not be solved with one set of tomahawk strikes. that's

do you think there was a possibility that a rogue agent of assads may have done this without assad's approval? >> there is always some doubt. we've spoken to rebel groups and i've spent a lot of time with the rebels. if some of these extremist groups had chemical weapons, i have no doubt they would use them. some of the groups that are operating in syria right now could, by almost any standard, be considered terrorist groups. but terrorists j s don't genera attack themselves. it's unclear if they would have the delivery systems to launch a sophisticated kind of chemical attack on a large area. so the rebel movements they say they certainly didn't do it, but i can't vouch for every group that is operating in the country right now. but the longer this goes on, no matter how good the case is, the more momentum is slowed down. you mentioned the uk labor party. demanding extra votes. the red cross just said it thinks escalatation would further worsen the humanitarian crisis in the country which is enormous. egypt doesn't support it. the arab league doesn't support military action. even if

you've met with bashar al assad.ow is he likely to react to what is clearly going to be a limited u.s. military strike? >> well, he's thinking about two things right now. first, in the immediate sense, is getting things out of the way where they think the u.s. is going to strike. secondly, how do we respond? i don't think he'll do so in a meaningful fashion. there's enough evidence accumulated over the last five, six years when there were numerous israeli strikes, when there were u.s. military incursions across the border from iraq. the syrian regime did not react in any sort of dramatic fashion at all. or doing anything, quite frankly. and so he's thinking right now, how do i turn this into our advantage? how do i fit the attack into the narrative they've uttered from the very beginning, that the uprising was the result of foreign conspiracies perpetrated by their foreign enemies. how can i seem to be the victim of the american/israeli project that brought him such street credibility in the past? >> so basically you

denials from the syrian regime the white house said that it is undeniable that president bashar al assad is behind the attacks setting the stage for an international brawl. now president hassan rouhani of iran has said that he will press forward with efforts to ward off military action by western nations against syrian president bashar al assad were ronnie was quoted as saying military action will bring great costs for the regime for the region it is necessary to apply all efforts to prevent it now according to state t.v. reports president rouhani said both iran and russia would work in cooperation to prevent any military action against syria and meanwhile the united states and its allies continue to prepare for a potential strike though president obama told p.b.s. yesterday that he did not want a prolonged military intervention if we are saying. in a clear. and decisive but. very limited way we send a shot across the bow saying stop doing this that can have a positive impact on our national security over the long term and may have a positive impact in the sense that chemical weapons are

what will bashar al-assad do?tion against his own people and release chemical weapons. what will he visit? who horror will he visit on the syrian people as a result? >> appreciate it. general marks, thank you-all. >>> coming up, calms for a montgomery judge to resign after he sentenced a teacher to 40 days for raping his 14-year-old student. what the judge said about the victim that got so many people angry and what he's saying now. >>> former nfl player aaron hernandez at a hearing for his murder case. what is next for him coming up. renewal notice. by about $110 a month. roll the dice. care act was passed, company to go down by about $60 a month. little guy rebecca: the law works. >>> justice today for the teen that killed the toddler in a crime that shocked the nation. details ahead. >>> welcome back. in "crime and punishment" tonight, anger, protest and calls for a judge to resign. how did a teacher get sentenced to just 30 days in jail after he admitted to repeatedly raping a student? he was 49 years old at t

bashar assad has his back to the wall as nick pointed out.to tie one hand behind his back and say i can't use chemical weapons because barack obama says it's immoral. he's going to do whatever it takes. the other thing is this week he goes to the g-20. he'll be with the 20 most powerful leaders in the world and he's got to make the case to them that they are responsible. this is one of the reasons he decided he wanted a time out. >> i have a question for you. i'm sure you'll talk about this and elevate it for me. he talked about what kind of signal do we send to the rest of the world. i was researching this, there are atrocities that happen all over the world. there's congo, north korea where people die in mass numbers all the time. there is no urgency about it. what's the urgency here? >> it's the luck of the draw. we have to be honest about this. there's some conflicts that arouse our interest. in the '90s, bosnia was one of the great conflicts of the time. >> what do you mean the luck of the draw? >> the location. syria is on the mediterra

assad is estimated to have 100 tons of the material. such a strike could unleech the chemicals and lead to a lot of death and destruction, and those chemicals are basically kept in underground sites. any plans to secure assad's chemical weapons would require special operations and boots on the ground. that's not on the table right now. the u.s. is planning a limit strike. it has four navy destroyers in position and at least one nuclear-powered submarine. the brits have another submarine in the met -- mediterranean. >> trace: what about the timing? when is this likely to happen? >> it's not likely to happen before thursday. if you look at the timing, defense secretary chuck hagel spoke to his birch and french counterparts, but there's also a very important meeting scheduled in brussels at nato headquarters tomorrow, and no strike will happen before that time. >> let's get the facts. let get the intelligence. and then a decision will be made on whether action should be taken, if action should be taken, what action, or no action. >> if --

assad is hiding all his assets it will soon be over.be humiliated in having a line crossed and doing nothing. >> steve, the administration has been accused of telegraphing tactical maneuvers here in advance. reuters quoted a military source today quote he does this all the time. all he, assad, has to do is watch the news what know what our tactics are. sure enough after that was reported the hill newspaper blog said today that assad is moving prisoners to military sites across the country that might potentially be targeted. human shields we are tag talking about. >> shiewrks human shields. major equipment has been moved out of military installations and people on the ground reporting this now for a couple of days. nobody should be surprised when we tell them what we're likely to hit and certainly what we're not going to hit that the assad regime responds exactly as they have responded. it's just one of several ways that suggest that this isn't serious. the way we are going about what we are likely to do is much less about bashar assad.

assad is a murderer, a thug. gu there are a lot of murderers and thugs leading countries in that part of the world. the reality is countries, if they can't go through a civil political reconciliation, they end up in civil war. that's been the case in syria. it's the case today, and it will be unless and until the syrians stand up and take responsibility for their future. >> you are saying hands down you will not support any military income syria? >> absolutely not. americans are sick and tired of war. the fact of the matter is we have been involved in wars the past decade in both the middle east and south asia and those places are no better. iraq is as violent as it was when we went in there and when we left, and it's gotten no better. and the united states can't do anything about that. the iraqs, themselves, shiia, sunnis and kurds have to develop a compact for reconciliation. afghanistan was and is the most corrupt and one of the poorest countries on the face of the earth after 10 years of american treasury and

assad has had days to prepare and to listen to u.s.and statements and leaks from the administration about what to expect. the pentagon has watched assad muff this scud missiles and other military launchers out of the bases. the bases have been emptied out, meaning targets have to be receipt. a senior u.s. defense official telling fox it would have been better to strike syria a few daysing a before the regime had time to prefer and move military hardware out of the sprayses. >> trace: what do we know about the possible plans for any military strike? >> much too much as far as the administration is concerned. in fact they are very upset at reports that appeared on the front page of "the new york times" today about possible targets. but, frankly, others had reported on those targets. right now we know there are five u.s. navy destroyers in the eastern met at the raran off the coast of syria. we know this will most likely be limited to a naval expert air force using weapons, each destroyer has tomahawk missiles on board. there are none of

there maybe another audience for this, and that may be syria and assad. the things that the president is saying -- he's trying to shape how syria is going to interpret this attack. this gets to the issue of objectives. russia fears we will take out a bunch of military assets and weaken assad. that's a big objective requiring a lot of targets and a lot of work for a long time. i don't think that's what we're going to do. the president is talking about -- >> what would the result of that be? >> that's definitely pushing things towards chaos, right? that would inflame the situation. if you push assad against the wall where the loser dies, then all sorts of extreme behavior become possible. if he's extreme now, wait until he thinks he's really in danger. back to the other things that could happen, i think in terms of objectives it is -- if it's going to be limited, which is what the president repeatedly said, it's one of two things. either we send a deterrent message to assad. you use this we're whacking you. don't do it again, or we will whack you harder. do

well of course iran is a close ally of the syrian president bashar assad and what we're hearing from iran is that it will apply pressure to prevent any kind of military action happening inside their country we're hearing from mehdi tired who is a confident of the supreme leader ali khamenei and he says that syria is iran's thirty fifth province and that if we lose syria we lose tehran the concern from the iranian side is that any kind of western military action inside syria will merely open the floodgates and that iran could ultimately be next what iran can do in retaliation to this is it can first we close the ports of hormuz that sees about twenty percent of the world's petroleum of course the international community is not going to want to see something like that happen it can also activate hizbollah and the radio revolutionary guards corps that have networks around the world and that they could carry out potentially terror attacks against those countries that are supporting military action this is not going to be something that the west once and of course this is something that t

if we don't take down assad, it's a victory for him.yria is a war for iran, something the administration will not admit and if we take out assad, we're empowering al-qaeda, the muslim brotherhood. >> double, jonathan, that the assad regime used chemical weapons? >> i do not. it's very hard to tell what's going on. to go inside the actual area that was shelled. >> just to be clear, you do not believe the assad regime used chemical weapons. what do you think happened? >> it could be very likely more islamists portions of the rebellion is using these. >> a false operation designed to bring the united states in the battle against assad? >> exactly. because on a strategic and tactical level, i do not understand why the assad regime would use chemical weapons, especially now considering they're winning this conflict. they've taken back a lot of the strategic parts of the nation. there's no need to use these banned weapons. they can win by using conventional weapons. >> you would think that after the last ten year, all of us would have respect

the assad recream used chemical weapons in the attacks.ussia sent two warships to the mediterranean. craig, what is the latest on russia and china's reaction to possible military strikes? >> we are having trouble getting our live shot out of hong kong. we'll return to craig if we can get that back. >>> the syrian government is preparing for a possible military strike. president assad said his country, quote, will defend itself against any aggression. assad's senior military commanders are reportedly staying away from buildings that are likely targeted in a strike. with more on the potential consequences of the military strike we're going out to thomas refer, a middle east expert at the university of san diego and associate fellow at the transnational institute. thank you for joining us. your specialty is studying large scale, long-term social change in world systems analysis which is appropriate for what we're talking about here. let's talk about the diplomatic situation. the u.k. parliament has voted down any military involvement. where d

assad. he's a ally of iran.e mischief. >> for a long time he felt impefshus to america. >> yes. the president has to make a tough decision. >> what about the rest of the world saying we're not sure we're going wait for the un? you've been through that before. >> a president has to make a tough call, brian. you're trying to rope me into the issues of the day. i refuse to be roped in. >> i understand. but i'm not roping in. i need your unique perspective at the leadership level its just putting on mill near harm's way is a tough decision a president will make. >> greta: thank you for being with us tonight. a live edition of hannity is next. go to gretawire.com. gretawire com. good night. >>> a special >>> also, tonight victoria johnson how she went from saturday night live to the tea party. when did actors become raging socialists.

we need something bigger, that will weaken the assad regime. of course, i think many of the rank and file syrian rebels i have spoken to were very enthusiastic, probably for the first time in more than a year about the u.s. -- the statements that were coming out of washington, usually these rebels were criticizing the obama administration for what they claimed was neglecting the syrian conflict. they were very excited that perhaps their number one enemy, bashar al-assad, would get hit by the u.s. military. of course, there's great disappointment being expressed by syrian opposition members, and as far as the turk irk government, they've been much more careful in their public statements. one of them actually interpreting this as a firm expression of u.s. determination to act, but of course, with consultation within the u.s. congressional system, as well. john? >> ben, one of the constant concerns over the last week, actually the last two years, has been the idea of a wider war in the region. syria with the allies in iran, with the allies in hezb

to deter assad from using these weapons again. to punish him for breaking that international norm and using chemical weapons against his own people. and to degrade his ability to do this again. as you mentioned, the targets that they'll be looking at will be anything that assad holds dear. what does it mean it deter someone? it mean to hold at risk something that assad values. he values his military command and control modes, his communication nodes, his military air fields. will probably crater runways so planes can't take off. we'll try to hit planes on the tarmac. we'll take out military positions, firing positions that richard engle referred to that are on the outskirts of damascus. anything that assad could use to hit people -- to hit his own people. it's not necessarily the chemical sites themselves. >> let's take a look at the assets. let's look at the map because we've been talking about where are warships are. we know we've got the warships, the submarines, in the mediterranean. we also have two carrier groups in the regi

>> assad's military is still very capable. the syrian army has a very short track record in terms of military successes. they have not been successful for years in terms of their application of force in the region. clearly since the insurgency has been in place, they've achieved a good deal of success. we thought assad was losing momentum and thought he was a dead man walking. he has since gained some incredible strength. so assad has capabilities and a lot of that is very kinetic. he also has hezbollah on his side, which is part of his force not fully integrated but part of the fighting force on the ground right now. so it's a capable military. it's not been completely degraded. he still has a navy and air force. so he has conventional forces and has not demonstrated any hesitation to use it. >> general, in terms of chemical weapons, is it true you can't strike the sites because that could detonate the weapons themselves? >> you can strike the sites and destroy them and minimize the down wind hazard that would ensue. so there

he got access because he worked for a charity that he and assad's wife, osma assad ran.y say bashar al assad has badly miscalculated. he got advice from people who told him that president obama would not enforce his red line against chemical weapons use and a huge part of this mi miscalculation is driven by assad. he's partly delusional. they believe they're not doing anything wrong, that it's outside forces, namely the u.s. and israel setting them up. i spoke with andrew tabor. he's an analyst who's a handful of westerners who got access. here's what he had to say about bashar al assad's personality. >> bashar al assad, unlike his father, is quite erratic. he's quite moody. he goes from one side to the other, bouts of rationality and irrationality. that confounded all of our attempts to deal with bashar over the years. >> he couldn't say whether he thinks assad is bipolar or not. even those close to him find it difficult to read him. his calculations in the current crisis may be even tougher to predict. you have an erratic personality who's now under a great deal of str

they're a factor to the degree they'll try and arm assad.ut nobody can see the russians actually sending the russian air force to try and support assad and his air force. if you don't go to the u.n., the russians are not a significant factor. they'll complain. they will, you know -- there will be strong statements from vladimir putin, as we've come to expect, but i can't imagine they'd intervene in favor of assad. >> all right. thank you very much. it's always a pleasure to have your insight. again, i want to just quickly show the live picture from the east room of the white house, where we are awaiting the ceremony. staff sergeant ty carter will be awarded the medal of honor, this nation's highest honor for a military service person for his heroic actions in afghanistan. we'll bring you that ceremony as soon as it happens. we're also following a few other stories. this is being called a danger zone for kids in chicago. extra security right now on the streets of that major city as students return to class. why this extra security, the need f