. >> issue one, stop red lining us. >> first of all, i didn't set a red line. the world set a red line. the world set a red line when government's representing 98% of the world's population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty forbidding their use even when countries are engaged in war. congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. >> president obama set a precedent this week by being the first sitting american president to visit sweden. during a joint news conference with the swedish prime minister mr. obama did his best to internationalize the red line. prime minister rhinefeld said sweden could only support action against syria if it were authorized by the united nations. the u.n. sent a team of inspectors to syria to verify the use of the nerve gas sarin. eight years ago in 2005, also, the u.n. security council authorized sanctions against syria. resolution 1636 punished syria for a terrorist attack in lebanon that killed a then former prime minister of lebanon, but chemical weapons being so horrific may have struck a n

the world set a red line. the world set a red line when government's representing 98% of the world's population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty forbidding their use even when countries are engaged in war. congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. >> president obama set a precedent this week by being the first sitting american president to

a red line. the world set a red line. the world set a red line when governments representing 98% of the world's population said the u.s. of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty preventing their use even when engaged in war. congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. congress set a red line when it indicated that in a piece of legislation titled the syria accountability act that some of the horrendous things that are happening on the ground there need be answered for. when i said in a press conference about what's happening in syria would be altered by the use of chemical weapons which the overwhelming consensus of humanity says is wrong, that wasn't something i just made up. i didn't pluck it out of thin air. there's a reason for it. when those videos broke and you saw images of over 400 children subjected to gas everybody expressed outrage. how can this happen in this modern world? well, it happened because a government chose to deploy these deadly weapons on civilian po

when he drew a red line a year ago he drew the red line. talking about congress or the world, he drew that red line. >> i understand what you're saying and i understand what he's saying. it was inartfully done, yes. >> remember when he drew that red line, mitt romney was rising in the polls. he was dipping on foreign policy. he felt he needed to flex his muscles and do so. also at the time. nit tanya hue was drawing rid lines. i'm good at words not deeds, i want my own red line. i will use a red line. they used chemical weapons before a couple weeks ago and he did nothing on this. this is a situation of his own making. >> we don't know he used chemical weapons before? >> yes, we do. >> where is the evidence of it? >> it's all over the newspaper. the president acknowledged it. >> there was never any conclusive evidence not that there is now. >> how do you get over 100,000 dead people. it didn't just happen a couple weeks ago. this has been happening for a while. by the way, it isn't just the assad regime. it is al qaeda. we know for a fact a

>> first of all i didn't set a red line, the world set a red line.ization that your body needs. this labor day, don't invest in a mattress until you visit a sleep number store. once you experience it, there's no going back. oh, yeah! during the final days of our biggest sale of the year, every bed is on sale. queen mattresses now start at just $599. plus, 24-month financing on all beds. sale ends sunday. only at a sleep number store. sleep number. comfort individualized. ( bell rings ) they remwish i saw mine of my granmore often, but they live so far away. i've been thinking about moving in with my daughter and her family. it's been pretty tough since jack passed away. it's a good thing you had life insurance through the colonial penn program. you're right. it was affordable, and we were guaranteed acceptance. guaranteed acceptance? it means you can't be turned down because of your health. you don't have to take a physical or answer any health questions. they don't care about your aches and pains. well, how do you know? did you speak to alex trebek?

the world set a red line. the world set a red line when governments representing 98% of the world's population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty preventing their use, even when countries are engaged in war. congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. >> so the president says he didn't set a red line, that raised a lot of eyebrows because keeping them honest that sounds like exactly what he did when you listen to what he said in august of 2012. >> we have been very clear to the assad regime and also to other players on the ground that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. that would change my calculous and equation. >> democrats and republicans have said the president boxed himself in with that statement last year and many wondered if today hearing president obama saying it for the first time, during the debate on the capitol hill eric cantor said any president would draw that red line and john kerry tri

first of all, i didn't set a red line. the world set a red line. the world set a red line when governments representing 98% of the world's population said the use of chemical weapons are aboard and passed a treaty forbidding their use, even when countries are engaged in war. congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. congress set a red line when it indicated that in a piece of legislation entitled the syria accountability act some of the horrendous things happening on the ground there need to be answered for. so, when i said in a press conference that my calculus about what's happening in syria would be altered by the use of chemical weapons which the overwhelming consensus of humanity says is wrong, that wasn't something i just kind of made up. i didn't pluck it out of thin air. there's a reason for it. that's point number one. point number two. my credibility is not on the line. the international community's credibility is on the line and america and congress' credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that th

i didn't set a red line, the world set a red line. congress set a red line. >> all right. the first one of 2012. the second one was today in stockholm. plus this evening an upbeat fed outlook points to a slowdown in bond purchases at the september 17th and 18th meeting, but that's likely to be right smack in the middle of the syrian bombing, and more than likely the fed will have to wait. >>> and will a little shut eye help make you healthy, wealthy or wise? i do it. we'll explore the science behind power naps and the benefits that may surprise you. all those stories and more coming up on "the kudlow report" beginning right now. >>> first up tonight, from europe today president obama kept lobbying congress to green light u.s. military intervention in syria. the new muscular plan to do that was approved by a key senate committee. nbc steve handelsman joins us now from washington with all the details. good evening, steve. >> reporter: larry, compared to business as usual on capitol hill, this is different. it's bipartisan. really bipartisan. house and senate, democrats and r

it's international community's red line. lity on the world stage right now. what he's trying to do there clearly is spread the responsibility and make it clear to the congress as they weigh this very important decision in the days ahead that in his words, what assad did, what his regime is accused of doing violates international norms. on the putin front, you mentioned back in june, we've seen those pictures. putin looking down at his shoes basically. the body language suggesting that relations were pretty frosty. look, there is a big reason for that on syria, which is that russia had a long relationship with syria, selling arms and the like. the president at his news conference yesterday tried to say look, despite that reset in relations, he's disappointed there hasn't been more progress issues but hopeful they can make progress with putin in the days ahead. although some republicans are saying this makes him look weak on the world stage. >> there is no doubt that as i indicated a while back, we've kind of hit a wall in term

. >> i didn't set a red line. the world set a red line. the world set a red line when governments representing 98% of the word's population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty forbidding their use, even when countries are engaged in war. congress set a red line when it

a red line. point number two, my credibility is not on the line. the international community's credibility is on the line and america and congress' credibility is on the line. >> reporter: without mentioning iran, the president warns failing to act against syria would encourage others to develop forbidden weapons. he said the u.s. would continue to build international support for action against syria's leaders, but added sometimes we must go it alone. while he wouldn't say if he would go ahead with an attack if congress refused to authorize it, he said he didn't ask for lawmakers' approval as a symbolic gesture. >> i did not take this to congress because it is an empty exercise. it is important to have congress' support. >> reporter: memories of colin powell, assuring the u.n. there were weapons of mass destruction in iraq in 2003. mr. putin says intelligence from syria is no more convincing this time. >>translator: there are horrible pictures, the question is who did it and what they did and who

this is about the world's red line. it's about humanity's red line. a line that anyone with a conscience should draw and a line that was drawn nearly 100 years ago in 1925 when the chemical weapons agreement was agreed upon. >> he and defense secretary chuck hagel and martin dempsey faced tough questions today. they passed a resolution authorizing military action. jim has more. >> reporter: today, the syrian debate moved to the less friendly house foreign affairs committee. some saying the administration wants to do too much, others too lit. >> our enemies don't know what our foreign policy is. our friends don't know what it is. i'm not so sure americans know what our foreign policy is in the middle east. >> secretary kerry was forced to confront the ghosts of the administration's last troubled middle eastern intervention in libya. >> it involved the u.s. and syria and was reluctant to use the same resources to rescue the brave americans that fought for their lives in benghazi. >> we are talking people being killed by gas and you want to talk about be

the red line was crossed in august. here we are in september. , and he hasesponse handcuffed himself to a limited, targeted, short response, no boots on the ground strike. we do not know what possible damage you can do to syria with such a limited strike. >> let's say congress approves this and he sends the cruise usesles in and then assad chemical weapons again. what then? general dempsey testified before the house and senate. it is not just a matter of sending in missiles. they believe they can degrade assad's capacity to deliver chemical weapons because they would destroy some of the infrastructure needed to do that. it is not just getting up the weapons themselves, but getting at the ability to deliver. knocking out aircraft, air , the, the runways airstrips. that is what they believe they can do. the timetable is not urgent. they can do this at any time. we mentioned odd couples, how about penpals? pope francis wrote to resident through 10. -- to putin. iiyou will recall, john paul , tose the u.s. war in iraq the p

this is about the world's red line, humanity's red line. a line that was drawn nearly 235 years when the chemical weapons con gregs was agreed on. this debate is also about congress's red line. you agreed to the chemical weapons convention. the congress passed the accountability act. that act says syria's weapons threaten the security of the middle east and the national security of the united states. i think repeatedly members of congress have spoken out about the grave consequences of assad were to use chemocam weapons. they are speaker boehner and the united states has a responsibility to respond. as we debate, the world is watching and wondering. not whether assad's regime did this. the world is wondering whether the united states of america will concept through silent. sto stand asaid while this kind of brutality is allowed to happen without consequences. in the nearly 100 years since this commitment was made, only two tyrants have dared to cross the world's brightest line. bashar al-assad has now become the third. in ift everyone knows

congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. my credibility is not on the line, the international community's credibility is on the line and america and congress' credibility is on the line. >> what did president obama actually say in 2012? >> a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons being moved around or utilized. that would change my calculus, change my equation. >> i like to call that a communication snafu. dana, what do you think? >> they could say that, but what would have been better instead of being defensive, he could have said yes, i said a red line because it is the world's red line, add to it instead of subtract. he should say yes, i'm leading, that's why we have the red line and we are moving forward, rather than it is a constant everybody is so mean to me. his subordinates for the past year have all been reminding reporters, reminding us that he is the president of the united states, commander in chief, and he is the one that issued the red line. i believe that's u.s. policy anyway. i do

i didn't set a red line, the world set a red line? the president is on his way to the g 20 summit. >> my credibility is not on the line, the international community's credibility is on the line. >> russia has been complaining. >> putin still blocking any kind of action. >> is he playing a game, was he serious? >> i was able to get a sense of his soul. >> the memory of iraq resulted in a narrower authorization of force. >> the senate foreign relations committee will vote on a resolution. >> i don't see a clear-cut, compelling american interest. >> this will come down to the house gop. >> hearing testimony from john kerry and chuck hagel. >> the administration's policy doesn't build confidence. >> this is beyond republican and democrat. >> i have yet to hear concrete things of what the world is doing. >> i do, however, have serious concerns. >> i have many questions. >> what are our interests there? >> first of all, the world set a red line, i did not set a red line. >> president obama says he retains the right to use force. >> we'll tal

congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. my credibility is not on the line, the international community's credibility is on the line and ameri congress' credibility is on the line. >> what did president obama actually say in 2012? >> a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons being moved around or utilized. that would change my calculus, change my equation. >> i like to call that a communication snafu. dana, what do you think? >> they could say that, but what would have been better instead of being defensive, he could have said yes, i said a red line because it is the world's red line, add to it instead of subtract. he should say yes, i'm leading, that's why we have the red line and we are moving forward, rather than it is a constant everybody is so mean to me. his subordinates for the past year have all been reminding reporters, reminding us that he is the president of the united states, commander in chief, and he is the one that issued the red line. i believe that's u.s. policy anyway. i don't th

. >> i didn't set a red line. the world set a red line. >> this is about the world's red line. it's about humanity's red line. >> this is an imperfect situation. >> bashar al assad put us in this position when he decided to gas his own people. >> secretary kerry, a lot of people have come up to me and said, why does america need to be the world's policeman? >> well, the united states of america is not being the world's policeman. our security interests are directly threatened with respect to assad's use of these chem balance cal weapons. >> my credibility is not on the line. the international community's credibility is on the line and america and congress' credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these international norms are important. >> what are the chances of escalation are different scenarios accounted for if our credibility is on the line now as is our what about if assad retaliates. >> my concern now is we want to do something specifically now to punish mr. bad guy assad. we're not going to shoot him. we're just going to shoot a shell ove

there is a red line. some were surprised when he drew at that clearly, but he does want the support of the world. he had a tough time getting it. he is trying to say look, i'm not alone in this. you are out there with me. you're all signatories to this treaty against chemical weapons, right? >> i wanted to ask you, and i are return to the red line issue in a moment, but he wasn't deeper. he moengsed some things that may harken the global players. he said you may not be in imminent danger, and bar don my paraphrasing here, but our security is affected in a profound way, our humanity is affected in a profound way. the greater point that he was trying to get to there being it may not be able what is going to happen to us personally here, tomorrow, but security is a long picture. >> and if you're making the case, eventually, if he were to lose this vote, for example, he has to make the case that this is in the in additional interest and the president can act when the national interest and the national securit

and said if you cross the line -- >> that's your red line, the world's red line, not his red line. be fair here. >> roll the tape. we know that's not true. nobody took out seriously. that's the problem. we need a leader, a president, a commander in chief that's respected around the world. we don't have it today. >> beside it is statements on red lines and regime change which was flopping and flailing, the other thing that's funny is when kerry made the statement and said, if they give us weapons within a week we'll go along with that, but they're not going to do it. immediately the white house ran out in public and said, oh, no, no, he was speakinghetorically rhetorically. it was a goof, off script. then kerry said, i designed it from the beginning because vladimir putin jumped on it. it's the keystone cops here. >> they didn't have a plan and they are grasping at straws. the time to get vladimir putin on board was when he drew the red line in the sand. h knew he didn't have the support of the american people. he thought he would get congress's support. found out oh he didn't have

>> first of all, the world set a red line, i did not set a red line. >> president obama says he retains the right to use force. >> we'll talk about red line, at this critical moment for u.s. foreign policy. >>> the resolution authorizing military action in syria was approved by the senate foreign relations committee today by a vote of 10-7, with one senator voting present. the resolution would limit any military strikes to 60 days with the possibility of a 30-day extension. i would expressly ban the use of ground troops. the resolution also includes wording offered by john mccain that would explicitly change the policy as to making the conditions for a policy. john mccain was joined by two others, tennessee's bob corker, two democrats voted against it, chris murphy and tom udall, the newest member markey voted present, later explaining he needed more time to view all the classified materials before i make the decision on something as important as authorizing the use of military force. in yesterday's hearing, senator markey wondered why we are not waiting for the results of the u.n.'s we

, this is the international red line.rst said it. >> it's both. it is certainly president obama stated the red line. but that his statement was based on an international red line. it's a red line that was first drawn with the 1925 geneva convention and later redrawn again in the chemical weapons convention. and frankly, congress helped to draw that red line by ratifying that treaty when the u.s. signed it. so, there is a very clear red line that multiple parties have reinforced over time and now it's very important, i think, to take action to reinforce that red line. >> vladimir putin in the last 24 hours has called john kerry a liar for this comment where he was explaining to congress, to a house committee, the balance between the al qaeda forces, and the moderate groups in the rebel leadership. let's watch. >> i just don't agree that a majority are al qaeda and the bad guys. that's not true. there are about 70,000 to 100,000 oppositionists, about somewhere maybe 15% to 25% might be in one group or another who are what w

the world set a red line. the world set a red line when governments representing 8% of the world's population said the -- f chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty for their use even when countries are engaged in war. congress set a red line when it ratifyed that treaty. gwen: he doesn't like this question either but the credibility issue, who set the red line, whether congress is capable of fulfilling its promises. is that conversation happening at capitol hill as well? >> i think so. one of the things we heard from lawmakers this week in the hearings is that there's a lot of doubt about -- because there's a perception of lack of support in the international community. if there was more of an international response it would be easier to make the case to congress. there'sen the arlington -- an argument that the immediate united states national security interests are threaten end at this point. that is not only a hard sell for lawmakers to their con instead of went but they don't necessarily believe

it's a red line that the international community set, it's a red line that congress set, and also a redat the president set. >> is regime change still part of the president's strategy? >> so here's what people need to understand. we believe that assad has lost his legitimacy, and in perpetrating the terrible violence he's perpetrated on his people, he needs to go. for the last time now, we've had a strategy in place to facilitate a transition to move assad out through a political transition. we believe that's the only sustainable way to do it. so to do that, we've been putting pressure on the regime, isolating it, building up the opposition, and we've been pursuing a diplomatic track with principles of what a transition would look like. we are committed to that. in that context, assad needs to go and there needs to be a transition. separate from that, but within the context of what's going on, we've had this terrible use of chemically weapons, on the august 21st, killing well over 1,000 people, including hundreds of children. this is something that goes beyond even syria and beyond the

and draw a red line, that truly is a red line? >> well, let me say, with respect to those other incidents, this is an intelligence community assessment -- >> but there is not new intelligence. >> no, no, i know this, congressman. i know this because -- >> i've read your reports. >> i was arguing this, talking about it last year, too. the problem is was again with many of those, the quality of evidence, the level of the event, and people were uncomfortable with the nothing that that in fact it called for action, but didn't necessarily rise to the level of what the president has decided. >> what is that level? 1,000 deaths? >> it's not based on deaths. it's based on, i think an exhaustive -- >> either use requires action or doesn't? >> beg your pardon? >> either use -- >> what was the day that he drew the red line publicly? i think some of those events were prior to that, so i think there's been a steady, going back all the way to august of last year. >> and i think there was a steady effort by the administration and others to try t

watch. >> i didn't set a red line. the world set a red line. we have been very clear to the assad regime but also to other players on the ground that a red line for us is, we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. that would change my calculus. that would change my equation. bill: august 2012 the second there. why did he say what he said yesterday? >> i think for the same reason on saturday that he passed it on to congress. he seems to flinch when he is under pressure. he backs away and, you know, somebody should remind the president that he is president of the united states, not the president of the world. this international community he talks about, somehow always trying to deflect responsibility f this goes well and vote passes and we're successful in syria he will be claiming the credit saying it was his on operation all along. whether it is harry truman, george bush, ronald reagan or john kennedy you have to assume responsibility early on and drive leadership forward. he is not doing that he is runn

first of all, i didn't set a red line. the world set a red line. the world set a red line when governments representing 98% of the world's population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty forbidding their use even when countries are engaged in war. congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. congress set a red line when it indicates that in a piece of legislation titled the syria accountability act that some of the horrendous things that are happening on the ground there need to be answered for. and so when i said in a press conference that my calculus about what's happening in syria would be altered by the use of chemical weapons, which the overwhelming consensus of humanity says is wrong, that wasn't saying i just kind of made up. i didn't pluck it out of thin air. there's a reason for it. that's point number one. point number two. my credibility's not on the line. the international community credibility's on the line. and america and congress' credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the no

on the red lines, there is a lot of suggestion about the syrian red line.t was mentioned that three american presidents have suggested that iran in possession of nuclear weapons was unacceptable. three american presidents have drawn various red lines with a large degree of impunity. in the summer of 2012, the u.s. policy was that -- they had a slogan for it. ship of at least 20% fuel. that is probably not our policy today. it is probably, in any forthcoming negotiation, that is unlikely to be our policy. you can suggest that that articular red line was unreasonable. well, then do not draw it. if you think your red line is nreasonable and unsustainable, then do not draw it. and do not attach a slogan to it. so the syria red lines are important, but there have been lots of red lines on iran that have come and gone. on the historical issue, reasoning through historical analogy is always imperfect and too often imprecise, so here i go. if you kind of look -- i agree with dennis, it looks like the 960's, and that is kind of a gray thing. the middle east is a reg

this debate is about the world's red line. it's about humanity's red line. and it's a red line that anyone with a conscious ought to draw. >> rose: joining me from washington david sanger from the "new york times," dexter filkins of the new yorker magazine, i'm pleased to have both of them here as we take a look at what happened today in washington as the secretary of defense, secretary of state and chairman of the joints chiefs testified before the foreign senate committee. i david begin with you. tell me what came out of that hearing and the q&a that took place after the testimony that you think influences or might influence the debate. >> well charlie, you've heard secretary kerry give a much more forceful reiteration of his reasons for believing that congress had to go give the president the authorization to use force. and his argument came down to this, that if congress didn't do it, that at some point soon everybody would be back in the same room seeking an authorization for force on something much larger. he envoked the spector of the iranians looking

i didn't set a red line.he world set a red line. >> p.j., this discussion of credibility really bothers me. it kind of suggests if we don't act tough here, suddenly iran will begin to think we're weak as if iran is not already aware we will go to the mat to make sure they don't achieve their nuclear ambitions. more than that, what will be the blow to our credibility if we were to launch a strike and assad would brush it off and continue on with the civil war, which will almost surely happen? what will be the blow to our credibility there? >> well, let's start with the resolution that's being contemplated. i mean, if the united states has drawn a red line on chemical weapons, it has to be prepared to defend that red line with one strike and potentially, you know, with others. i do think that bashar al assad will challenge this red line at one point. we think of chemical weapons in horrific terms it. he thinks of chemical weapons as just, you know, one tool in his arsenal attempting to survive. i have no doubt

. >> i didn't set a red line. the world set a red line. the world set a red line when governments representing 98% of the word's population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty forbidding their use, even when countries are engaged in war. congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. congress set a red line when it indicated in -- in a piece of legislation entitled the "syria accountability act." some of the horrendous thing happening on the ground there need to be answered for. what i said in a press conference that my calculus about what's happening in syria would be altered by the use of chemical weapons which the overwhelming consensus of humanity says is wrong, that wasn't something i kind of made up. i didn't pluck it out of thin air. there is a reason for it. that's point number one. point number two, my credibility is not on the line. the international community's credibility is on the line. and america and congress' credit bit is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these

the world set a red line. the world set a red line when governments representing 98% of the world's population said, the use of chemical weapons are abore hadn't and passed a treaty forbidding their use even when countries are engaged in war. congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. my credibility is not on the line. the international community's credibility is on the line and america and congress' credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these international norms are important. >> meanwhile -- >> i mean his credibility is so on the line. of course -- >> yes. >> he pulls the united states of america with him. because he's commander in chief. but he is the one during a campaign that created the red line. he said it twice. he framed it and set a red line and said if you cross it -- >> back to that -- >> there are going to be consequences. there have been other countries that have used chemical weapons against their people and we haven't responded to it. the president

>> i didn't set a red line. the world set a red line. congress set a red line of when it ratified that treaty. my credibility is not on the line. the international credibility is on the line. >> that's just not true. it's another one of your false narratives. >> a red line for us is we start saying a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around and being utilized. that would change my calculus. >>a i lie is a lie is a lie. he said it and the world heard it and they gave you a line and did it anyway. by the way, if you didn't draw a red line, why are you going in? we have done this. why draw red lines with everyone knowing your red lines are nothing more than green lights over and over again. i got to give you one. your credibility is not on the line. with all due respect, mr. president, you have no credibility. to be credible must be clear and confident and actions must be swift and certain. you lost credibility when you led americans on the roof top in benghazi to go to your las vegas fund-raiser. that was a clear signal to the world t

there's an international red line, there's a congressional red line. and the president adheres to the same red line. >> the treaty that we're a signatory too that 98% of the countries are, syria is not a signatory to that? >> that is correct, they're an outlier. >> what is the remedy here. we're talking about a bizarre situation, we will act unilaterally without u.n. approval or authorization, or even our closest ally, the u.k. with us. it's something of a paradox. >> we would like nothing better than to be able to work this through the u.n. security council, unfortunately, since the beginning of the syria conflict. we have tried time and again to get the security council to act in a much lesser fashion, just to make statements condemning what was going on in syria. we've been stymied, blocked by other countries on the council. so at some point if that doesn't work, and you have a profoundly important international norm, like the one prohibiting the use of chemical weapons, have you to stand up and enforce it. we went through this in kosovo as you'll r

take a listen. >> i didn't set a red line. the world set a red line. the world set a red line when governments representing 98% of the world's population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty forbidding their use, even when countries are engaged in war. congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. >> reporter: the president is making the case that this is everybody's problem on capitol hill, everybody's problem in the world community, and, brian, tomorrow, the president leaves for russia where he's going to come face-to-face, if only briefly, with the one man that has stood in the way of international cooperation on this, vladamir putin. >> all right. chuck todd with the president tonight in stockholm, chuck, thanks. >>> now back to what we said at the top of the broadcast about washington and the conversation going on there. the huge lobbying effort by the obama team to get a yes vote on this military strike. our chief foreign affairs correspondent andrea mitchell covering from our d.c. newsroom tonight. andrea, g

that would be a violation of the red line. he drew a red line. had a red line every where. now the president is saying he never used the term red line. he's saying the world used the term red line. so, it's taken him five years but finally the guy has learned to bull [ bleep ] >> well, you know i think dave might have a point. while congress is calling witnesses and debating whether to strike syria does president obama want to go to war. this red line business has been wondering. he said the red line back in 2012 when he >> we have communicated in no uncertain terms with every player in the region that that's a red line for us. and that there would be enormous consequences if we start seeing movement on chemical weapons front or the use of chemical weapons. that would change my my calculations significantly. >> this week he changed his tune. >> didn't set a red line. the world set a red line. >> right. [ laughter ] >> when it comes to global concerns the president's language is important. and messages are, shall we say nuanced. so to make sure we know exactly where presiden

. >> i didn't set a red line. the world set a red line. the world set a red line when governments representing 98% of the world's population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent. my credibility is not on the line. the international community's credibility is on the line. >> that line of argument that, this isn't about president obama but instead reflects the will of the international community exploded with chuck hagel. >> key partners including france, turkey, saudi arabia, united arab emirates and friends in the region have assured us of their strong support of u.s. acts. >> still, the memory of iraq and concern about getting bogged down in an open-ended conflict resulted in a narrower authorization of force at the senate foreign relations committee. the updated resolution gives the president a 60-day window with a possible 30-day extension and exclusively rules out the use of ground forces. while passage out of committee is expected, hours ago senator john mccain announced he would not support the authorization in its current

this debate is about the world's red line. it's about humanity's red line.nd it's a red line that anyone with a conscience ought to draw. >> if it is the world's red line, where is the world on this? we know where france is. we now know where england is. where is the rest of the arab world? >> the arab league made an incredibly strong statement staying that assad had to be punished for using chemical weapons. for the arab league, that was an extraordinary statement. >> in terms of actual cooperation. >> i think we're going to get a lot of cooperation from saudi arabia, turkey, jordan. some will be public, some will be under the table. but i don't think this is about the president's red line. this is a weapon of mass destruction, like nuclear weapons. we have iran there. we're telling iran they can't have weapons of mass destruction. this is the ability of a government to wipe out tens of thousands of people. >> so you think if the united states does not act on this use of a weapon of mass destruction, it makes israel feel like, are you going to have israel's

obama earlier today in stockholm, sweden. >> i didn't set a red line. the world set a red line. my credibility is not on the line, the international community's credibility is on the line. and america and congress' credibility is on the line. do i hold out hope that mr. putin may change his position on some of these issues? i'm always hopeful. >> and for his part, president putin claimed that russia does not exclude supporting a u.n. resolution on punitive strikes against syria, if they are provided with evidence that they decide proves assad is actually guilty of using chemical weapons against his own people. all of this before calling secretary of state kerry a liar for his denial of al qaeda involvement with the syrian opposition. putin said, quote, this was very unpleasant and surprising for me. we talk to them, the americans, and we assume they are decent people. but he is lying and he knows that he is lying. this is sad. kerry today making the u.s. military sound like a mercenary force during his testimony for the tot hou the house foreign as committee. listen to this. >>

. >> i didn't set a red line. the world set a red line. >> president obama seeks support for military action against syria overseas and they will make the case to congress again. >>> cleveland kidnapper ariel castro who held three women captive for a decade is found dead in his jail cell in ohio. >>> president obama is pushing for global support for action against syria. he arrived today in sweden ahead of the g-20 summit in russia. at a joint news conference with sweden's prime minister, obama called the alleged chemical attack by the assad regime barbarism and said the credibility of the national community is at stake. >> my credibility is not on the line. the international community's credibility is on the line, and america and congress's credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these international norms are important. >> for more we're joined by mike in stockholm traveling with the president. this is supposed to be a ceremonial stop. it's turned out to be so much more than that