this, precisely to mark s point doesn t really have a defined end. this will just continue on, this has to do with the american credibility and a statement of iran, or the force of chemical weapons will only continue as long as american troops are not on the ground. if this is conducted from what we perceive to be a safe distance, then it will continue for as long as they define it to be needed. richard wolff and senator ginburg, thank you for joining us. coming up, the new split in the republican party on the american intervention in the middle east. krystal ball and ari melber will join me. and politicians are wandering off their talking points and improvising and why it is driving their staffs crazy. and over the bay, the push, and why it is driving them crazy over the iraq war.
here is the question that most of congress is just rushing right past without asking. why would assad use chemical weapons? knowing that it could provoke this kind of intervention that is being contemplated now. well, there is a book that can help answer that question. the dictator s handbook. that is a real title. why bad behavior is almost all good politics. today, co-author alistair smith said that assad does not use chemical weapons to punish the rebels, but to send a signal to his core supporters. first of all, using chemical weapon has absolutely cemented for assad that there can be no soft landings, that has two effects, the domestic and the coalition that they should stick with him. he is there for the long run, and there is no easy way out for him, and so they know they won t
chemical weapons here. that part is clear. ari, the american/israel public affairs committee issued a statement today supporting the intervention of the washington group that speaks very consistently in line with the israeli government. hillary clinton has come out publicly supporting the intervention today. and we have bill crystal, who is at least now one of the consistent republicans on this. i want to listen to what he said to andrea mitchell today. congress did not object when assad had to go. congress didn t object when they drew the red line. he is our president. i voted against him twice, but he won re-election, he is speaking there as president of the united states. not as leader of the democratic party, so congress has to think long and hard before just walking against the president.
opportunity of military action toward that goal. did you hear a satisfactory answer to that? here is the answer i heard across several conversations, several briefings on that point. and i think this is complicated. we have two goals here, the short-term goal, what we are debating today and what the authorization seeks, the brief strike that continues to deter assad, and the use of chemical weapons on his own people. our own objective is to make sure assad leaves syria and the assad regime ends. but we shouldn t try to achieve that through military goals. to do that would require the kind of massive intervention that was required in the iraq war to remove saddam from power. instead, we heard today, and from senator johnson s questions and at other points in the hearing, and from general dempsey, to pursue that goal from diplomatic means. this is one of the issues that i believe president obama will raise with president putin in russia this week. it is our hope, rather than have
resolution by congress, i think would be a catastrophe because it would underline the credibility of the country, and the president of the united states. joining me now, krystal ball, and ari melber, krystal, here we have it, some americans have actually found an intervention that they don t like. well, you know, rand paul, is somebody like his father who would have been against basically any military intervention. but when you look at last week, and they would not go to congress for approval, first lining up saying he would go to congress for approval, and being very skeptical, you have to think that if this were any other president, and certainly under george w. bush, there would be a much different tone coming from that caucus. let s listen to an exchange today from secretary kerry and