war, one might say the president pulled a rabbit out of his hat. david kay, there is a wild theory that perhaps a lot of assad s big stash of chemical weapons is the missing stash that we never found in iraq with saddam hassan. he shifted it to syria. is that plausible? it s not at all plausible and something i dealt a fair amount with over the last ten years. look, saddam had lousy sarin. it was unstable. it really had lack of lethalness compared to the syrians. the syrians have first-class sarin developed with the help of the soviet union among with other countries. they didn t need saddam s lousy chemical weapons. where did they get it? do they make it themselves or buy it from places like russia? where did they get a large amount of sarin or whatever it may be? they got the basic technology how to make it and mate it to
objective. the president doesn t want to own this war, and noother do the american people want to own this war so we have to be careful not to comment to things that we aren t ready to engage in the sense of getting fully involved in a civil war and another country by narrowly defining the mission, i think we can achieve that objective and detour the regime from going to a brutal and terrible weapon but it has to be narrowly defined mission so we don t have mission creep and get entangled in the war. nick, one of the problems administration faces is the fallout that continues from iraq where the american people and the british people, for that matter, were assured saddam hassan had weapons of mass destruction. britain and america are being told this man assad have used chemical weapons but haven t produced public evidence to that
now the new norm, chemical weapons are a tool in the military tool box. so i think it can be very effective and accomplishing that objective. the president doesn t want to own this war, and neither do the american people want to own this war so we have to be careful not to comment to things that we aren t ready to engage in the sense of getting fully involved in a civil war and another country by narrowly defining the mission, i think we can achieve that objective and detour the regime from going to a brutal and terrible weapon but it has to be narrowly defined mission so we don t have mission creep and get entangled in the war. nick, one of the problems administration faces is the fallout that continues from iraq where the american people and the british people, for that matter, were assured saddam hassan had weapons of mass destruction.