a half years, and the reality is, there was a coalition in place behind the iran deal, behind the sanctions, that coalition, based on the evidence we ve seen, was united and the sanctions were furthering what had been stated as the american strategic interest. donald trump is the one, with sort of this america-first message, who came in and took america out of it. so, now the notion that he is saying, well, the allies need to put pressure on iran, the allies need to get involved in this is strange, because he is the one who essentially has led to the fraying or the break crisis of his own making. and when he talks about sort of diplomacy, what is diplomacy for, you know, donald trump? it s america s way, chiefly, until he needs others, and the question is, if you re a traditional ally of america who had been onboard the coalition that president obama put together and now you are hearing donald trump say, okay, we need you to come back in and help the situation, i guess, why would
tensions, therefore, america must continue to consult with our allies so we do not make the region less safe. do you see the administration reaching out to allies to talk about this? well, diplomacy is a real challenge for donald trump. he s run an america-first foreign policy, national security policy now for two and a half years, and the reality is, there was a coalition in place behind the iran deal, behind the sanctions, that coalition, based on the evidence we ve seen, was united and the sanctions were furthering what had been stated as the american strategic interest. donald trump is the one, with sort of this america-first message, who came in and took america out of it. so, now the notion that he is saying, well, the allies need to put pressure on iran, the allies need to get involved in this is strange, because he is the one who essentially has led to the fraying or the break crisis of his own making.
my concern is the chemical weapons. not so much the size of these civil wars but what is the american strategic interest. our interest is making sure chemical weapons don t ever get used against americans. if there is a way the united states can use precision strikes as everyone said, not boots on the ground, not overflying syria but go in and destroy the chemical weapons sites and depots. that s it. don t take side in the civil war and prevent the chemical weapons from falling into the hands of people that would use them against us. martha, i m greatest fear rebels affiliated with al qaeda would use weapons against syria as the syrian government allayed with hezbollah. martha: what do you make of assad s response basically saying it would be very dangerous to get involved here? i think the danger and the risk is that it won t just be an easy strike. you just can t go in and bomb them and get out t would be a mater would there be civilian casualties? you never, even go back to world