assad carried this out. so the question is, after we have gone through all this, are we going to try to find a reason not to act? and if that s the case, i think the world community should admit it. because you can always find a reason not to act. this is a complicated, difficult situation. and an initial response will not solve the underlying tragedy of the civil war in syria. as frederick mentioned, that will be solved through eventually a political transition. you we can send a strong message against the prohibition or in favor of the prohibition against using chemical weapons. we can change assad s calculus about using them again.
and now we re asking him to do another mission. you know, we keep asking them to do more with less, and i think that has to stop. we talk about the morality of standing up to men such as assad. what he did was immoral but he used chemical weapons almost a year ago and we didn t do anything about it. and that causes big problems. i think it s also immoral to be sending our troops out while we re cutting their ability to carry out their missions and return home safely. martha: i understand what you re saying. when you look at the situation in congress, do you believe that a vote would pass for this strike in syria? because there s a lot of question about what kind of coalition needs to be built and a suggestion this morning that it is really nancy pelosi who would have to pull this over the finish line. is that the case? well, yesterday the speaker and nancy said they would support the president s action.
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 international norms are important. and when those videos first 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 populations. so the question is, how credible is the international community when it says this is an international norm that has to be observed?
closer to resolving the climate crisis. i would refer you to the speech i gave when i received the nobel prize. and i think i started the speech by saying that compared to previous recipients i was certainly unworthy. but what i also described was the challenge that all of us face when we believe in peace but we confront a world that full of world that is full of violence and occasional evil. the question becomes, what are our responsibilities. i made of effort to end the war in iraq, wind down the war in afghanistan, strengthen our commitment to multi lateral
congress will authorize action. and in my view that s the correct decision. the question is what do you do about the other 98,000 people who have been killed. what do you do about instability in the arab world. but having set a red line the word of the president of the united states has to mean something. we have to show the syrians and iranians that actions have consequences. bill: i want to stay on the comments the president made about the evidence. it s about as much as he has said so far publicly. intercepts, chain of command he believes they have. talk about public sourcing. the testing of sarin gas. he said rockets went from areas where assad controlled. in area where rebels controlled. is that enough to condense those on the fence in congress?