of president obama calling his syrian policy, i took some notes here, inept, accidental, calling the president himself confused, indecisive, vacillating. have you been surprised, howard at the severity and the harshness of the criticism in the media? i ve been surprised at how widespread it is meaning even on the left you have liberal commentators who either oppose military intervention in syria or think the president has been inconsistent or confused because he brought us to the brink of war and then pulled back, then gave all the network interviews, and then gave a speech he said there s a moral case for war but we re not going there yet. it has been right, left, center, straight news accounts. at the same time if somehow this process leads to confiscating those chemical weapons without any shots being fired perhaps people will look at back at it and say the president stumbled into a decent policy it is too early to say that now. at the moment on syria, he seems to have almost no f
person to travel 2500 miles over the ocean by a cluster of balloons but 12 hours a technical glitch forced him to land in a remote part of newfoundland. martha: oh. gregg: that is too bad. he is safe and sound we re happy to report. no word yet on another attempt. martha: i loved up. i love the movie. so sad though. how about this? push back for a popular ride sharing service to a san francisco airport. claudia cowan is live for with us that. what is all that about? reporter: popular ride sharing services are banned from sfo. companies like uber, sidecar and lift in a bit of a turf car war. unlike taxis and him they re not regulated and airport officials are saying there are safety concerns. drivers are operating uninsured. we don t know what the status of the vehicle is. we have a obligation from the safety perspective to insure these things for ground
condition that must be met and will prove to be an impediment to a peaceful solution. there was another condition and that was that israel get rid of its nuclear weapons before all of this. the threat of chemical warfare is over. pew continue iover. putin is in charge of this war and putin has told assad he s not going to use chemical weapons again, whether the u.n. steps in or not. and secondly if he follows his instructions from his masters in moscow he will win the war anyway with conventional weapons. for him to say the united states has got to stop threatening military action and arming the rebels is ridiculous. particularly now at least from the perspective of the situation on the ground putin assad and
in any meaningful way? and you were on capitol hill. what was their sense of things? i testified before 21 members, and all but one expressly expressed at least hesitation about conduct a missile strike. and this is a cross-section of congress. as far as the american people are concerned, i believe two things. they are tired of war, they fought two already. and number two they don t understand the military aspect.of all this. they don t have a sense of what a missile strike might do or not do. they don t understand the if the effects of all this will achieve the end that the president seeks. and they are worried about the collateral damage. are you going to allow the killing of innocent syrians with conventional weapons to add to the devastation donnelly chemical weapons. gregg: the wall street journal