Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
COMMENT THORK WAS THE FINAL
BREAKING POINT?
>> WELL, SOMETHING WORKED.
HERE ON "THE CROSSFIRE" TWO
MEMBERS THE CHAIRMAN ROBERT
MENENDEZ SUPPORTS A STRIKE.
AND SENATOR RAND PAUL OPPOSES A
MILITARY STRIKE.
SENATOR PAUL, THE FIRST QUESTION
TO YOU.
WHY DO YOU THINK THE RUSSIANS
CAME FORWARD TODAY, AFTER BEING
SO OBSTRUCTIVE FOR SO LONG?
>> I THINK ANYTIME DIPLOMACY IS
POSSIBLE, IT'S PREFERABLE.
I THINK IT'S A GREAT
DEVELOPMENT.
THERE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSIONS WITH
THE RUSSIANS FOR MONTHS, REALLY
I THEY ON TO A YEAR NOW, THERE
HAVE BEEN DISCUSSIONS --
>> WITH NO MOVEMENTS.
>> BY APPARENTLY THEY'VE BEEN IN
FAIR OF SOME NEGOTIATED
SETTLEMENT.
HOW DID THEY GET THERE, IS THE
THREAT OF FORCE BRINGING THEM
THERE, I THINK IS UNKNOWN.
THE PRESIDENT NEEDS TO TAKE
CREDIT TO MOVE FORWARD AND AVOID
AN ALL-OUT WAR, I SAY THE MORE
THE BETTER.
I THINK WAR OR BOMBING ASSAD
WILL LEAD TO MORE INSTABILITY
AND MORE LIKELY KEM DALE WEAPONS
IN THE HANDS OF TERRORISTS IF WE
DESTABILIZE ASSAD.
>> I HAVE TO SAY THAT I'M
CAUTIOUSLY LOOKING AT WHAT THE
RUSSIANS ARE SUGGESTING.
WE'LL SEE.
YOU KNOW, AFTER TWO YEARS IN
WHICH THE RUSSIANS HAVE VETOED
EVERY EFFORT AT THE UNITED
NATIONS, INCLUDING SIMPLY
RECOGNIZING THAT THE USE OF
CHEMICALS WEAPONS IN GENERAL IS
A VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL
LAW, WITHOUT EVEN ASCRIBING
BLAME AT THAT POINT IN TIME,
THEY VOTED AGAINST THAT.
THEY VOTED AGAINST A SIMPLE
PRESS RELEASE, SAYING XWSH
EMPLOY TO SEND INSPECTORS IN.
SO I'M SOMEWHAT CAUTIOUSLY
LOOKING AT THE SET OF
CIRCUMSTANCES, BUT LOOK, THE
ONLY REASON -- IF THIS IS TRUE,
IF THE RUSSIANS ARE SERIOUS IN
THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MORE
IMPORTANTLY, IF THE SYRIANS ARE
ACTUALLY GOING TO GIVE IT UP,
AND THEY CAN DO THAT RIGHT AWAY
AT THE SECURITY COUNCIL IN THE
NEXT DAY OR TWO, GO RIGHT IN
THERE, WITH A RESOLUTION THAT'S
VERY SPECIFIC THAT SAYS ALL OF
THE SITES, UNFETTERED ACCESS TO
THE WEAPONS, BUT ACCESS
THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY TO
DETERMINE THE SITES AND BE ABLE
TO SECURE THEM?
THE ONLY REASON WE MIGHT GET
THERE IS BECAUSE OF THE THREAT
OF A CREDIBLE MILITARY FORCE.
>> GIVEN THAT THREAT, SENATOR
REID HAS APPARENTLY ANNOUNCED HE
WILL POSTPONE THE VOTE IN THE
SENATE.
THE WHIP COUNT WE HAVE SEEN IN
THE HOUSE IS LIKE 5 TO 1
AGAINST.
DO YOU THINK IT WOULD BE WISER
TO SLOW THING DOWN AND HOLD OFF
TO THOSE KINDS OF VOTES UNTIL WE
SEE WHETHER OR NOT IN FACT WE
CAN GET THE UNITED NATIONS AND
THE RUSSIANS TO DO SOMETHING
THAT'S REAL AND NOT JUST PUBLIC
RELATIONS?
ILLUSTRATES I'M GOING TO DEFER
TO THE MAJORITY LEADER IN THE
SENATE CONTEXT TO DETERMINE
WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO MOVE
FORWARD, WORKING IN CONCERT WITH
THE ADMINISTRATION.
IF THE ADMINISTRATION BELIEVES
THIS IS A SERIOUS EFFORT BY THE
RUSSIANS THAT WILL IN FACT BE
EMBRACED BY THE SYRIANS, AND WE
CAN MOVE FORWARD.
WE CAN SEE THAT IN VERY SHORT
ORDER.
THEN THAT IS OBVIOUSLY A
WELCOMED EFFORT, BUT I TRULY
BELIEVE THAT THE ONLY REASON WE
ARE AT THIS POINT IS BECAUSE THE
PRESIDENT SAID HE HAD MADE A
DECISION THAT IN FACT THIS WAS
NECESSARY, BECAUSE THE SENATE
FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE
MOVED FORWARD IN A BIPARTISAN
FASHION, IN A TARGETED FASHION.
I THINK THE RUSSIANS SAID, YOU
KNOW, THIS IS A REAL POTENTIAL
CONSEQUENCE TO OUR OWN
INTERESTS.
>> I AGREE WITH YOU.
SENATOR PAUL, WHAT DO YOU THINK
ABOUT THE DELAY IN VOTE?
I WANT I THINK IT'S A GREAT WAY
OUT FOR THE PRESIDENT, BECAUSE I
THINK HE WOULD HAVE BEEN HANDED
A REBUKE.
I THINK IT'S A GOOD CHANCE THAT
THE HOUSE WOULD VOTE AGAINST
GOING INTO SYRIA.
WOULD HE EVEN OBEY THE
CONSTITUTION AND SAY I'VE BEEN
TOLD I DON'T HAVE AUTHORITY,
THEREFORE I CAN'T DO IT?
THAT'S BEEN AN OPEN QUESTION,
BECAUSE HE HASN'T ADMITTED HE
WOULD ABIDE BY IT.
WHETHER IT'S A GOOD IDEA OR BAD
IDEA, I THINK IT ALLOWS
DIPLOMACY MORE TIME TO SEE IF IT
CAN WORK THIS OUT.
IT WON'T GET TO WHAT THE
PRESIDENT SAID HESS WAS GOING TO
DO, WHICH IS PUNISH ASSAD.
>> GETTING RID OF THE CHEMICAL
WEAPONS I THINK WAS THE ULTIMATE
GOAL.
>> BUT HE WAS GOING TO PUNISH
ASSAD, BUT NOT ATTACKING --
>> AND SEND A MESSAGE TO IRAN
AND NORTH KOREA THAT THERE ARE
CONSEQUENCES.
THE CONSEQUENCE HERE IS YOU'RE
GOING TO GIVE YOUR CHEMICAL
WEAPONS OVER.
>> RIGHT.
I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE
THEM TURNED OVER TO AN
INTERNATIONAL AUTHORITY.
I'M NOT GOING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT
A GOOD THING.
EVEN THOUGH IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE
CROSSFIRE I THINK WE COULD ALL
AGREE IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA
FOR THE TO BOMB SYRIA.
I THINK AT THE ADDS TO THE
INSTABILITY.
MORE LIKELY THAT ISRAEL OR
TURKEY WILL BE ATTACKED, MORE
LIKELY REFUGEES WILL GO INTO
JORDAN.
>> I THINK THE RESOLUTION PRETTY
MUCH SAYS THAT, THIS IN ESSENCE
WOULD BE A WIN.
WE SAY IN THE RESOLUTION, THIS
IS TO DETIER AND DEGRADE ASSAD'S
ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE
TO DELIVER CHEMICAL WEAPONS
AGAINST INNOCENT CIVILIANS.
IN THE LAST INSTANCE HE KILLED
OVER 400 CHILDREN.
TO ME I LOOK AT THESE PICTURES
AND IT SHAKES MY CONSCIENCE.
I NOTICE THE SPEAKER IS A GREAT
ADMIRER OF HISTORY.
I'M REMINDED OF WHAT HAPPENS
WHEN WE DO NOT ACT IN
CIRCUMSTANCES SUCH AS THIS.
I THINK IN ESSENCE, THAT'S WHAT
THE RESOLUTION CALLED FOR.
IF THEY GIVE IT UP IN THIS WAY,
WE WILL HAVE PLIRD TO A LARGE
DEGREE IN A BETTER SENSE,
BECAUSE YOU CAN'T DELIVER
CHEMICALS WEAPONS THAT YOU DON'T
HAVE ACCESS TO.
>> EXACTLY.
>> NOW YOU CAN CONTINUE TO GO
AHEAD AGAINST ASSAD IN WAR
CRIMES, WHICH I CERTAINLY THIS I
THAT WE SHOULD THROUGH THE
UNITED NATIONS, PURSUE ASSAD IN
TERMS OF A WAR CRIMES CRIMINAL,
WHICH I BELIEVE HE IS FOR WHAT
HE'S DONE TO THE U.S. CITIZENS.
>> I DON'T THINK ANYBODY DO YOU
SEE THAT HE'S PROBABLY A WAR
CRIMINAL, BUT ON THE OTHER SIDE
WE'VE SEES PRIESTS BEHEADED BY
REBELS, WE'VE SEEN A REBEL
EATING THE HEART OF A SOLDIER.
IT'S NOT LIKE THERE'S NO
ATROCITY ON THE OTHER SIDE, AND
AL QAEDA IS ON THE OTHER SIDE.
I CAN'T CONCEIVE HOW WE COULD BE
ALLIES WITH AL QAEDA.
>> I DON'T SUGGEST WE WOULD BE
ALLIES WITH AL QAEDA.
THERE ARE VETTED ELEMENTS OF THE
SYRIAN OPPOSITION THAT WE
BELIEVE THAT ARE LARGELY.
>> NO, THEY'RE NOT ALLIES.
>> -- THAT SHARE OUR VALUES.
IF AT THE END OF THE DAY YOU SIT
BACK AND SAY THERE'S NO
CONSEQUENCES.
GO KILL ANOTHER 1400, GO KILL
ANOTHER 14,000, AT WHAT POINT
DOES THE CONSEQUENCES OF THOSE
ACTIONS NOT ONLY SEND A MESSAGE
IN SYRIA, BUT GLOBALLY.
WE WANT THE AYATOLLAH IN IRAN TO
HEED OUR MESSAGE, DO NOT CROSS
THAT LINE TOWARDS NUCLEAR
WEAPONS.
WE WANT THE DICTATOR OF NORTH
KOREA TO UNDERSTAND, DO NOT
CROSS A LINE AS WELL.
THIS IS I THINK EVEN BEYOND
ASSAD.
IF WE CAN GET THE UNITED NATIONS
QUICKLY TO GO AHEAD AND
INTERVENE AND ACTUALLY OBTAIN
ALL THESE CHEMICAL WEAPONS,
SECURE THEM AND DESTROY THEM, I
THINK WE WOULD HAVE MADE A GOOD
STATEMENT.
>> BUT THERE'S A REAL
DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHATEVER
HAPPENS IN TERMS OF THE CHEMICAL
WEAPONS AND THE SYRIAN CIVIL
WAR.
ALL THE EVIDENCE WE'RE GETTING
IS THE COUNTRY BY ENORM ON YOU
WEAPONS IS DEEPLY OPPOSED TO THE
UNITED STATES PICKING SITES IN
THE SYRIAN CIVIL WAR, PARTLY
BECAUSE, AS SENATOR PAUL SAID,
THERE'S THIS DEEP KEELING THAT
THERE'S THE BAD GUYS AND THE BAD
GUYS.
>> THAT'S EXACTLY WHY WORKING
WITH SENATOR CORKER, THE RANKS
REPUBLICAN ON THE COMMITTEE, AND
GETTING A UNIVERSE THAT WENT
FROM JOHN McCAIN, WHO IS VERY
HAWKISH ON THESE ISSUES TO DIB
DURBIN, WHO'S VERY DOVISH, TO
FIND THE BALANCE, AND WHAT DID
WE SAY?
NO AMERICAN TROOPS ON THE
GROUND.
WE DON'T WANT TO BE ENGAGED IN
THAT CIVIL WAR --
>> UNLESS THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS
BREAK FREE.
>> AND IN FACT TO HAVE A TIME
LIMIT OF 60 DAYS, WHICH MANY
WOULD ARGUE THE PRESIDENT HAS
UNDER THE WAR POWERS ACT ANYHOW,
TO BE ABLE TO PROCEED.
IT SEEMS TO ME WHAT WE HAVE DONE
HERE IS NOT GET INVOLVED.
NO ONE WANTS TO GET INVOLVED IN
SYRIA'S CIVIL WAR, BUT WE MAY
VERY WELL HAVE STOPPED A
SLAUGHTER.
>> I AGREE, SENATOR PAUL, I WANT
TO GO BACK TO --
>> THE BIG EXCEPTION TO GROUND
TOOK PLACE THAT SECRETARY KERRY
ADMITTED THAT, WE WOULD NEED
75,000 TROOPS TO SECURE THE
WEAPONS.
THAT WOULD BE BOOTS ON THE
GROUND.
THE QUESTION IS, IS IT MORE
LIKELY FOR THAT TO HAPPEN IF WE
DESTABILIZE ASSAD OR LESS
LIKELY?
>> I WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT --
>> AT THE COMMITTEE HEARING, I
MUST SAY, WHEN HE WAS PRESSED ON
THIS ISSUE, HE SAID, LOOK, LET'S
CLOSE THAT DOOR.
NO AMERICAN TROOPS ON THE
GROUND.
I THINK THE WORLD UNDERSTANDS IF
CHEMICAL WEPS CACHES ARE OPEN
AND SUBJECTED TO THE POSSIBILITY
OF TERRORISTS, HOPEFULLY THERE
WOULD BE INTERNATIONAL EFFORT TO
SECURE THOSE WEAPONS.
SO THEY DON'T GO AGAINST US, OUR
INTERESTS.
>> I THINK THEY WOULD.
>> IF WE DESTABILIZE ASSAD, IT
MORE LIKELY THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS
WOULD BE FREE ROAMING?
I THINK IT'S MORE LIABLE LIKELY
THAT THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS MAY
FALL INTO THE HANDS OF AL QAEDA.
>> WELL, OKAY.
LET'S HOLD ON A MINUTE.
IN HIS INTERVIEW WITH WOLF,
PRESIDENT OBAMA ALSO MADE A