Fox News
Expand
Browse All Video
Watch Live

You're watching...

How would US respond if Syria used chemical weapons?

Details

  • Description

    Western powers preparing for worst-case scenario

  • Duration 4:32
  • Date

Clips

Also in this playlist...

Latest News

Auto-advance: ON

Auto-advance
View All

Transcript

This transcript is automatically generated

We get a little international news instant mix today there's some new concerns over violence in Syria -- France's foreign minister says western powers.

Are now preparing a tough response in the event.

Syrian government uses chemical or biological weapons on its own people one of the questions would be.

Q what what our role be in that response joining us now.

Is -- your -- -- -- former spokesman for the last four US ambassadors to the UN so Rick what do you think about that how would the United States responded said only we find out that.

Some of these chemical weapons are being -- Well the president said that that that's when we would get involved if that's the Red Line that if there were chemical.

Weapons biological weapons like Sarin gas he used.

Then suddenly the US would be urged to act and what I find trouble in about that is.

Right now we have a policy of shock and off basically the Obama administration is shocked and odd that we have 30000.

People dead.

16100.

People dead in this week alone and yet we are going to wait.

And tell gas.

Chemical or biological weapons are used before we actually get outraged I think.

This is an admission by the administration that they're very comfortable with standing on the sidelines and I I don't think that that's a great role for the United States to be in.

What did they get the topic that comes up while we talk about Syria -- Libya.

And how we got involved there through NATO and if I remember correctly with the Europeans -- said hey listen we have to get involved and we kind of all got in together that's why there's been some criticisms of the administration.

From leading from behind at something that the of course refute.

For -- do you think it would take that though.

To get involved would it be the United States leading or do you think -- be the United -- -- a cue from somewhere like France to.

For assault jump -- if you out.

Well it's a really good question Jenna because there's there's no question that when NATO.

Urges us that we should follow like Turkey is a member of NATO and if the Turks feel that we should get involved in Syria because they are being attacked or that there are border.

Firings then we should support the Turks however I think if you go back and you look exactly at what.

The Obama administration.

Had said -- Libya policy was about it wasn't just about NATO it was about.

The United States doing something to help another country when there were clearly but when there was clearly violence and killings going on.

So I think it's really difficult for the Obama administration.

To pretend like -- Libya policy.

Is our strategy but then.

Look away when it comes to killings and Syria you cannot justify going into Libya and not going into Syria with any type of a strata.

If you're talking about humanitarian crises which is something that's obviously come up when it came to Syria and there's been a conversation is -- humanitarian crisis is is a civil war what is this.

We did say governor Richardson on the program last hour.

And he just said yesterday yesterday that we have a solid relations solid relations with China.

And rash act.

Tell us your thoughts on that you do we have that right now -- because in this administration you laugh a little bit when it comes to Syria.

-- how how does that all play in as well.

Well let's remember that this administration pressed the reset button with Russia and decided that our relations from the past weren't working.

They wanted to move forward.

Any rational person should look at the voting record in the United Nations of Russia or China.

They have not supported us if it's dark they have V -- multiple resolutions on Syria.

They have only supported us once.

On Iran in the Bush Administration we got five resolutions on Iran.

I hardly think that the cowboy administration of the past which is what the Obama team tries to label previous administrations.

I don't see how -- cowboy administration can get five resolutions.

On Iran and this administration get one and nothing in two years the simple fact is.

That Russia and China love a weaker United States they want to have the flexibility.

To be able to do what they want.

And have been and President Obama not challenge them and not offer consequences for bad behavior is exactly why they're comfortable with this administration.

We'll see what happens -- next and Syria and whether or not that line is crossed the big question is did that wind even need to be cross which is what you race today.

Break nice -- in the program as always thanks for the time thanks to.

Load More