Analysts Discuss Impact on Assad From Syria Strike
August 30, 2013
As U.S. officials took to the U.S. airwaves, insisting that the Assad government was responsible for last week's chemical attack in Syria, a U.S. military response seemed increasingly likely. The White House and the State Department have insisted that any U.S. response will be aimed only at preventing President Basahr al-Assad from using weapons of mass destruction again. But the question many are asking is where will that U.S. response leave the embattled Syrian president.
On Friday, President Barack Obama was clear about a possible US strike against Syria. He said it would not be about bringing down the government in Damascus.
"We're not considering any boots-on-the-ground approach. What we will do is consider options that meet the narrow concern around chemical weapons, understanding that there's not going to be a solely military solution to the underlying conflict and tragedy that's taking place in Syria," said Obama.
Last week's chemical weapons attack east of Damascus has the international community in a quandary in terms of how to react. The president's decision matters in real ways to U.S. security, said Secretary of State John Kerry.
"It matters because if we choose to live in a world where a thug and a murderer like Bashar al-Assad can gas thousands of his own people with impunity, even after the United States and our allies said no, and then the world does nothing about it, there will be no end to the test of our resolve and the dangers that will flow from those others who believe that they can do as they will," said Kerry.
最新
2013-11-25
2013-11-25
2013-11-25
2013-11-25
2013-11-25
2013-11-25