"You should expect everything," Assad said in an interview with CBS taped in Damascus. "Not necessarily from the government. It's not only the government ... in this region. You have different parties, you have different factions, you have different ideology."
Asked if he was making a threat of a direct military response to any such attack, Assad was vague, saying at one point, "I am not fortune teller to tell you what's going to happen."
President Barack Obama is seeking authorization from Congress to launch what the administration says would be a limited-scope attack against Syria in reprisal for Assad's purported use of chemical weapons. Assad has denied it and argued in the interview broadcast Monday on "CBS This Morning" that Washington has presented no evidence to substantiate its allegations. In London Monday, Secretary of State John Kerry reasserted Washington's argument and said that the evidence is sufficiently strong to be accepted as evidence in a court of law.
I do not understand this entire scenario, and/or the reasons behind it all. Why did Obama leave the decision to Congress, and then exert pressure on them to make the decision he wanted in the first place. I am not a diplomat, I am not aware of all the ramifications of the incidents in Syria. Perhaps Washington has more detailed information with which to make a learned decision. But I question more, why, now, get involved?
