March 19th, 2013
06:57 PM ET

House intel chair: 'High probability' Syria used chemical weapons

There is a "high probability" that Syria used chemical weapons during fighting with opposition forces, though a final verification is needed, U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Tuesday.

"I have a high probability to believe that chemical weapons were used," Rogers, R-Michigan, told CNN. "We need that final verification, but given everything we know over the last year and a half, I would come to the conclusion that they are either positioned for use, and ready to do that, or in fact have been used."

Rogers and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, struck ominous tones in an interview on CNN's "Situation Room" about the possibility that Syria had crossed what President Barack Obama has said was a "red line" that could lead to the United States' getting involved militarily in the conflict.

FULL STORY
Post by:
Filed under: Politics • Syria
soundoff (17 Responses)
  1. AlFetah

    SYRIANS WILL FIGHT YOU FOREIGN INVADERS.

    March 19, 2013 at 7:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • Name s kel

      The only people you are fighting clown is the same you look at in the mirror! Its a civil war.

      March 19, 2013 at 10:42 pm | Report abuse |
  2. banasy©

    What the...NO! No US boots on Syrian soil, for heaven's sake!

    Why does Wolf's expression never change?

    March 19, 2013 at 7:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • Sheryl ©

      @ banasy:
      Chemicals were doing that to me too, so I switched to egg white.

      March 19, 2013 at 8:59 pm | Report abuse |
  3. bobcat (in a hat)©

    Well, we said that was going to be line in the sand for us. So was this fabricated in order to draw us in there ? Is this a ruse concocted by the powers that be to try to stretch us even thinner. ? Will it draw forces away from Korea ?
    This now opens so many variables. If we are now indeed destined to go in there, how about we go in with the atti tude of winning. Because of all the political correctness, we haven't been able to" fight " a war since WW 2. As soon as they say, civilians are dying, we are made to quit fighting an offensive style. I'm sorry, civilians die in war, but that is the nature of war. It seems lately that the only reason we send our warriors there is to thin out our population a little. . It's time we remind the world who we are and what we do in war. If we have to go into war again, let's do it right. But I truly hope it doesn't come to that.

    March 19, 2013 at 9:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • bobcat (in a hat)©

      Oh, and if it "does" come to that, reopen the draft with no loopholes for these "fortunate ones " to use. Maybe that will smarten up those power people when there children have to die too.

      March 19, 2013 at 9:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • ronvan

      Bobcat: I couild not agree more with your comment! WHY is it that people think that WE, have to fight a "good, clean, war"? NO such thing exsists! We train our magnificient military to fight to win, and when we put them to the task we handcuff them with stupid rules of engagement! And YES, YES, YES, bring back the draft!!

      March 20, 2013 at 7:23 am | Report abuse |
  4. Portland tony

    Do the 60,000 or so, who have already died in this sectarian war, really care what killed them? The true danger now is an Assad's chemical weapons being obtained by every two bit local tribe doing jihad!

    March 19, 2013 at 9:10 pm | Report abuse |
  5. Joey Isotta-Fraschini ©™

    @ bobcat (iah):
    Amen.
    I hate the peace-with-honor line.
    Still, it's not OUR civil war in Syria: it's their civil war.

    March 19, 2013 at 9:14 pm | Report abuse |
  6. bobcat (in a hat)©

    @ JIF

    Thatt is true Joey, it is their civil war with mainly alqueada doing the heavy lifting. All I'm saying is, if we go in there, let's leave no doubt about what the outcome will be. We have let the world forget who they are messing with, I know our warriors are even better trained and armed than we were in Viet nam. The big difference is , just like my time, they are not allowed to fight the war they were trained for. It's time to let the dogs loose.

    March 19, 2013 at 9:24 pm | Report abuse |
  7. saywhat

    So we do what we did in Iraq and are doing in Afghanistan? Bomb and then invade and occupy Syria?
    Bruise ourselves in the process to the point that Russia,China even India become the centers of power.
    We must be losing our marbles altogether driven by the neocons.

    March 19, 2013 at 9:53 pm | Report abuse |
  8. saywhat

    14 trillion dollars according to Cost of War.com, the tab for going insane on Iraq & Afghanistan. The human cost horrendous.
    Achievement zilch.
    Lets continue repeating.

    March 19, 2013 at 9:57 pm | Report abuse |
  9. saywhat

    Good night all.Sleep well.Don't think.

    March 19, 2013 at 9:57 pm | Report abuse |
  10. ronvan

    With the introduction of drones, smart bombs, missiles etc., we are rapidly reaching a point where "boots on the ground" can be drastically reduced! NONE of these two bit countries was worth loosing 1 american life! The term "our national security interests" has become a joke, and is just an excuse used by the MIC and those profiting from getting involved in other countries problems!

    March 20, 2013 at 7:51 am | Report abuse |
  11. bobcat (in a hat)©

    @ saywhat

    It seems my words have been twisted. As a viet nam vet, let me assure you I do not condone war. What I said, is if we must get into war again, let our warriors do what must be done. The rules of engagement that have tethered their hands has cost us to many of our troops. And since our leaders insist this must be done, then their children should also have to bear the same risks as our children.

    March 20, 2013 at 11:22 am | Report abuse |
  12. Ngovicaus

    Viet nam vet the my ..friendship go to my commenter for you ...i and friends the all ,..

    January 29, 2014 at 8:09 am | Report abuse |
« Back to main