But i also believe the will of this. It is very clear tonight. It is clear to me that reflecting the views of the british people does not want to see military action. I get that and the government will act accordingly. And paul is live for us in london tonight. A stunning defeat. Lap and david cameron, who is coming under a lot of scrutiny for misjudging this entire thing, repeated yes, i understand, the people have spoken, theres house has spoken. I will not move them to any kind of action. Paul, thank you very much. And joining me here in the studio, is the diplomatic editor. And former chief u. N. Weapons inspector. Gentlemen, thank you. James let me start with you. The u. N. There is shock, that the loyal britts who stood by the americans in iraq and afghanistan will not be involved in this military campaign. It is interesting at the beginning of the week, i spoke to british m. P. By phone. Said to me i dont like the party or apartmen parliament aro support this. At the time, it looked as though there was a plan. A short path to short attacks. It looks like that is unraveling now. What does it mean for the possibility of an attack . Especially at the u. N. . I think theres a big question. Certainly they wont get this to resolution. The british tried that again. They sat down with the other members of the Security Council. It looks like theres no way that russia is going to budge. The other problem facing the Obama Administration, yes, they are going to leave. But what we are hearing is their scientific work is going to take days possibly weeks. So what we are clear of that team for some time. Ambassador, welcome back. We are talking about the inspectors now. Seems like there is tremendous pressure on them. Yes, there is. The time that it can take. They will leave tomorrow. They will leave on saturday. In their time zone. They leave on saturday. Now the earliest i would expect that would complete the examination. The small quantity of the materials they have been able to collect. Now, that seems well outside the timeframe of the administration seemed to be employing for a possible strike on syria. And then, what will the question arises what will their analysis show . Their ability to collect samples of soil, blood, urine. Has been quite restricted. They wanted to exhume some bodies. They were denied that. So im not sure how comprehensive the results will be. And what the quality of the analysis that would take four or five days would then be. And by the way, what they are analyzes is the presence of chemicals, not who did it. So ambassador, with the britts out, do you think that it is possible that obama may decide to go sooner rather than later. I am speculated that i think it is possible. I cant imagine the difficulty that is the exaggerate, i dont think any of us can overstate the difficulty that is being encountered in washington now. This is a clear result in london, and leaves United States high and drive. On the other hand, look at how the drums have been beating this week. Even absent the crucial pieces of informing require which had is who did this thing. We may not know what happened but we may not know who authorized it. Let me just pause our rea. Paul is on capitol hill. First lets go to the white house, what are you hearing . The administration is doubling down. It has been crossed once before by the administration own estimation, earlier this year. But the images that we saw coming across Television Screens over the course of the last several days really changed the tone here in washington. Talk about this before. The president most recently in an interview with pbs that aired last night, called for a clear and decisive way to send a shock across the bow of the regime. Clearly, the president is talking in the context of punishment, to set an example of the asaad regime. An example for iran and north korea and other regimes that possess weapons or in the process of developing those. Now, a surprise certainly. And the shock that has been experienced in domestic circles within the u. K. I think they are just processing this. Top officials just concluded a Video Conference call with congressional leadership, both house and senate, and the leaders in ranking members on all the relevant committees. No reaction, no read out yet on that. Although im sure that will be streaming in in the late night hours. Here is the key sentence here. The white house doubling down a reaction from a National Security council spokeswoman. The response to the british vote. I will read it. President obamas decision make willing be guided by what is in the best interest of the United States. He believes there are interests at stake for the United States, and that countries that violate International Laws need to be held accountable. The president has used that term time and time den. For National Interests now the question is, can the president credibly back away from the posture that he has taken. These limited strikes that he almost quite obviously referred to in that interview, if americas core National Interests are at stake . Let me go to paul, who is in capitol hill, and paul, of course, many members of congress back home on recess thats why they have this conference call, have you heard anything tonight . Well, thats right. There is mounting frustration what we are hearing. Mounting bipartisan frustration, they are worried that any attack can draw the u. S. Further into the syrian conflict. And they are also frustrated about the lack of an end game. About a clear policy for a way out. Paul, do we know anything about the briefing at the white house that they had with congress . Have you hear anything about that. They have heard there are problems with that Video Conference. A problem securing enough Video Conference lines so the conference had to be declassified on ur classified report. President obama said it wouldnt be regime change or even changes the civil war. They are trying to keep it out of the hands of terrorists. We know the ashad regime maintains stock piles. We have indicated over the course of the last two years that the regime would be held accountable for the security of the chemical weapons. Experts say it is a stretch for the president to say attacking syria is somehow about keeping america safe. The only way that the president can legally strike syria is somehow relate to americas defense. Quite frankly, i think he is making a tenuous case. The other big question concerns precedent, never before have they attacked another country for using chemical weapons against its own people. When sudan hussein gases thousands of curds the the u. S. And the rest of the world took little action. Even the state Department Admits there is no blueprint. No. Not to that degree. So there is no precedent. Not that i am aware of, no. Closest comparison may be operation dessert fox, in 1998. Thats when the u. S. Led a four day Bombing Campaign against iraqs illusive weapons of mass destruction. And in april 1993, when they launched tom hawks into iraq. The former president george h w bush, defense secretary sounded a lot like president obama. In an interview with the post, aspen said what we are doing is sending a message against the people who were responsible for planning this operation. If anybody asks the same people to do it again, they will remember this message. And experts say this isnt about sending a message to syria at all. But to another american enemy right next door. It really is about the president s credibility when dealing with other countries. Specifically iran. He has told iran that all options are on the table, including military options. To prevent them from gaining a nuclear weapon. If he lets it go in syria, the threat in iran is weakened. Experts kept coming back with why now, when president obam ha has so clearly stated this is a red line. Paul, thank you very much. It would seem after listening to those reports that if there was a plan, it has gone terribly wrong. What change was done before the sort of turn tide and began to talk about an attack. I think that spoke to their closest allies and i think perhaps they may feel that the british didnt deliver on what they were hoping to do. I think they felt that he had the votes in his parliament, and he is coming along on this. But it is quite clear that he hasnt been able to deliver. Russia has been in the same position throughout this on completely the other side of the argument, and china is sticking very close. A couple of days ago in the program, we deliver add warning to the United States, essentially saying you need to have hard and tags evidence. And now we still dont have hard and fast evidence that we know of, and there are indications that the United States is moving forward. What is your reaction . I take the same position. I think it is crucial within the United States within the United Nations to and indeed, for the general population. For the truthful reason given. And thats not being done. The United States, if it doesnt do that, yet goes ahead. Run as propound risk in terms of standing in the world. In temples of the possible failure of the operation. Those are the reasons that havent made it. I would vow to no one in insisting that there is a norm. Against the use of the position for the chemical weapons. And if that norm has been violated it seems to me we have those consequences. But we have not been given enough information about that violation of the norm. The culprit has not yet been identified. All we have is conviction, that will not convince the world of the rightness of this action. Other countries are taking a more wait and see approach. Jackie is in paris, with a desided public. Shoulder to shoulder. With the leader of the syrian opposition. But they are launched then two days ago when he spoke with punishing the regime. Everything must be done for a political solution, but this will only happen in opposition appear to alan terntive with the necessary strength, note my with its army. We will only achieve that to put a stop to this ebbing collation and violence, to which the chemical attack is just one example. A new opinion polled on the International Response in syria, suggests the french are deeply divided. When asked about a u. N. Military intervention, 55 agreed. But when they were asked if france should intervene, 59 disagreed. Well, if something did happen to the regime, it is a very serious problem. Because it is a man killing his own people. And we cant just stand by and do nothing. I am not in favor, we have intervened in many countries. We are still in many, but unfortunately, it doesnt make much of a difference. Leaders across europe seem to be pulling back from the strong statements they were making a few days ago. Be uh the military build up around syria is continuing. That needs to happen for the intervention to appear credible, and for the pressure to be maintained and the authorities. Cautious approach in berlin too, where people are sensitive to germanys military history. Usually one wouldnt be in favor of military intervention, but there are certain circumstances where human rights are massively hurt. And then it is time for a clear response. I dont think germany should get involved. It is difficult to say which side to take, and you dont have the full picture of what is going on between state and citizens. Back in paris, military commanders say all preparations are taking place. They are now waiting for the press release. Al jazeera. Ambassadors this skepticism that we are hearing in germany, and france. About what happened in iraq. Yes. And it was reflected in what happened in the British Parliament too. I must say i found it astonishes today, to hear Donald Rumsfeld to hear what im saying tonight, we must have the truly factual information before it can occur. Remember wayhe did. At that time, he was the main architect of how should i put it politely, the mistakes. The misinformation. The justified the invasion. They talked about in the parliament today. He say the well is being poisons. Everyone knows. The skepticism that is arecord today, that yet another attack, and the reasons being given for it. Have driven pi their awful experience a dozen years ago. I can tell you that the u. N. , there are many that believe that it is possible that now because of the way this is unraveling it may happen quite quickly. Then some say what is happening in the long view delay, it is bet tore get on with this, i can tell you right now that the u. N. Is thinking about reducing. This is a good time to take a leave, why dont you ebb tend your leave, they are trying to reduce it, and i was told by a reliable source that they fear that the attacks could start this weekend. Lets take a look at more international reaction. Now, russian president has been but today, russia says it is sending two of its own warships to the eastern mediterranean. On why russia is so determined to defend its middle east ally. It was in the height of the cold war that the deal was struck. In 1980, sign add treaty of cooperation and friendship. With the then syrian president. It was a master stroke of soviet strategy, that immediately turned the soviet union and later russia into a major player in that tinderbox in the middle east. Where the sowf cents have been selling weapons since the 1973 war. Zero years ago. So what does russia get from the deal today . It has access to a naval maintenance and supply base, syrian port, russias only military base, outside the former soviet union. Also unparalleled access. A little surprise in the Security Council that russia has consistently voted down resolutions calling for sanctions on syria. But one voice has remained silent. Vladimir putin in a calculated display to the threat of the u. S. Intervention in syria, was 6,000kilometers from thursday independenting flight in the east. I dont think that putin has something to say, just now. To come up and to say that this attack would be wrong and a mistake, and a crime, and dont do it. While i think Everybody Knows that it will happen anyway. It doesnt make any sense. Im sure he will appear after, and feel strongly for them. As for the russian people a poll on wednesday revealed a 39 had never even heard of the war. No. At the moment im occupied with other things. I dont follow the news. They will use this as an excuse to launch an attack. What is most important is not to be seen the people as bending to u. S. Pressure, and maintaining its roll to protector of syria. And to that end, two russian warships were deployed on thursday. As tensions continue to rise. A reminder gathering in the area, that this is not somalian american bond. Have enough clout with president asaad to encouraging him to go to the tables after any strikes on his country. Remains fundamentally opposed to the military action that could bring about these new talks in the first place. Let me ask you this, james. What does it mean for russia to send warships. It is certainly very worrying. Simply of deep concern to the white house, and i think theres another thing concerning them on the diplomatic calendar ahead. In the next few days in the next week. To the g 20 summit, thats very bad times. We just heard from the white house that during that call just a while ago, president is still not made the final decision. Does that mean he is rethinking this . I strongly doubt it. This has a very bad feeling about it. I repeat again, whatever you do do it for the right reasons. And the world wants to know what the reasons for this would be. I dont think we are going to get them. We can only speculate on highway the quite now seems so committed to this course. In addition to wanted to defend the world against chemical weapons. Thats the bit from moscow, france, the bit that people are finding it difficult to believe. They have to do better than that. Interesting discussion. Richard butler, thank you very much for your incite. Well, the main highway between damascus and beirut has been jammed with syrians trying to leave the war torn nation. Those along this rout are supporterred of the shower real asaad. Most of them are angry at the u. S. And ready to fight. From the boarder seen syria and lebanon. Syrian lebanese boarder means safety for those trying to escape the dangers. The capitol city is only 20 miles away and seen as a certain target if a u. S. Led coalition decides to strike as punishment as the use of chemical weapons. But many of those are strongly supporting the rah jet stream, saying they would give their lives to defeat america. And you think asaad is the right side. Absolutely. Totally support mr. Asaad . To the end. To the death. These women and children are coming out of syria for their own safety, but many of the them crossing here with them, will be headed back, today, to support Syrian Military regime. You are going to turn right around and do back in . Sure. Today . Yes. Today you turn around and go back into syria. Our family in a safe place. So we need to sort out something, to make them invasion. This is the main Border Crossing from damascus to beirut. The exit where legal papers are presented. But on dozens and back roads it is believed that the syrian rebel supporters are also making their way out. People opposed to the regime, those refugees have left syria illegally, never to return while asaad remains in power. Still others here are crossing this border reluctantly, quickly visiting relatives only to do back into damascus, to witness the coming events. And pray for peoples safety. So you cant leave the family, you dont want to leave the family . Yeah. Whatever it is. We hear that its very dangerous, but we cant do anything. Nervous, absolutely. But resigned to a life in a war torn city, certainly faces more battled ahead. David jackson, al jazeera, on the lebanon syria border. We will have more on the crisis after this. Measles outbreak. Thats the headlines consider this is up next on al jazeera. Last week Al Jazeera America launched a new and needed voice]. Welcome back to al jazeera. President obama has not made a decision on syria. The administration broked lawmakers tonight. Some say the president has not yet made a final decision. Despite the conclusion that the government car