Its a busy day. Lets get to it. Now, Shepard Smith reporting. The United States could soon expand its attacks on Islamic State fighters targeting them in syria as well as iraq. But the United States will not go it alone. Thats the word today from military officials who say they are preparing a list of options, a list that includes air strikes in syria. They say any new campaign against the Islamic State terrorists would involve the United States working with a team of several nations. The United States is already striking the militants in Northern Iraq but has not yet gone after them in neighboring syria. Pentagon Officials Say it would take more than bombs to get rid of the threat. Air strikes alone are not going to solve the threat that they pose. Its not going to completely eliminate the challenge that they represent. And i think we all agree with that. But isil is a growing network, they are well resourced, they are well led, they do pose a regional threat. The Islamic State militants control an enormous section of land stretching between the two countries. The areas that you see on this map in red through there. Thats raised concerns that the militants could retreat into syria, far from where the United States is currently doing any bombing. For their part, the syrians foreign minister today warned the United States must have permission before launching any air strikes there in syria. He said without permission from syria, any u. S. Air strikes would be seen as an act of aggression. Of course, getting permission from the Syrian Government means essentially teaming up with that countrys president , Bashar Al Assad, something that would have been unthinkable just a few months ago, and it may be right now. Assad, of course, the leader the United States has accused of gassing, bombing and executing his own people. The United Nations now estimates nearly 200,000 people have died in the ongoing civil war. Ed henry on fox top story live for us at the white house this afternoon. Do we know at all what the president s thoughts are on this day of what the next steps should be, ed . Well, i will tell you that josh earnest was very cautious today as far as briefing after the president s vacation, back to work. Basically would not directly say even whether the president has officially gotten military options from the pentagon, from general martin dempsey, defense secretary chuck hagel who, by the way, is meeting here at the white house with the president this afternoon. Obviously thats one possibility that the president could eventually be officially presented potential options for military strikes in syria. Something that they have confirmed privately that they are already considering. The other issue josh was dealing with was whether or not they will officially go into syria, whether they will expand beyond iraq as you have been talking about. Remember, general martin dempsey, the joint chiefs chairman, last thursday suggested the only way to defeat isis is to go inside syria. I pressed josh earnest on whether the president agrees with that assessment. Listen. What the chairman was saying is that yes, obviously you have to make gains against isil in syria in order to defeat isil. What you shouldnt necessarily do is jump to the conclusion that that means robust American Military action is required in syria to further accomplish that goal. It certainly sounded like general dempsey last week was talking about robust military, actually the potential for it, inside syria. Hes now at the pentagon, they have been clarifying those comments clearly at the white house podium trying to tamp that down a little bit and make sure theres not a rush into syria now as the president weighs his options. We reported that the syrians are now saying if there are any air strikes in syria, that would mean getting permission from Bashar Al Assad which sounds to me on the face of it like a nonstarter. Is that true . It certainly does sound like a nonstarter. We pressed josh earnest on that as well. The white house in recent weeks has made a distinction that in iraq, there has been u. S. Air strikes because the Iraqi Government invited the u. S. Government in to help battle isis. In this case, with syria, up until today, there have been no invitations from the Assad Government and instead, what the Assad Government now seems to be saying is look, we might work with you to fight isis but were not going to allow the u. S. To come in with air strikes on its own. We pressed josh earnest. He simply would not address that directly because it appears the president wants to keep his options open. You know, potentially go in with u. S. Air strikes, obviously, without assads permission because they dont really care what assa but remember, one year ago this week, the president considered u. S. Air strikes in syria, stopped short of that by saying im not going to move forward unilaterally without approval from congress. He wanted a consensus. Again, we pressed josh earnest, this time will he go to congress. He only would say he will consult with congress. Didnt say he would get Congress Approval first. So they may be rethinking what they said a year ago and might move forward on their own this time but they want to weigh it out first. Ed henry at the white house. Good of you. Thank you very much. Lets go to d. C. And bring in the former assistant secretary of state, p. J. Crowley, now professor in practice at George Washington university. This started with very clear goals for the United States. The goals were two, protect americans who were at the base in baghdad and secondly, stop a genocide from happening. They said at the time and they say to this day no boots on the ground. You dont have to be a genius to know there are more than 1,000 boots on the ground already and this idea of expanding to syria, your thoughts . Well, they are part and parcel of a common challenge. Obviously the Islamic State holds territory on a border that has less and less significance between syria and iraq. But as ed was just mentioning, there are two fundamentally different environments there. If we were to take military action in syria, one is for what purpose is it expansive, is it limited, and the second is it a discrete operation or part of a campaign. If its the latter, the first thing you have to do is take out major sections of the Syrian Air Defense system because you have to understand that this will be moving into a hostile military environment. What are your greatest concerns as we continue with boots the ground now in iraq and now apparently are considering air strikes in syria . I think we have to look at military action in terms of a larger solution which has to involve the political element. Obviously the military operations in iraq have been very successful, but the longterm goal here is to get the Iraqi Government to be far more effective and far more inclusive than it was under al maliki. If the Iraqi Government performs well, you have every reason to believe that we could see the same dynamic in iraq today, or soon, that we saw with the anbar awakening in 2006 and 2007, in which case the sunnis and shia together will help push out the islamic estate. We dont have a viable political solution because you are in syria fighting multiple adversaries, not just the Islamic State but also the Assad Government and also hezbollah is there as well. Putting that together is a far more complex calculation than what were seeing in iraq. Doesnt a limited and shortterm military operation on the part of the United States leave open the possibility that that would be an enormous recruiting tool for these terrorists, that a shortterm limited operation, history tells us, brings in more adversaries, creates a larger problem. Whats your degree of concern on that front . I think what the white house said last week was if we are pursuing those who are responsible for james foleys death, borders dont matter. That takes you back to kind of where we were with the bin laden raid, obviously went in, did the job and then had to deal with what the pakistanis thought after the fact. The real question is are we going to take the step of recognizing that in order to defeat the Islamic State in both contexts, iraq and syria, we have to have an expanded aggressive longterm military challenge or military strategy, but that has to be combined with some sort of political strategy and thats been the dilemma of syria for the past three years. Obviously countries like iran, countries like russia, have thwarted any every opportunity to try to find a political solution in syria. P. J. Crowley, very good of you. Thanks very much. Keep in mind, stated goals, when all of this began, one, protect American People and interests in baghdad at the embassy there, and two, stop a genocide from happening. Which has apparently according to american officials, happened. Now we have more than 1,000 troops on the ground and now, they are considering air strikes in syria with the same goals listed and the word that there is no mission creep. We report, you decide. Word today that the militant who carved off the head of the american journalist james foley revealed a major clue to his identity by not covering his hands. Two clues, actually. We will get to that as our coverage continues across america and around the world. The terrorist who appeared in the Islamic State video that showed the beheading of the journalist hid behind a mask, but the militant did not cover his hands and the new part is a Counter Intelligence source now tells fox news that may have been an enormous mistake on his part. You see, this source is telling investigators are mapping veins in the terrorists hands, analyzing his skin tone to help identify him, and analyzing voice patterns. The source also says the terrorist is part of a group of about a dozen extremists who are active on social media and close to the Islamic States top leaders. The British Ambassador to the United States yesterday reported that intelligence officials in the uk are quote, very close to identifying foleys killer. Meantime, reports indicate that some forensic analysis indicates that the suspect may have been a front man of sorts, so maybe not a killer but a front man. You see, the video shows the terrorist appearing to start cutting off foleys head, but then it fades to black before showing the journalists decapitated body. In other words, the analysts say somebody else must have actually killed foley, or may have actually killed foley. The video is clearly edited. The journalists parents say they have posted online the final letter that he wrote during his time as prisoner, saying Islamic State militants took the original letter but foley had another hostage memorize it and then dictate it after his release. The letter as dictated reads, i remember so many great family times that take me away from this prison. Dreams of family and friends take me away and happiness fills my heart. Katherine herridge is live in washington. What more are we learning about this analysis, the veins and the lefthandedness and all the rest at which theyre looking . Well, in addition to those voice recordings, fox news is told investigators are analyzing the skin tone, the killer is lefthanded as you mentioned, as well as distinguishing characteristics such as the pattern of veins which can be as unique as a fingerprint according to a former senior investigator with the fbi. If you can get two pictures where the veins and any markings on the skin match up, there are just very few people who have moles and veins that are the same in their hands. Its pretty good in a court of law. Investigators want a high degree of confidence because as the attorney general said last week, all options are on the table and privately, u. S. Officials say that does include legal force in this case. What more are we learning on the investigation . Any specifics . Well, federal investigators have also identified the social media account that was used to post the foley execution video and this is described to fox news as a key part of the electronic forensic trail of evidence. Counterterrorism source says there are dozens of social media accounts linked to isis Senior Leadership and the data suggestion the isis leader al baghdadi provided his blessing or takcit approval for foleys murder. Both have to be at the top of their game in order to gain the financial support, the recruiting and what other items that they need to continue the jihad. I think the competition, just like any marketplace, will be good in the long run for the global jihad. Among the small pool of suspects is that british rapper who was first reported over the weekend by the sunday times. Whats interesting about his case, hes got what really amounts the a terro a terrorist. His father was extradited two years ago for his alleged ties to the east Africa Embassy bombings by al qaeda. That is considered one of the seminal attacks that led up to 9 11. Thank you, catherine. Robert young felton is a film maker and author of the worlds most dangerous places. I have been reading around and i know there are a lot of questions now about whether this video of the killing of foley is really representative of what happened there. No question about whether he was murdered. The consensus is he was. But this video itself. Yeah. As you know, i own dpx gear which designs and manufactures knives. If you look at the knife that abdelmajed bary is holding, it doesnt do any damage to foley. As you mention, they cut away and you see his dead body. Keep in mind that this gentlemans father was the head of p. R. For al qaeda. Abdel bary is not only head of al qaeda but a p. R. Maven. His son seems to be following in his steps so this is a p. R. Video designed to inflame us. Its designed to attract foreign jihadis to come to syria, to iraq, to join isis. The real murderer of foley may be off camera. You said this is abdelmajed abdel bary. We cant confirm that. It is the person to whom theyre leaning quite heavily at very minimum, i must say. This guys a rapper in the uk, sort of has been a sort of jihadist hero, if you will, on social media over time, right . Yeah. Hes no shrinking violet. Hes been on the front page of the daily mail the tabloid in england, he sent hundreds of tweets, he has posed before with severed heads. Hes really on a roll. He wants to be famous. If you look at what isis sends out, they are very very p. R. Savvy. Vice magazine did a whole series where they showed how they are trying to project who they are and what theyre doing. This to me is just a p. R. Video and once again, i think looking at who this is, its quite easy to understand who this guy is based on his voice, he may or may not be the murderer. The point is why are we being dragged into something with these very inflammatory acts and video . We clearly are being dragged into something, because all of our leaders tell us there is no mission creep. When your stated goal is to protect americans and the embassy in baghdad, number one, and the second of two goals, thats it, second goal, to stop a genocide and now you are considering air strikes in syria, it sounds to me like these jihadis are getting exactly what they want. Is this in any way the right thing for us to be doing . Well, im worried that we are using hot button emotional cues to get involved dont we always . My friends went over in june as part of a 300 overt operators. Their goal was to set up air strikes to take out isis. Thats how it should be done. Emotional type rhetoric doesnt really stay focused on whats going on there. Theres a huge vacuum of power. The government of iraq has failed, the government of syria has failed. I dont think pouring american troops in to fill that vacuum is the right answer. I think very logical, sterile annihilation of violent perpetrators of crime is a good solution. Which stops things, but no one is suggesting that that helps to retake territory. Thats another matter for another day . Youre not going to fix the middle east. Trust me. We should have figured that out by now. Thats not going to fix things. So for now, at least, your thinking is these air strikes are the right thing to do, putting boots on the ground which we already have some 1,000, 1100, is the wrong thing. Close air support requires boots on the ground but it doesnt require the huge long tail Logistical Support that requires mraps, all the things we associate with ground war. We know how to fight smart wars. We can put special forces, we can put air force controllers, we can use the air force and dramatically decimate mobile units like isis. We cant fix the political situation. We cant fill the vacuum. But we have already removed maliki from power so we are making strides. Our government should make that very plain to the american public. We actually are fairly competent in this type of warfare. Robert, thank you. Breaking news coming into the fox news deck. We just got word on the ongoing crisis in ukraine that ukraines president has just dissolved the government. In other words, dissolved parliament and announced early elections coming in october. Ukrainian president issued a statement just moments ago saying the Ruling Coalition collapsed weeks ago, which clearly it did. Meantime, there are new allegations that Russian Forces have disguised themselves as separatist rebels and have entered