Chemical weapons

facebook_page
twitter_page

Last quote about Chemical weapons

Beatrice Fihn
We are particularly happy the text is rooted in humanitarian principles and that it builds on previous prohibitions of unacceptable weapons, such as biological and chemical weapons, landmines and cluster munitions. Nuclear weapons are ethically unacceptable in the 21st century. Intended to indiscriminately kill civilians, this 1940s technology is putting countless of lives at risk every day. Their continued existence undermines the moral credibility of every country which relies on them. A treaty to ban them, as a first step towards their elimination, will have real and lasting impact.feedback
share this quote
May 23 2017
“I was obviously trying to make a point about the heinous acts that Assad had made against his own people last week, using chemical weapons and gas. Frankly, I mistakenly made an inappropriate and insensitive reference to the Holocaust, for which there is no comparison. And for that I apologize. It was a mistake to do that.” said Sean Spicer speaking about Chemical weapons. It’s one of the 280 quotes about Chemical weapons you can find on this page. 139 people have said something about this topic. Among them: Donald J. Trump, Rex W. Tillerson and Boris Johnson. Browse the quotes by date and by name to find those that are relevant to you.
Automatically powered by Storyzy
Take our quote verification challenge and find out !

All quotes about Chemical weapons

Boris Johnson

If the US has a proposal to have some sort of action in response to a chemical weapons attack and if they come to us and ask for our support, whether it's with submarine-based cruise missiles in the (Mediterranean), or whatever it happens to be, it would be in my view, and I know this is also the view of the Prime Minister, very difficult for us to say no. I think that needs to be tested. As I said I think it would be very difficult for us to say no. How exactly we were able to implement that would be for the Government, the Prime Minister.feedback

Recep Tayyip Erdogan

He has attacked his people with tanks, with cannons, with barrel bombs, with chemical weapons, with fighter jets. Do you think he could be the vehicle for a solution?feedback

Donald J. Trump

It hasn't lived up to the potential. I see a day when there's a conflict where the United Nations, you get together, and you solve the conflict. You just don't see the United Nations, like, solving conflicts. I think that's going to start happening now. On Syria, the council failed again this month to respond to Syria's use of chemical weapons. The status quo in North Korea is also unacceptable, and the council must be prepared to impose additional and stronger sanctions on North Korean nuclear and ballistic missile programs.feedback

Steven Mnuchin

We take Syria's disregard for innocent human life very seriously, and will relentlessly pursue and shut down the financial networks of all individuals involved with the production of chemical weapons used to commit these atrocities. The United States is sending a strong message with this action that we will hold the entire Assad regime accountable for these blatant human rights violations in order to deter the spread of these types of barbaric chemical weapons.feedback

Donald J. Trump

This is a real threat to the world, whether we want to talk about it or not. North Korea is a big world problem, and it's a problem that we have to finally solve. On Syria, the Council failed again this month to respond to Syria's use of chemical weapons. A great disappointment; I was very disappointed by that. If we do a great job, I care much less about the budget, because you're talking about peanuts compared to the important work you're doing.feedback

Steven Mnuchin

These sweeping sanctions target the scientific support center for Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad's horrific chemical weapons attack on innocent civilian men, women, and children.feedback

Yannick Jadot

Putin is the one who validates chemical weapons massacres in Syria and an absolutely totalitarian regime in Chechnya that is the process of massacring homosexuals.feedback

Jeremy Corbyn

I would say to President Trump, listen, it's in nobody's interest for this war to continue let';s get the Geneva process going quickly and in the meantime no more strikes, have the UN investigation into the war crime of the use of chemical weapons in Syria and take it on from there.feedback

Benyamin Netanyahu

We sense a great change in the direction of American policy. We noted the very clear and forthright words, Mr. Secretary, that you had to say about Iran. This follows very strong and forthright words on the part of President Trump and very forthright deeds against the use of chemical weapons by Iran's proxy, Syria.feedback

Jean-Marc Ayrault

We will provide proof that the regime did indeed organise these strikes with chemical weapons. In a few days, I will be able to provide proof.feedback

Bruce Bechtol

Korean analysts should take note of how chemical weapons were used in the Syrian civil war because this is likely going to be a test-bed for future North Korean actions in a conflict with the South.feedback

Jean-Marc Ayrault

There is an investigation underway (by) the French intelligence services and military intelligence … it's a question of days and we will provide proof that the regime carried out these strikes. We have elements that will enable us to show that the regime knowingly used chemical weapons. It's 100 percent lies and propaganda. It's 100 percent cruelty and cynicism.feedback

Tom Brake

The First Lady of Syria has acted, not as a private citizen, but as a spokesperson for the Syrian presidency. This is a barbarous regime, yet Asma al-Assad has continued to use her international profile to defend it, even after the chemical weapons atrocity. The government is entitled to deprive someone of their citizenship if it is conducive to the public good because that person has prejudiced the interests of the UK.feedback

Sean Spicer

I was obviously trying to make a point about the heinous acts that Assad had made against his own people last week, using chemical weapons and gas. Frankly, I mistakenly made an inappropriate and insensitive reference to the Holocaust, for which there is no comparison. And for that I apologize. It was a mistake to do that.feedback

Sean Spicer

We didn't use chemical weapons in World War II. You know, you had a – someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons.feedback

Boris Johnson

Assad uses chemical weapons because they are not only horrible and indiscriminate. They are also terrifying. In that sense he is himself an arch-terrorist, who has caused such an unquenchable thirst for revenge that he can never hope to govern his population again. He is literally and metaphorically toxic, and it is time Russia awoke to that fact. They still have time to be on the right side of the argument. America "could of course strike again. British scientists have analysed samples from the victims of the attack. These have tested positive for Sarin or a Sarin-like substance.feedback

Sean Spicer

Nothing has changed in our posture. You had someone who was despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. [Hitler] brought them into the Holocaust centers, I understand that. But in the way that Assad used them, where he went into towns and dropped them down to innocent in the middle of towns.feedback

Sean Spicer

You had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons . . . I think when you come to Sarin gas, he (Hitler) was not using gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing.feedback

Boris Johnson

The UK, the US and all our key allies are of one mind: we believe that this was highly likely to be an attack by Assad, on his own people, using poison gas weapons that were banned almost 100 years ago, under the 1925 Geneva protocol. In exchange they should commit to produce a real ceasefire, to end the use of chemical weapons and barrel bombs, and to bring about a political settlement that relieves the Syrians of the tyranny of Assad.feedback

Zaher al-Sakat

He will not let go of the chemical weapons while he is leader of Syria. If he is forced to leave, he might confess to where some of it is hidden only so it doesn't end up in the wrong hands.feedback

Michael McFaul

For me, this tragedy underscores the dangers of trying to do deals with dictators without a comprehensive, invasive and permanent inspection regime. It also shows the limits of doing deals with [Russian President Vladimir] Putin. Surely, the Russians must have known about these chemical weapons.feedback

Erik Wemple

The Anti-Defamation League was closed for Passover around the time that White House press secretary Sean Spicer claimed, “You had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn’t even sink to using chemical weapons”; spoke of “the Holocaust center”; and, when pressed on the matter, mentioned something about Syria’s Bashar al-Assad dropping poisonous chemicals on “innocent” folks.feedback

Bashar al-Assad

We can only allow any investigation when it's impartial, when we make sure that unbiased countries will participate in this delegation in order to make sure that they won't use it for politicized purposes. Our impression is that the West, mainly the United States, is hand-in-glove with the terrorists. They fabricated the whole story in order to have a pretext for the attack. We don't have any chemical weapons, we gave up our arsenal a few years ago. You have a lot of fake videos now. We don't know whether those dead children were killed in Khan Sheikhun. Were they dead at all?feedback

Mark Toner

There can be little doubt that the recent attacks and the chemical weapons attack in Idlib was by the Syrian government, by the Syrian regime and that it wasn't only a violation of the laws of war but it was, we believe, a war crime.feedback

Donald J. Trump

Vicious slaughter of innocent civilians with chemical weapons including the barbaric killing of small and helpless children and babies must be forcefully rejected by any nation that values human life. That's a butcher. So I felt we had to do something about it. I have absolutely no doubt we did the right thing, and it was very, very successfully done. It is time to end this brutal civil war, defeat terrorists and allow refugees to return home. I don't like it because I don't think it's necessary. The bank mainly helps a few companies - and these are companies that can do very well without it.feedback

Boris Johnson

I am dismayed that Russia has once again blocked the UN Security Council and in so doing refused to condemn the use of chemical weapons or support a full UN investigation into the attack. This puts Russia on the wrong side of the argument. But it doesn't have to be this way. Russia faces a choice: it can continue acting as a lifeline for Assad's murderous regime, or it could live up to its responsibilities as a global power, and use its influence over the regime to bring six long years of failed ceasefires and false dawns to an end.feedback

Rex W. Tillerson

This is just the latest in a series of the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime. (…) Clearly, our view is that the reign of the Assad family is coming to an end, and they have again brought this on themselves with their conduct of the war of these past few years.feedback

Sergey Lavrov

We saw that our American colleagues are ready to support such an investigation and we expect that the powers that the UN and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons have will be used immediately.feedback

Boris Johnson

This puts Russia on the wrong side of the argument. Last week in Syria, a barbaric attack was committed. Today, British scientists have completed an analysis of samples obtained from the site of the attack and concluded that sarin, or a sarin-like substance, was used. Our assessment, like that of the US, is that it is highly likely the Assad regime was responsible. This afternoon in New York, the international community sought to make clear that any use of chemical weapons by anyone anywhere is unacceptable and that those responsible will face consequences.feedback

Donald J. Trump

We're not going into Syria. But when I see people using horrible, horrible chemical weapons ... and see these beautiful kids that are dead in their father's arms, or you see kids gasping for life ... when you see that, I immediately called (Defense Secretary) General Mattis.feedback

Sean Spicer

We didn't use chemical weapons in World War II. You know, you had a, you know, someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. So you have to if you're Russia, ask yourself: Is this a country that you, and a regime, that you want to align yourself with? You have previously signed onto international agreements, rightfully acknowledging that the use of chemical weapons should be out of bounds by every country.feedback

Rex W. Tillerson

With respect to Russia's complicity or knowledge of the chemical weapons attack, we have no firm information to indicate that there was any involvement by Russia, Russian forces into this attack. What we do know, and we have very firm and high confidence in our conclusions, is the attack was planned and carried out by regime forces at the direction of Bashar al-Assad.feedback

Rex W. Tillerson

Clearly, this is an issue that has emerged in our time for which we have yet, as an international community, come to some conclusion on how we want to respond to that. This is just the latest of the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime, and notwithstanding their use on more than 50 occasions of chlorine bombs and cluster bombs and other types of weapons that are intended to maim and kill in the most horrific ways.feedback

Vladimir Putin

I've said that this U.S. strike reminds me strongly of events in Iraq in 2003, when U.S. representatives in the UN Security Council showed alleged chemical weapons found in Iraq. A military campaign was launched in Iraq after this and it resulted in the destruction of the country, in the growth of the terrorist threat and the emergence of Islamic State on the international arena.feedback

Joseph Wilson

I was very pleased by the president's response. And I would have supported the prior president if he had acted, but he didn't. Where chemical weapons are used, there should be immediate action. Because if we don't, sadly it's an opportunity for chemical weapons to be used around the world and, we know, ultimately, within the United States.feedback

Sean Spicer

I think when you come to sarin gas, there was no, he [Hitler] was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing. There was clearly ... I understand your point, thank you. There was not ... He brought them into the Holocaust center I understand that. In no way was I trying to lessen the horrendous nature of the Holocaust. I was trying to draw a distinction of the tactic of using airplanes to drop chemical weapons on population centers. Any attack on innocent people is reprehensible and inexcusable.feedback

Sean Spicer

Someone as despicable as Hitler didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. You have to ask yourself if you are Russia, is this a country and a regime you want to align yourself with? And frankly, I mistakenly used an inappropriate and insensitive reference to the Holocaust, for which frankly, there is no comparison. For that, I apologise. It was a mistake to do that.feedback

Vladimir Putin

You can say that the level of trust on a working level, especially on the military side, has not improved but most likely worsened. Where is the proof that Syrian troops used chemical weapons? There isn't any. But there was a violation of international law. That is an obvious fact.feedback

Sean Spicer

Russia is on an island when it comes to its support of Syria or its lack of, frankly, acknowledgment of what happened. You had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. It was a mistake. I shouldn't have done it and I won't do it again. It was inappropriate and insensitive.feedback

Vladimir Putin

To my mind, this strongly resembles what happened in 2003 when representatives of the United States showed in the Security Council what was supposed to be chemical weapons found in Iraq. A military campaign in Iraq ensued, and it ended in devastation of the country, growth of the terror threat and emergence of ISIL on the international scene.feedback

Vladimir Putin

President Mattarella and I discussed it, and I told him that this reminds me strongly of the events in 2003, when the US representatives demonstrated at the UN Security Council session the presumed chemical weapons found in Iraq. The military campaign was subsequently launched in Iraq and it ended with the devastation of the country, the growth of the terrorist threat and the appearance of Islamic State [IS, formerly ISIS] on the world stage.feedback

Sean Spicer

We didn't use chemical weapons in World War Two, you know, you had a, someone as despicable as Hitler, who didn't even sink to the, to using chemical weapons. So you have to, if you're Russia, ask yourself is this a country that, and a regime, that you want to align yourself with. His statements imply a profound lack of knowledge of events of the Second World War, including the Holocaust. Moreover, they are liable to strengthen the hands of those whose goal is to distort history.feedback

Steven Goldstein

Someone who is [as] despicable as Hitler didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. Sean Spicer has engaged in Holocaust denial, the most offensive form of fake news imaginable, by denying Hitler gassed millions of Jews to death. Spicer's statement is the most evil slur upon a group of people we have ever heard from a White House press secretary. Sean Spicer now lacks the integrity to serve as White House press secretary, and President Trump must fire him at once. #Antisemitism. #NeverAgain.feedback

Sean Spicer

We didn't use chemical weapons in World War II. You had a ... someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink ... to using chemical weapons. You have to, if you're Russia, ask yourself, is this a country and a regime you want to align yourself with? I think when you come to sarin gas... he was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing. He brought them into the Holocaust center, I understand that. But I was saying that in the way that Assad used them, where he went into towns, dropped them down into innocent – into the middle of towns.feedback

Sean Spicer

You had a -- you know someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. He brought them into the Holocaust Center. But I'm saying that in the way that Assad used them where he went in towns, dropped them down to innocent - into the middle of towns - it was brought - so the use of it - I appreciate the clarification. In no way was I trying to lessen the horrendous nature of the Holocaust. I was trying to draw a distinction of the tactic of using airplanes to drop chemical weapons on population centers. Any attack on innocent people is reprehensible and inexcusable.feedback

Sean Spicer

We didn't use chemical weapons in World War Two - you had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to the - to using chemical weapons. Hitler "was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing ... he brought them into the Holocaust centre and I understand that, what I'm saying is in the way that Assad used them where he went into towns, dropped them down into the middle of towns.feedback

Sean Spicer

We didn't use chemical weapons in World War II. I think when you come to sarin gas, there was no, he (Hitler) was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing. They have aligned themselves with North Korea, Syria, Iran… they are all failed states.feedback

Sean Spicer

We didn't use chemical weapons in World War II. Someone who is despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. You have to, if you're Russia, ask yourself, is this a country that you, and a regime that you want to align yourself with? He brought them into the Holocaust centre. I understand that. But I'm saying in the way that Assad used them where he went into towns, dropped them down into innocent, into the middle of towns. So the use of it, I appreciate the clarification there. That was not the intent.feedback

Yisrael Katz

Sean Spicer's statement that Hitler didn't use chemical weapons is severe and outrageous. We have a moral obligation that supersedes policy considerations. We must demand that he apologize, or resign.feedback

Francine Prose

The uncomfortable fact is that this short-lived fixation will move the conversation away from the administration’s chaotic (or nonexistent) foreign policy. On Monday, at a White House press briefing, Sean Spicer surprised an audience of reporters who must by now have grown accustomed, even hardened, to the press secretary’s gaffes, mistakes and dogged defenses of alternative facts. Extemporizing on Syrian President Bashar-al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons against a civilian population, Spicer explained why the Syrian dictator is more evil than Hitler.feedback

Michael Fallon

Did they know that Assad was going to unleash chemical weapons? We have no evidence for that, we don't know whether the Russians were involved at all.feedback

Nachman Shai

The White House urgently needs a history teacher. Ignorance is not acceptable. Hitler used chemical weapons of mass destruction in a large scale that human history hadn't seen until then, and since then. This a second failure of the White House recently, regarding the biggest tragedy that occurred to the Jewish people and took place in the 20th century.feedback

Sean Spicer

You know, you had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. So you have to, if you're Russia, ask yourself, is this a country that you and a regime that you want to align yourself with? For that, I apologise, it was a mistake to do that.feedback

Sean Spicer

You had someone as despicable as Hitler, who didn't even sink to chemical weapons. I think when you come to sarin gas, there was no - he was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Ashad is doing... he brought them into the Holocaust centres and I understand that. But I'm saying in the way that Assad used them where he went into towns dropped them down to innocent, into the middle of towns… the use of it. I appreciate the clarification there, that was not the intent.feedback

Sean Spicer

We didn't use chemical weapons in World War II. Someone as despicable as Hitler... didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. People keep asking me: when are you running for mayor? I think when you come to sarin gas, there was no, he (Hitler) was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing. There was clearly ... I understand your point, thank you. There was not ... He brought them into the Holocaust center I understand that. I appreciate the clarification. That was not the intent.feedback

Sean Spicer

We didn't use chemical weapons in World War II. You had someone as despicable as Hitler … who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. I think when you come to sarin gas, there was no, he [Hitler] was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing. I mean there was clearly … I understand your point, thank you … thank you … I appreciate that … there was not … he brought them [Jews] into the Holocaust centres I understand that.feedback

James Mattis - US Marine Corps

We have gone back through and looked at all the evidence we can and it's very clear who planned this attack, who authorized this attack and who conducted this attack itself. Even in World War II chemical weapons were not used on battlefields. Even in the Korean War, they were not used on battlefields. ISIS represents a clear and present danger and immediate threat to Europe and ultimately a threat to the United States homeland.feedback

Sean Spicer

Not even Hitler used chemical weapons. We didn't even use chemical Weapons in World War II. You had someone as despicable as Hitler and who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. In no way was I trying to lessen the horrendous nature of the Holocaust, however, I was trying to draw a contrast of the tactic of using airplanes to drop chemical weapons on innocent people.feedback

Sean Spicer

Even Hitler didn't use chemical weapons. We didn't even use chemical Weapons in World War II. You had someone as despicable as Hitler and who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. I think when you come to sarin gas, he was using the gas on his own people in the same way that Assad is doing. He brought them into the …to the Holocaust centre, I understand that. What I'm saying is the way that Assad used them where he went into towns, dropped them down to into the middle of towns. I appreciate the clarification, that was not the intent.feedback

Sean Spicer

We didn't even use chemical weapons in World War II. You had a – you know someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. He brought them into the Holocaust Center. But I'm saying that in the way that Assad used them where he went in towns, dropped them down – into the middle of towns – it was brought – so the use of it – I appreciate the clarification. That was not the intent.feedback

Sean Spicer

I was obviously trying to make a point about the heinous acts that Assad made against his own people last week using chemical weapons and gas. And frankly I mistakenly used an inappropriate and insensitive comment about the Holocaust and there is no comparison. For that, I apologize. It was a mistake to do that. You had ... someone as despicable as Hitler, who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. [Hitler] brought them into the Holocaust center.feedback

Vladimir Putin

We have information that a similar provocation is being prepared ... in other parts of Syria including in the southern Damascus suburbs where they are planning to again plant some substance and accuse the Syrian authorities of using (chemical weapons). Then the US representative at the UN Security Council showed alleged chemical weapons found in Iraq. After that a military campaign in Iraq began, which ended with the destruction of the country, the growth of the terrorist threat and the appeararence if Isil.feedback

Sean Spicer

If you gas a baby, if you put a barrel bomb into innocent people, I think you will see a response from this president. Nothing has changed in our posture. The president retains the option to act in Syria against the Assad regime whenever it is in the national interest, as was determined following that government's use of chemical weapons against its own citizens. And as the President has repeatedly made clear, he will not be telegraphing his military responses.feedback

Sean Spicer

You had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. He was not using gas on his own people the same way. To suggest that remembering the Holocaust and acknowledging all of the people – Jewish, Gypsies, priests, disabled, gays and lesbians – it is pathetic that people are picking on a statement.feedback

Sean Spicer

You had -- someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to the -- to using chemical weapons. So you have to, if you're Russia, ask yourself, Is this a country that you and a regime you want to align your self with? I think when you come to sarin gas, he was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing. He brought them into the Holocaust centers, I understand that. But in the way that Assad used them, where he went into towns, dropped them down to innocent -- in the middle of towns....I appreciate the clarification…that was not the intent.feedback

Rex W. Tillerson

Russia has aligned with the Assad regime, the Iranians and Hezbollah. Is that a long-term alliance that serves Russia's interest? We hope that the Russian government concludes that they have aligned themselves with an unreliable partner in Bashar Al-Assad.... It is clear to us the reign of the Assad family is coming to an end. We do not want the regime's uncontrolled stockpile of chemical weapons to fall into the hands of ISIS (Islamic State) or other terrorist groups who could and want to attack the United States or our allies.feedback

Rex W. Tillerson

We do not want the regime's uncontrolled stockpile of chemical weapons to fall into the hands of or other terrorist groups who could and want to attack the United States or our allies. Nor can we accept the normalization of the use of chemical weapons by other actors or countries in Syria or elsewhere. So that's why we are not presupposing how that occurs.feedback

Scott Clement

Nearly 7 in 10 say they are 'not so' or 'not at all' confident the U.S. missile strike will end the Syrian government's use of chemical weapons, while one-quarter are at least somewhat confident.feedback

Jenna Johnson

Although Spicer lumped barrel bombs in the same category as chemical weapons on three separate occasions during a Monday briefing with reporters, he later insisted that his comments should not be interpreted as a change in U.S. policy.feedback

Donald J. Trump

I think it was important for me as president of the United States to send a message that in fact there is something different about chemical weapons.feedback

Vladimir Frolov

This would involve joint investigation of the chemical weapons attack, or the support of an international investigation and complete destruction of all chemical weapons. A new complete cease-fire and the return to the Geneva agreement would then create a basis for a joint military center that would coordinate operations against the Islamic State and mutual actions in Raqqa.feedback

Aleksei V. Malashenko

I have a feeling that both Mr. Lavrov and Mr. Tillerson understand the situation well and, while the U.S. had to react to the chemical weapons attack, nobody wants to escalate this situation further. I think despite the heated atmosphere, they will try to achieve positive results.feedback

Sean Spicer

The sight of people being gassed and blown away by barrel bombs ensures that if we see this kind of action again, we hold open the possibility of future action. The President retains the option to act in Syria against the Assad regime whenever it is in the national interest, as was determined following THAT government's use of chemical weapons against its own citizens. And as the President has repeatedly made clear, he will not be telegraphing his military responses.feedback

Fumio Kishida

Japan supports the U.S. commitment in trying to take responsibility to prevent [the] spread and use of chemical weapons, and we confirmed Japan and the U.S. will continue to work together [in that effort].feedback

Sean Spicer

Today I was trying to describe the attack that [Syrian President Bashar] Assad made on his own people using chemical weapons. Frankly, I mistakenly used an inappropriate and insensitive reference to the Holocaust, to which there is frankly no comparison. Obviously, that is not what I was intending to do. And I – especially during this week [Passover] – regret using that term and apologize and hope that we can focus on the president's decisive action that he took to make sure that we deal with the situation in Syria. We didn't use chemical weapons in World War II.feedback

Sean Spicer

We didn't use chemical weapons in World War Two. In no way was I trying to lessen the horrendous nature of the Holocaust. I was trying to draw a distinction of the tactic of using airplanes to drop chemical weapons on population centers. Any attack on innocent people is reprehensible and inexcusable.feedback

Sean Spicer

You had someone as despicable as Hitler, who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. When it comes to Sarin gas, [Hitler] was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing. I understand your point. Thank you. I appreciate that. He brought them into the Holocaust centers, I understand that. I was saying in the way that Assad used them where he went into town, dropped them into the middle of town. I appreciate the clarification. That was not the intent.feedback

Boris Johnson

There is overwhelming support in what the U.S. did, signaling that we will not tolerate the barbaric use of chemical weapons.feedback

Sean Spicer

The answer is, if you gas a baby, if you put a barrel bomb into innocent people, I think you will see a response from this president. Make no mistake: he will act. I can't imagine a stable and peaceful Syria where Bashar al-Assad is in power. We're ensuring that ISIS is contained -- and the proliferation of chemical weapons -- at the same time creating the environment for a change in leadership. I think that there is a court that decides those things. That would be something for a court to decide.feedback

Erik Wemple

White House press secretary Sean Spicer on Monday articulated his boss’s narcissistic foreign-policy sensibilities. Citing the U.S. strike on a Syrian air base, Spicer said, “the action that we took last week has been widely praised domestically and internationally.” Asked about the danger of getting involved in a Middle East war, Spicer showcased his un-facility with words: “No. 1, the reason that we took action was multifold. No. 1, to stop the proliferation and the deterrence of chemical weapons. When you see mass weapons of destruction being used, it should be a concern to every nation, especially our own people. The proliferation of those weapons pose a grave threat to our national security.”.feedback

David Lesch

Assad now knows there is a red line with regard to the use of chemical weapons. But I think he also probably just sees it as a slap on the wrist. Assad has to recalibrate but not fundamentally change his military approach that they've been engaging in since the Russian intervention. I really believe they are not feeling too bad today, if this is the extent of what the U.S. is going to do.feedback

Jennifer Rubin

As he is wont to do regarding President Trump, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) got carried away, becoming downright giddy in extolling the president’s Syria strikes. The strikes, he insisted, restored “our credibility.” That’s downright silly, for while something is better than nothing - President Barack Obama’s policy - a single show of force does not make a policy. Credibility is restored with persistent, consistent action over a period of time. If Cotton thinks Trump is not showing a “reluctance to use force, ” he hasn’t been listening to the secretary of state, who insists we aren’t doing anything but sending a warning about use of chemical weapons. Cotton’s confidence in Trump, again, is misplaced. Sure enough, on Sunday the cacophony of administration voices affirmed that no one, including the president, has any idea of what comes next.feedback

Barack Obama

Today we mark an important achievement in our ongoing effort to counter the spread of weapons of mass destruction by eliminating Syria's declared chemical weapons stockpile. Serious questions remain with respect to the omissions and discrepancies in Syria's declaration to the OPCW and about continued allegations of use.feedback

Ahmet Üzümcü

The last of the remaining chemicals identified for removal from Syria were loaded this afternoon aboard the Danish ship Ark Futura. The ship made its last call at the port of Latakia in what has been a long and patient campaign in support of this international endeavor. Removing the stockpile of precursor and other chemicals has been a fundamental condition in the program to eliminate Syria's chemical weapons program.feedback

Adam Szubin

The Syrian regime's use of chemical weapons against its own people is a heinous act that violates the long-standing global norm against the production and use of chemical weapons. Today's action is a critical part of the international community's effort to hold the Syrian regime accountable for violating the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and UN Security Council Resolution 2118.feedback

John Kerry

Removing these weapons from Syria ensured that they could not be used – by the Assad regime or by terrorist groups like ISIL – but unfortunately other undeclared chemical weapons continue to be used ruthlessly on the Syrian people. While we have made progress, we cannot and will not rest until the Syrian people can no longer be gassed and terrorized by these vicious weapons.feedback

Robert Einhorn

Either he didn't declare all his C.W. [chemical weapons] and kept some hidden in reserve, or he illegally produced some sarin after his stock was eliminated – most likely the former.feedback

Rex W. Tillerson

We are prepared to do more. The president will make whatever decision he thinks is in the best interest of the American people. We do not have any information that suggests that Russia was part of the military attack undertaken using the chemical weapons.feedback

Jeffrey Mankoff

At least in the short run, it will further complicate efforts to improve the U.S.-Russia bilateral relationship, which seemed to be Tillerson's objective in going to Moscow. In the longer term, the threat of further U.S. intervention is a card that the U.S. can play to get the Russians to tighten the screws on Assad – on both the chemical weapons and possibly on accepting a political deal with the opposition.feedback

Rex W. Tillerson

I think the real failure here has been Russia's failure to live up to its commitments under the chemical weapons agreements that were entered into in 2013. The failure related to the recent strike and the recent terrible chemical weapons attack in large measure is a failure on Russia's part to achieve its commitment to the international community. Our priority is first the defeat of ISIS. Once we can eliminate the battle against ISIS, conclude that – and it is going quite well – then we hope to turn our attention to cease fire agreements between the regime and opposition forces.feedback

Nikki Haley

You know, the interesting thing, Chuck, is, when this chemical weapons murder happened to so many people, Russia's reaction was not, Oh, how horrible,' or, How could they do this to innocent children,' or, How awful is that?' Their initial reaction was, Assad didn't do it. The Syrian government didn't do it.feedback

Mitch McConnell

Indeed, if through this limited strike the President's credibility is not restored, because Assad uses chemical weapons again, what then? Add new targets aimed at toppling the regime which end up jeopardizing control of these same chemical weapons stashes – allowing them to fall into the hands of Al Qaeda or others intent on using them against the United States or our allies. Where would the cycle of escalation end?feedback

Mitch McConnell

I've concluded that being credible on Syria requires presenting a credible response, and having a credible strategy. And for all the reasons I've indicated, this proposal [to attack Syria for use of chemical weapons] just doesn't pass muster. The President's proposal seems fundamentally flawed, since if it's too narrow it may not deter Assad's further use of chemical weapons. But if it's too broad, it risks jeopardizing the security of these same stockpiles, potentially putting them into the hands of extremists.feedback

Mitch McConnell

The President's delayed response was to call for a show of force, for targeted, limited strikes against the regime. We have been told that the purpose of these strikes is to deter and degrade the Assad regime's ability to use chemical weapons.feedback

H.R. McMaster

I think what we should do is ask Russia, How could it be, if you have advisers at that airfield, that you didn't know that the Syrian air force was preparing and executing a mass murder attack with chemical weapons? I think we ought to ask them that question. Do they want it to be a relationship of competition and potential conflict?feedback

Jennifer Rubin

Nikki Haley, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, addressed the U.N. Security Council on Wednesday, and in so doing helped to focus the world’s attention and President Trump’s attention on Tuesday’s chemical attack on men, women and children in Syria. She declared, “Yesterday morning, we awoke to pictures, to children foaming at the mouth, suffering convulsions, being carried in the arms of desperate parents. We saw rows of lifeless bodies. Some still in diapers. Some with the visible scars of a chemical weapons attack.” Holding up two horrifying photographs, she stared down the Russian ambassador. “Look at those pictures, ” she said. “We cannot close our eyes to those pictures. We cannot close our minds of the responsibility to act. We don’t yet know everything about yesterday’s attack. But there are many things we do know.” She continued: “We know that yesterday’s attack bears all the hallmarks of the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons. We know that [Syrian President Bashar al-]Assad has used these weapons against the Syrian people before. That was confirmed by this Council’s own independent team of investigators. We know that yesterday’s attack was a new low, even for the barbaric Assad regime.”.feedback

Rex W. Tillerson

There is no role for him to govern. We have already issued some very strong statements. And yes, that will be part of the discussions when I visit Moscow. To call upon Foreign Minister Lavrov and the Russians to fulfill their contract to the international community, when they agreed to be the guarantor of the elimination of chemical weapons. And why Russia has not been able to achieve that is unclear to me. I don't draw conclusions of complicity at all, but clearly they have been incompetent, and perhaps they have simply been outmanoeuvred by the Syrians.feedback

James R. Clapper Jr.

We assess that Syria has not declared all the elements of its chemical weapons program.feedback

John Kerry

With respect to Syria, we struck a deal where we got 100 percent of the chemical weapons out.feedback

Susan E. Rice

We were able to find a solution that didn't necessitate the use of force that actually removed the chemical weapons that were known from Syria in a way that the use of force would never have accomplished. We were able to get the Syrian government to voluntarily and verifiably give up its chemical weapons stockpile.feedback

Michael Fallon

The Russians have influence in the region. They helped broker the original deal to put chemical weapons out of commission. This latest war crime happened on their watch. In the past few years, they have had every opportunity to pull levers and stop the civil war. By proxy Russia is responsible for every civilian death last week. If Russia wants to be absolved of responsibility for future attacks, Vladimir Putin needs to enforce commitments, to dismantle Assad's chemical weapons arsenal for good, and to get fully engaged with the UN peacekeeping progress.feedback

Donald J. Trump

I directed this action in order to degrade the Syrian military's ability to conduct further chemical weapons attacks and to dissuade the Syrian regime from using or proliferating chemical weapons, thereby promoting the stability of the region and averting a worsening of the region's current humanitarian catastrophe. The reason you don't generally hit runways is that they are easy and inexpensive to quickly fix (fill in and top)!feedback

Igor Konashenkov

Once again this resembles the story with Colin Powell's white powder or reports to the U.K. prime minister about the claimed chemical weapons in Iraq.feedback

Hassan Rouhani

Neutral countries should come and assess to make it clear where the chemical weapons came from.feedback

Hassan Rouhani

The tragedy of Khan Sheikhoun is horrifying and must be condemned. It reminds Iranians, victim of chemical weapons for years, the attacks in Sardasht. US aggression against Shayrat strengthens regional extremism and terror, and global lawlessness and instability, and must be condemned. I call on the world to reject such policies, which bring only destruction and danger to the region and the globe.feedback

Reed Foster

Although the strike will further weaken the overall air defence and ground attack capabilities of the (Syrian air force), it will not significantly diminish the ability of the Assad regime to conduct further chemical weapons attacks.feedback

Boris Johnson

Developments in Syria have changed the situation fundamentally. My priority is now to continue contact with the US and others in the run up to the G7 meeting on 10-11 April, . We deplore Russia's continued defence of the Assad regime even after the chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians, . I discussed these plans in detail with Secretary Tillerson.feedback

Boris Johnson

We deplore Russia's continued defence of the Assad regime even after the chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians. We call on Russia to do everything possible to bring about a political settlement in Syria and work with the rest of the international community to ensure that the shocking events of the last week are never repeated. My priority is now to continue contact with the US and others in the run-up to the G7 meeting on 10/11 April - to build co-ordinated international support for a ceasefire on the ground and an intensified political process.feedback

Dmitry Peskov

President Putin regards the US attacks on Syria as an aggression against a sovereign state in violation of the norms of international law, and under a trumped-up pretext at that. Putin also sees the attacks on Syria by the US as an attempt to divert the international community's attention from the numerous casualties among civilians in Iraq. This move by Washington is causing substantial damage to Russian-US relations, which are in tatters as it is. At the same time, in Putin's opinion, total disregard for the use of chemical weapons by terrorists only drastically aggravates the situation.feedback

Anshel Pfeffer

Syria's chemical weapons program is believed to have begun in earnest in the mid-1970s after the Syrians realized following the 1973 Yom Kippur War that their conventional forces were no match for Israel's army.feedback

Mitch McConnell

The strike was well planned, well executed. It was certainly more than a pinprick, and sends a message ... that using chemical weapons again is not something [Syrian president Bashar al-Assad] can do with impunity.feedback

Nikki Haley

The moral stain of the Assad regime could no longer go unanswered. His crimes against humanity could no longer be met with empty words. It was time to say enough. But not only say it, it was time to act. Bashar al-Assad must never use chemical weapons again, ever. Russia is supposed to have removed all the chemical weapons from Syria, but obviously that has not happened.feedback

Sean Spicer

I think, first and foremost, the president believes that the Syrian government, the Assad regime should, at the minimum, agree to abide by the agreements that they made not to use chemical weapons.feedback

Vladimir Frolov

Moscow's main problem is not that the U.S. made a strike but that Trump and Tillerson have toughened their rhetoric on Syria and Assad. They have said that Russia is responsible for Assad's actions and that it didn't fulfill its responsibilities in terms of chemical weapons disarmament.feedback

Boris Johnson

We deplore Russia's continued defence of the Assad regime even after the chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians. We call on Russia to do everything possible to bring about a political settlement in Syria and work with the rest of the international community to ensure that the shocking events of the last week are never repeated. Developments in Syria have changed the situation fundamentally.feedback

Justin Amash

The idea this chemical weapons attack affects the national security of the United States is fairly tenuous. It's a rather flimsy argument.feedback

Mohammad Emami Kashani

You (Americans) gave chemical weapons and substances to the terrorists. You created terrorists all over the world.feedback

Rex W. Tillerson

The use of prohibited chemical weapons, which violates a number of international norms and violates existing agreements, called for this type of a response, which is a kinetic military response.feedback

Donald J. Trump

It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons. The President must get Congressional approval before attacking Syria-big mistake if he does not!feedback

William Hansen

Honestly, my whole thought was 'Mad Dog' wouldn't put us in a position to be back at war if there wasn't a very good reason. I saw what happened. I felt really bad about the chemical weapons, you obviously don't want people to be hurt, but we don't want our troops to be hurt there either. For me, let's leave the wars alone for a little and let's just take of ourselves.feedback

Rex W. Tillerson

[I]t's important to recognize that as Assad has continued to use chemical weapons in these attacks with no response – no response from the international community – that he, in effect, is normalizing the use of chemical weapons, which may then be adopted by others. So it's important that some action be taken on behalf of the international community to make clear that the use of chemical weapons continues to be a violation of international norms.feedback

Ilan Goldenberg

President Trump’s decision to launch missile strikes against Syrias Al Shayrat airfield after a chemical weapons attack on civilians was an appropriate response to an act of unspeakable horror. Yet as analysts who have argued for greater U.S. military engagement to end the Syrian civil war, we find ourselves conflicted about the president’s decision: We fear [].feedback

Dmitry Peskov

President Putin considers American strikes on Syria aggression against a sovereign state in violation of international norms, and under an invented pretext. The Syrian army does not have any chemical weapon stockpiles. The fact of destruction of all chemical weapon stockpiles of the Syrian armed forces was recorded and confirmed by the (Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons). This step by Washington inflicts considerable damage to US-Russia relations, which are already in a lamentable state.feedback

Nancy Pelosi

The President's action and any response demands that we immediately do our duty. Congress must live up to its Constitutional responsibility to debate an Authorization of the Use of Military Force against a sovereign nation. Bashar al-Assad's chemical weapons attack on his own people places him outside the circle of civilized human behavior. As heartbreaking as Assad's chemical weapons attacks on his own people was, the crisis in Syria will not be resolved by one night of airstrikes.feedback

Paul Waldman

Allow me to ask an uncomfortable question: If you were in a war zone, and the government dropped a bomb on your house that killed your entire family, would you say, “It could be worse - at least they weren’t killed with chemical weapons”?feedback

Jean-Claude Juncker - European Commission

The US has informed the EU that these strikes were limited and seek to deter further chemical weapons atrocities. The repeated use of such [chemical] weapons must be answered. There is a clear distinction between air strikes on military targets and the use of chemical weapons against civilians.feedback

Francois Hollande

I believe this operation was a response which must now be followed up at an international level within the United Nations if possible, so we can go all the way with sanctions against Bashar al-Assad, and prevent this regime from using chemical weapons again to crush its own people.feedback

Mitch McConnell

I think the president had the authority to do what he did. If the president can think of an AUMF that he thinks can strengthen his hand, I'd be happy to take a look at it. This strike was related to the use of chemical weapons only. So I don't interpret this as a first step toward anything else in particular other than trying to eliminate or at least make sure [Syria] knows what the consequences are for doing this.feedback

Ben Sasse

American troops met injustice with strength. The use of chemical weapons cannot become normal. After sending a clear message tonight, the president should propose to Congress a comprehensive strategy to protect American interests from a humanitarian crisis that threatens to destabilize our regional allies and create vacuums for jihadi sanctuaries.feedback

Paul Nuttall

The whole world rightly condemns the use of chemical weapons in Syria but the US attack on the Assad regime does nothing to lower tensions, nor will it hasten peace in that country. Too often rash responses to horrific situations are about the conscience of the attacker, rather than a clear-headed response to an awful situation. Assad or Isis is not a choice anyone would wish to make. But firing off missiles in an enraged response shows weakness not strength in the face of horror. I hoped for better from this administration.feedback

Dmitry Peskov

President [Vladimir] Putin considers the American strikes against Syria an aggression against a sovereign government in violations of the norms of international law, and under a false pretext. Syria does not have chemical weapons.feedback

Dmitry Peskov

The Syrian army doesn't have chemical weapons. This step deals significant damage to US-Russian ties, which are already in a deplorable state.feedback

Phil Gordon

The basic questions haven't changed. Is there a set of military strikes that you can use to degrade the Syrians' ability to deliver chemical weapons and, if you do that, what do they do in response? If you don't act, you are effectively telling Assad and the regime's backers that you can use as much Sarin as you want. Assad tested Obama. Now there is an early test for Trump.feedback

Nancy Pelosi

As heartbreaking as Assad's chemical weapons attacks on his own people was, the crisis in Syria will not be resolved by one night of airstrikes. The killing will not stop without a comprehensive political solution to end the violence. The American people are owed a comprehensive strategy with clear objectives to keep our brave men and women in uniform safe and avoid collateral damage to innocent civilians in Syria.feedback

Donald J. Trump

No child of God should suffer such horror. It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons.feedback

Rex W. Tillerson

A few days later they translated this belief into action on the ground with chemical weapons. It's a weapon of terror and sent an obvious message inside and outside of Syria that the regime is still here. That it feels it can do anything.feedback

Armanatha Nasir

At the same time, Indonesia is concerned with unilateral actions by any parties, including the use of Tomahawk missiles, in responding to the chemical weapon attack tragedy in Syria. Military actions, undertaken without prior authorisation of the U.N. Security Council, are not in line with international legal principles in the peaceful settlement of disputes, as stipulated in the U.N. Charter. Indonesia is a party to the convention on chemical weapons. Of course, Indonesia rejects the use of chemical weapons by anybody for whatever purpose.feedback

Donald J. Trump

Tonight (Thursday), I ordered a targeted military strike on the air field in Syria from where the chemical attack was launched. It is in this vital national security interest of the US to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons. There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention and ignored the urging of the UN Security Council. Years of previous attempts at changing Assad's behaviour have all failed and failed very dramatically.feedback

Jean-Marc Ayrault

I was told by (U.S. Secretary of State) Rex Tillerson during the night. Use of chemical weapons is appalling and should be punished because it is a war crime.feedback

Boris Johnson

We in the UK, together with our French friends, have called an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council. We have tabled a resolution which I hope absolutely everybody feels able to sign up to. Because all we are saying is that there should be condemnation of that chemical weapons attack, and secondly, that there should be a thorough and urgent international investigation, and I don't think anybody could possibly, reasonably, oppose such a resolution.feedback

Malcolm Turnbull

The Australian government strongly supports the swift and just response of the United States. This was a calibrated, proportionate and targeted response. We have been consistent in our condemnation of the use of chemical weapons in Syria and elsewhere. The use of these weapons, under any circumstance, is illegal and abhorrent. It is a violation of international law. It is a war crime. It is a blatant contravention of basic principles of humanity. The United States have made it clear that they are not seeking to overthrow the Assad regime.feedback

Donald J. Trump

Using a deadly nerve agent, Assad choked out the lives of helpless men, women and children. It was a slow and brutal death for so many. Even beautiful babies were cruelly murdered in this very barbaric attack. Tonight I ordered a targeted military strike on the airfield in Syria from where the chemical attack was launched. It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons. There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons.feedback

Donald J. Trump

Tonight I ordered a targeted military strike on the airfield in Syria from where the chemical attack was launched. It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons. There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the chemical weapons convention, and ignored the urging of the UN security council. And we hope that as long as America stands for justice that peace and harmony will in the end prevail.feedback

Donald J. Trump

On Tuesday, Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad launched a horrible chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians using a deadly nerve agent. Tonight I ordered a targeted military strike on the airfield in Syria from where the chemical attack was launched. It is in the vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons. There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the chemical weapons convention and ignored the urging of the U.N. Security Council.feedback

Kori Schake

Whatever clumsiness the secretary of state and U.N. ambassador committed in the last week, nobody but Bashar al-Assad is responsible for the chemical weapons attack, and we should not blur the morality of who is to blame.feedback

Barack Obama

American diplomacy, backed by the threat of force, is why Syria's chemical weapons are being eliminated.feedback

Hala Abdulwahab

The hit on Bashar al-Assad should have happened three years ago from the beginning when Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons. Children are choking and dying. Entire families are dying.feedback

Donald J. Trump

No child of God should ever suffer such horror. There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention and ignored the urging of the U.N. Security Council. Years of previous attempts at changing Assad's behavior have all failed and failed very dramatically. As a result, the refugee crisis continues to deepen and the region continues to destabilize, threatening the United States and its allies.feedback

Tim Farron

When Assad first used chemical weapons I didn’t vote to punish him, and I regret that. It’s up to Theresa May now to kickstart the diplomatic process. I am in no doubt that what will end the war in Syria is what ultimately ends every conflict: words and diplomacy, not weapons. But when diplomacy fails and civilians suffer, as they have been doing for many years in Syria, and when they are the victim of weapons that have been outlawed by the international community for their horrific and indiscriminate consequences, then we cannot shy away from proportionate military intervention.feedback

Jens Stoltenberg - NATO

The Syrian regime bears the full responsibility for this development. Any use of chemical weapons is unacceptable, cannot go unanswered, and those responsible must be held accountable.feedback

Donald J. Trump

It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons. There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention and ignored the urging of the UN Security Council. Years of previous attempts at changing Assad's behaviour have all failed and failed very dramatically. Tonight I call on all civilised nations to join us in seeking to end the slaughter and bloodshed in Syria, and also to end terrorism of all kinds and all types.feedback

Bahram Qasemi

Iran ... condemns use of chemical weapons ... but at the same time believes it is dangerous, destructive and a violation of international laws to use it as an excuse to take unilateral actions. Iran strongly condemns any such unilateral strikes... Such measures will strengthen terrorists in Syria ... and will complicate the situation in Syria and the region.feedback

Donald J. Trump

Bashar al-Assad launched a horrible chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians. Using a deadly nerve agent, Assad choked out the lives of helpless men, women and children. It was a slow and brutal death for so many. Even beautiful babies were cruelly murdered in this very barbaric attack. No child of God should ever suffer such horror. No one disputes that Syria used banned chemical weapons of the people of Idlib. This is a violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention. Syria also ignored United Nations Security Council resolutions.feedback

Ilya Somin

Earlier tonight, the United States launched cruise missiles against a Syrian military base in retaliation for the Assad regime’s brutal use of chemical weapons against civilians. Assad’s atrocities are appalling. Perhaps they even justify US military intervention. Nonetheless, it is essential to remember the constitutional requirement that initiating war requires congressional authorization. That is both legally necessary, and the right choice from a prudential point of view.feedback

Greg Jaffe - The Washington Post

The Syrian chemical weapons attack poses a particular problem for Trump's foreign policy philosophy. The attack by Assad's forces offends America's values and it violates long-standing international norms of behavior, but it does not present an immediate threat to America's security or its economic interests. In an 'America First' world, it is an atrocity, but hardly a call to action for the United States and its allies.feedback

Paul Ryan

Earlier this week the Assad regime murdered dozens of innocent men, women, and children in a barbaric chemical weapons attack. Tonight the United States responded. This action was appropriate and just. These tactical strikes make clear that the Assad regime can no longer count on American inaction as it carries out atrocities against the Syrian people. Resolving the years-long crisis in Syria is a complex task, but Bashar al-Assad must be held accountable and his enablers must be persuaded to change course. I look forward to the administration further engaging Congress in this effort.feedback

H.R. McMaster

This was not a small strike. It was important during the president's deliberations and in deliberations with his leadership that we weighed the risk associated with any military action, but we weighed that against the risk of inaction, which Secretary Tillerson has already really summarized, which is the risk of this continued, egregious, inhumane attacks on innocent civilians with chemical weapons.feedback

Walid al Muallem

I stress to you once again that our army has never used chemical weapons and will not use chemical weapons. Not only against our civilians, our people, but also will not use chemical weapons against the terrorists who are attacking our civilians with their mortar shells and killing civilians.feedback

Rex W. Tillerson

We are considering an appropriate response for this chemical weapons attack. It is a serious matter. It requires a serious response.feedback

Hamish de Bretton-Gordon - NATO

I appreciate the international community have wanted to wait for the full due process and the full chain of evidence. But that takes years, and we're now four years down the line from chemical weapons usage and it is now the norm. I'm absolutely convinced. For those who don't die immediately, it's the convulsions and pinpoint pupils. Because nerve agents basically attack your nerves and stop them working, which is why your eyes don't work. ... Because the nerve in the eye is dead. That is how you destroy sarin – you burn it or you blow it up.feedback

Walid Moallem

The first air raid conducted by the Syrian army was at 11:30 on that day. It attacked a weapon's depot belonging to the Nusra Front, which contained chemical weapons.feedback

Nancy Youssef - BuzzFeed

[T]hree defense officials told BuzzFeed News they cannot begin to craft a military response, if that is what Trump wants, without a clear understanding of what the president wants to see happen in Syria. Does he only want the Assad regime to stop using chemical weapons? Does he want regime change? Is he seeking a negotiated settlement? Or were Trump's comments simply rhetoric?feedback

Bekir Bozdag

Autopsies were carried out on three of the bodies after they were brought from Idlib. The results of the autopsy confirms that chemical weapons were used. This scientific investigation also confirms that [Syrian President Bashar al-] Assad used chemical weapons.feedback

Jennifer Rubin

President Trump may have figured this out on Wednesday. “He can’t criticize Barack Obama on one hand for turning a blind eye to Assad’s chemical weapons in 2012 and then allow it to happen in 2017 and do absolutely nothing while this holocaust unfurls before our eyes.”.feedback

Jeff Davis - Navy

As always, the U.S. took extraordinary measures to avoid civilian casualties and to comply with the Law of Armed Conflict. Every precaution was taken to execute this strike with minimal risk to personnel at the airfield. We are assessing the results of the strike. Initial indications are that this strike has severely damaged or destroyed Syrian aircraft and support infrastructure and equipment at Shayrat Airfield, reducing the Syrian government's ability to deliver chemical weapons. The use of chemical weapons against innocent people will not be tolerated.feedback

Adam Schiff

This strike will not hasten an end to the Assad regime, but it may deter its further use of chemical weapons. Nevertheless. this missile strike and the military action of our forces already in Syria have yet to be authorized by Congress. I will be reintroducing an authorization for use of military force against ISIS and al-Qaida when Congress returns to session. Congress cannot abdicate its responsibility any longer and should vote on any use of force not made in self-defense.feedback

Ed Royce

The use of chemical weapons is abhorrent, and Assad's brazen gassing of men, women and children cannot be tolerated.feedback

Walid al-Moallem

I stress to you once again: The Syrian Army has not, did not and will not use this kind of weapons – not just against our own people, but even against the terrorists that attack our civilians with their mortar rounds. It attacked an arms depot belonging to the Al Nusra Front that contained chemical weapons. Al Nusra Front and ISIS and other organizations continue to store chemical weapons in urban and residential areas. How am I supposed to go to Khan Sheikhoun if it's held by Al Nusra?feedback

Tugrul Turkes

If the Syrian regime knew that there were chemical weapons in the warehouse, it should have also known that it should not have attacked it.feedback

Theresa May

On the chemical weapons attack, obviously the OPCW needs to investigate soon and establish clearly all the facts. It is a despicable attack. If it is the case it has been conducted by the Assad regime it shows the barbarism of that regime. What I would say is, all those backing that regime including Russia need to use their influence to stop Assad from bombarding and dealing with his people in such a way.feedback

Walid Moallem

When we are sure we have convincing answers to these questions, we will give you an answer. The Syrian Arab Army has never used chemical weapons and will not use chemical weapons against Syrians and even against terrorists.feedback

Bob Corker

The regrettable failure to take military action in 2013 to prevent Assad's use of chemical weapons remains a blight on the Western world.feedback

Vladimir Safronkov - UN

The former U.S. administration's so-called red lines, which should have triggered a military interference in the internal Syrian conflict if crossed, marked a watershed in the history of toxic chemicals in Syria and followed by full-blown poisonous substances. That decision served as a starting point for future provocations by terrorists and extremist structures with the use of chemical weapons. They sought to discredit the official Damascus regime and to create a pretext for the use of military force against a sovereign state.feedback

Barack Obama

We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized, . That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.feedback

Federica Mogherini - European Union

There must be no doubt that those responsible for violations of international humanitarian law or human rights, whoever they are, wherever they are, will be held accountable. In particular we condemn, as I said, the use of chemical weapons as reported in yesterday's (Tuesday) attack, and demand that they cease and that accountability is guaranteed through the appropriate mechanisms. Sustainable and inclusive peace in Syria, for the Syrians, remains the objective of all our common work.feedback

Rob Portman

I strongly condemn today's horrific chemical weapons attack against innocent civilians by the Assad regime.feedback

Matthew Rycroft

This does not look like the opposition, or terrorists, it bears all the hallmarks of the Assad regime, and the use of chemical weapons is a war crime.feedback

Matthew Rycroft

History will judge all of us in how we respond to these unforgettable and unforgivable images of the innocent. How long are we going to sit here and pretend that actions in these chambers have no consequences? This bears all the hallmarks of the Assad regime, and the use of chemical weapons is a war crime.feedback

Paul Waldman

Ask any conservative about what they objected to in former president Barack Obama’s foreign policy record, and the first words out of their mouth will be “RED LINE!” They’ll tell you that Obama was weak and feckless, and that his unwillingness to attack Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad’s government after it used chemical weapons on civilians in 2013 sent a message to the world that the United States wouldn’t stand up for its principles or follow through on its threats.feedback

Mohammed Alloush

The true solution for Syria is to put (Syrian President) Bashar Assad the chemical weapons user in court, and not at the negotiations table.feedback

Donald J. Trump

President Obama said in 2012 that he would establish a 'red line' against the use of chemical weapons and then did nothing. If the US attacks Syria and hits the wrong targets, killing civilians, there will be worldwide hell to pay. Stay away and fix broken US. What I am saying is stay out of Syria. The only reason President Obama wants to attack Syria is to save face over his very dumb RED LINE statement. Do NOT attack Syria,fix USA.feedback

Stephane Dujarric - United Nations

Any sort of report of use of chemical weapons, especially on civilians, is extremely alarming and disturbing. Any use of chemical weapons anywhere constitutes a threat to peace and security and is a serious violation of international law.feedback

Rex W. Tillerson

It is clear that this is how Bashar al-Assad operates: with brutal, unabashed barbarism. Those who defend and support him, including Russia and Iran, should have no illusions about Assad or his intentions. Anyone who uses chemical weapons to attack his own people shows a fundamental disregard for human decency and must be held accountable.feedback

Emile Hokayem

Assad calculates, reasonably, that military dynamics play in his favor. By using chemical weapons and other weapons, he is demonstrating the powerlessness of international actors.feedback

Mike Pence

I think with H.R. McMaster's addition as our National Security Advisor – a man of extraordinary background in the military – this is just a natural evolution to ensure the National Security Council is organized in a way that best serves the president in resolving and making those difficult decisions. No American can look at those images and not be heartsick. It is a reflection of the failure of the past administration to both confront the mindless violence of the Assad regime and also hold Russia and Syria to account for the promises that they made to destroy chemical weapons.feedback

Boris Johnson

If this were proved to have been committed by the Assad regime, it would be another reason to think they are an absolutely heinous outfit. Bombing your own civilians with chemical weapons is unquestionably a war crime and they must be held to account. It is unbelievable to think that in the long term, Bashar Assad can play a part in the future of Syria, given what he has done to his people.feedback

Federica Mogherini - European Union

Chemical weapons are the worst of the war crimes and whoever is responsible for that must be held accountable.feedback

Daryl Kimball

The muted response by the international community – including the United States – probably encouraged Saddam to continue using chemical weapons in that war, and also encouraged other countries in the region to develop their own.feedback

Jean-Marc Ayrault

The use of chemical weapons constitutes an unacceptable violation of the convention against chemical weapons and is another example of the barbarity that the Syrian people have been under for so many years.feedback

Phil Gordon

It is at the least embarrassing to have Assad be massacring civilians with chemical weapons at the same time Trump is trying to make the case that they're potentially a partner.feedback

John McCain

The Iranians and Hezbollah are also heavily involved. All players here are going to have to pay a penalty, and the United States of America is going to be on the side of people who fight for freedom, and we will not sit by and watch chemical weapons being used to slaughter innocent women and children.feedback

Husam AlKatlaby

Patients are already dying due to lack of medicine, food is becoming more expensive, and every day brings fresh casualties from conventional or chemical weapons. We fear that eastern Ghouta will be the next of many more Aleppos yet to come – cut off, strangled, and bombarded while the world watches.feedback

Matthew Rycroft

We expressed concern over reports of possible use of chemical weapons by Daesh and we look forward to the results of Iraq's investigation into those allegations.feedback

Najib Razak

We are one of a very few countries that have been very fair to North Korea, quite friendly to them. We did not pick a quarrel with them, but when a crime has been committed, especially when chemical weapons have been used in Malaysia, we are duty-bound to protect the interest of Malaysians.feedback

Najib Razak

We are a country that's friendly to them. We didn't pick a quarrel with them but when a crime has been committed, especially when chemical weapons have been used in Malaysia, we are duty bound to protect the interest of Malaysians. If there's any negotiations, we can't do it through the media. It's been hard for us to do the DNA verification as no one has come forward. Maybe they're scared to come forward.feedback

Najib Razak

We didn't pick a quarrel with them but when a crime has been committed, especially when chemical weapons have been used in Malaysia, we are duty bound to protect the interest of Malaysians.feedback

Lise Grande - United Nations

This is horrible. If the alleged use of chemical weapons is confirmed, this is a serious violation of international humanitarian law and a war crime.feedback

Lise Grande - United Nations

This is horrible, there is never justification – none whatsoever – for the use of chemical weapons.feedback

Paulo Pinheiro

We have established very clearly in the report that the Syrian air force is responsible for these attacks, we don't have any evidence linking Russia to those attacks with forbidden chemical weapons.feedback

Nikki Haley

Russia just doesn't want to criticise the Assad regime for using chemical weapons. That's the truth. So what message are we sending to the world? If you are alie with China and Russia they will cover the backs of their friends who use chemical weapons to kill their own people. Some say we should focus more on ISIS.. The US condemns any use of chemical weapons by ISIS or any other non-state actor.feedback

Yun Byung-se

Just a few grams of VX is sufficient for mass killing. North Korea is reported to have not just grams but thousands of tonnes of chemical weapons including VX all over the country ... The recent assassination is a wake-up call to all of us to North Korea's chemical weapons capability and its intent to actually use them. Now is the time, I believe, for us to seriously consider taking extraordinary measures in all relevant regional and international fora including the U.N. as well as the CD.feedback

Chang Yong-seok

North Korea was already under immense pressure over its efforts to develop nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles, and also its human rights issues. Things will get even more complicated for Pyongyang if its chemical weapons issues are thrown into the mix.feedback

Mohammed Javad Zarif

The use of chemical weapons can never be condoned ... Unfortunately the terrorist organisations Nusra and Daesh (Islamic State) still possess chemical weapons.feedback

Dominik Stillhart - International Committee of the Red Cross

But it is true, as soon as the fighting intensifies and there are big battles, that there are situations where individual hospitals will have difficulties to cope with the number of wounded. We have trained and equipped our staff for possible small-scale use of chemical weapons, but we have also prepared some of these medical facilities with training and equipment to receive people affected by chemical weapons.feedback

Ravina Shamdasani - United Nations

There does not have to be an intention to target civilians with the use of these chemical weapons, but particular care must be taken to avoid this affecting civilians. If that particular care is not taken, or if action is taken instead through negligence or through active action, to cause damage to civilians, then this is clearly prohibited – this is a war crime.feedback

Ned Price

We condemn in the strongest possible terms the Assad regime's defiance of the longstanding global norm against chemical weapons use and Syria's abrogation of its responsibilities under the Chemical Weapons Convention, which it joined in 2013.feedback

Thomas Weiss

We also fear, and there has been some evidence that ISIL (Islamic State, IS, formerly ISIS) might be using chemical weapons. Children, the elderly, disabled, will be particularly vulnerable.feedback

Omer Dahab Fadl Mohamed

The allegations of use of chemical weapons by Sudanese Armed Forces is baseless and fabricated. The ultimate objective of such wild accusation, is to steer confusion in the on-going processes aimed at deepening peace and stability and enhancing economic development and social cohesion in Sudan.feedback

Tirana Hassan

It is not the case that we can seek accountability for the use of chemical weapons in one place at the expense of another.feedback

Tirana Hassan

During these attacks, hundreds of civilians have been shot at, tens of thousands have been displaced and, in one of the most sickening twists in the conflict in Darfur, we have discovered credible evidence that the Sudanese government has been using chemical weapons on the civilian population.feedback

Jeff Davis - Navy

We recognize this is real. They're dead-set on it -- they would love to be able to use chemical weapons against us, against the Iraqis as they move forward. We are making every effort to make sure that we're ready for it.feedback

Jean-Marc Ayrault

It is up to the Security Council to act under Chapter 7 to condemn these attacks and sanction perpetrators. It is a moral duty and an obligation for the international community which wanted to ban chemical weapons.feedback

Louis Charbonneau - United Nations Security Council

This has been a political minefield for five and a half years but we have something different, we have a U.N.-backed mechanism with a report. We have it in black and white that the Syrian Government and ISIS are responsible for using chemical weapons, it's a crime and the Security Council has many tools it can use, so we expect them to use them all.feedback

Samantha Power - United Nations

It is the first official independent confirmation of what many of us have alleged for a long time, many of us have presented substantial evidence of for a long time, and that is a pattern of chemical weapons use by the Syrian regime. It is incumbent on the council to act swiftly to show ... we were serious about there being meaningful accountability.feedback

Samantha Power - United Nations

It is essential that members of the Security Council come together to ensure consequences for those who have used chemical weapons in Syria. When anyone – from any government or from any terrorist group – so flagrantly violates the global ban on chemical weapons use without consequences, it sends the signal that impunity reigns.feedback

Abu Bakr

The worst method the regime uses is not chemical weapons but it is the sieges, the slow death. We will not allow the repeat of the tragedy of sieges imposed elsewhere in Syria.feedback

Francois Hollande

Syria is now a shame, a stain for the international community. To accept that there is a city ... where the population is starving, with humanitarian convoys attacked, with chemical weapons used and with children who become victims every day - it's the responsibility of the entire world.feedback

Mohammed Assad

In the presence of international experts we have recorded the fact this site was bombed with chemical weapons and poisonous gases on more than four occasions. The worst of these attacks was last year by shells with deadly chemicals in them. We also found landmines with chemicals which we dismantled preventing hundreds of soldiers from being killed.feedback

Yahya al-Houthi

Among the weapons we found British and French bombs, but most are American. We have found that munitions dropped on Yemen, particularly in Marib province, include cluster bombs, white phosphorous, and chemical weapons.feedback

Samantha Power - United Nations

This sends a clear and powerful message to all those involved in chemical weapons attacks in Syria. The joint investigative mechanism will identify you if you gas people.feedback

Bashar Ja

The Syrian government and army have never used chemical weapons and they will never use chemical weapons. Syrian civilians were targeted with the use of toxic chemicals and chemical weapons, including chlorine gas, by armed terrorist groups.feedback

John Kerry

There is something different that happened today, because of the chemical weapons that have been used, and because of this tension for violence, which has been expressed through the use of Hezbollah and Iranian trans-boundary support. Because of that increase in violence, we have decided that we have no choice, in order to try and carry out this negotiation, but to provide greater assistance of one nature or another.feedback

Walid al-Moallem

We are ready to reveal the location of our chemical weapons, halt the production of them and also show these facilities to representatives of Russia, other states and to the United Nations. Our adherence to the Russian initiative has the purpose of halting the possession of all chemical weapons.feedback

Ban Ki-moon - United Nations

I remain deeply concerned about all these reports about the possible use of chemical weapons. I reiterate my demand, that the Syrian authorities categorically state that they will not use chemical weapons or other weapons of mass destruction under any circumstances. That's my strong demand.feedback

Jay Carney

We have seen more co-operation from Russia in the last two days than we have heard in the last two years. I don't have a time line to give to you. What I can say is that it obviously will take some time; there are technical aspects involved in developing a plan for securing Syria's chemical weapons and verifying their location and putting them under international control.feedback

Georges Chachan

To be honest, we are tired of indignation. Since the start of this crisis, the Syrian regime and the Russians have been one step ahead of everyone. It is sad to see now that the regime is waging against its people has transformed into negotiations about controlling chemical weapons.feedback

Nouri Al-Maliki

I think they can all be cancelled. Some decisions were based on the fact that Iarq had nuclear and chemical weapons. UN inspections ran their course, and the file is closed. Certainly Iraq was a danger to its people, its neighbours, and the entire world, but that's no longer the case today. All the decisions taken in the past and the international sanctions imposed are unnecessary today. Iraq is no longer a threat to peace and international security. The UN has stated that.feedback

Omran al-Zoabi

If chemical weapons were used, and that is a big 'if' – we are trying to investigate that – but if they were used, it is the Syrian government that has access to them and would have used them against the civilian population.feedback

Vali Nasr

The stockpile of chemical weapons at some point in time could be used in a negotiation with the opposition to get the terms that they want in any negotiations. I think this is a real classic game of Realpolitik that Assad is playing with both outsiders and people inside.feedback

Maria Cristina Perceval - United Nations

All council members agree that any use of chemical weapons by any side, under any circumstances, is a violation of international law.feedback

Borge Brende

This has not been an easy conclusion for us to come to – because if there's one thing Norway and the Norwegian people desire, it is to contribute to these chemical weapons being destroyed.feedback

Barack Obama

Given the regime's stockpiles of chemical weapons, we will continue to make clear to Assad and those around him that the world is watching, and that they will be held accountable by the international community and the United States should they make the tragic mistake of using those weapons.feedback

Jay Carney

We need to expand the evidence we have. We need to make it reviewable. We need to have it corroborated before we make any decisions based on the clear violation that use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime would represent.feedback

Jen Psaki

If the regime has nothing to do with these attacks, if there was not a use of chemical weapons here, there is no reason they wouldn't let the United Nations team that is on the ground, available, happy to investigate, in to do just that.feedback

Guido Westerwelle

The use of chemical weapons would be a crime against humanity. If it proves to be true then the international community needs to act and Germany will be amongst those calling for consequences. We are in close contact with the United Nations and our allies.feedback

Sergey Lavrov

Now that the Assad government has joined the chemical weapons convention we have to engage our professionals together with the Chemical Weapons Prohibition Organisation and with the United Nations to design a road, which would make sure that this issue is resolved quickly, professionally and as soon as practical.feedback

Khaled Saleh

They have continued to kill civilians using conventional weapons and will continue to do so with chemical weapons…they have nothing stopping them.feedback

Chuck Hegel

Our approach is to continue to find an international coalition that will act together, and I think you're seeing a number of countries state, publicly state, their position on the use of chemical weapons.feedback

Sergei Ivanov

After I heard the Pentagon Chief said Russia supplied chemical weapons to Syria, then he corrected himself saying it was not chemical weapons, but the means for their development and production. This, I apologise if I lose my temper, is rubbish, sheer rubbish.feedback

Faisal Al-Maqdad

The most dangerous thing will be that those terrorists will use chemical weapons soon against European people.feedback

Sergey Lavrov

We have serious grounds to believe that it was a provocation, and several of our partners without irrefutable proof, have announced that only the regime (of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad) could use such chemical weapons, but the truth has to be determined.feedback

Mark Lyall Grant - United Nations

The type of munitions, the trajectories which confirm the analysis that British experts have done about the provenance of where the rockets were fired from, all of that confirms in our view that there is no remaining doubt it was the regime that used chemical weapons.feedback

John Kerry

Sure, he could turn over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week – turn it over, all of it without delay and allow the full and total accounting (of it) but he isn't about to do it and it can't be done.feedback

Sergey Lavrov

The talks were already over when news came of John Kerry's speech in which he said that strikes on Syria could only be avoided if Damascus handed over all its chemical weapons to the international community. If the establishment of international control over chemical weapons in that country would allow avoiding strikes, we will immediately start working with Damascus.feedback

Vladimir Putin

One of the priorities is not only the liquidation of chemical weapons, but restoring the negotiation process between the conflicting parties, on the basis of the Geneva platform.feedback

Barack Obama

If we cannot agree even on this (enforcing Assad's promise) then it will show that the United Nations is incapable of enforcing the most basic of international laws. On the other hand if we succeed, it will send a powerful message that the use of chemical weapons has no place in the 21st century, and that this body means what it says.feedback

Chuck Hagel

The United States is concerned that the Syrian government is behind in delivering these chemical weapons and precursor materials on time and with the schedule that was agreed to.feedback

Vitaly Churkin

We all, of course, are going to follow things very carefully and we believe that there is no room for using chemical weapons in Syria or anywhere else and in fact if there was a use it should be investigated. That's why we're very upset that the March 19 incident was not investigated.feedback

Barack Obama

But we can send a very clear strong message in favour of the prohibition against using chemical weapons. We can change Assad's calculus about using them again, we can degrade his capabilities so that he does not use them again.feedback

Ahmed Marwan

The regime has been bombing Homs for a few days and we really are scared for people there. The civilians there receive a lot of rockets every day, we are not sure about that, we think chemical weapons have been used. So really, we are very concerned about it.feedback

Barack Obama

We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is, we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilised. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation.feedback

Barack Obama

I have instructed John Kerry to talk directly to the Russians… if we can exhaust these diplomatic efforts and come up with a formula that gives the international community a verifiable, enforceable mechanism to deal with these chemical weapons in Syria, then I am all for it.feedback

Vladimir Putin

We think any decisions on providing arms to the opposition based on the unproven accusations of Damascus's use of chemical weapons could just additionally destabilize the situation.feedback

Jean-Marc Ayrault

On wednesday there will be a debate without a vote, because in law the ultimate decision can only be taken by the president of the republic alone, once the coalition is formed, to lead an action which will send this strong message: It is no longer possible for the dictator Bashar Al Assad to use chemical weapons in Syria against his own people.feedback

Luigi Alcaro

It has been proven that chemical weapons also have a macroscopic effect, particularly in the case of chemical weapons containing mustard gas, which is an irritant that causes blisters. Our research has also identified liver and spleen lesions in fish caught in areas near the ordnance.feedback

Nadim Shehadi - Chatham House

The message about the chemical weapons that we're getting is what would happen to the chemical weapons after the collapse of the regime? Whether they will go into the hands of al Qaeda or terrorists or anything like that… That's part of trying to regain the fear of the aftermath of Assad.feedback

Ban Ki-moon - United Nations

The former regime under Gaddafi has reported to the relevant international United Nations organisations on nuclear materials as well as chemical weapons.feedback

Samantha Power - United Nations

Just two weeks ago tonight's outcome seemed utterly unimaginable. Two weeks ago the Syrian regime hadn't even acknowledged the existence of its chemical weapons stockpiles. But tonight we have a shared draft resolution that is the outcome of intense diplomacy and negotiations over the past two weeks.feedback

David Cameron

I understand people's concerns about getting involved in wars in the Middle East, getting sucked into the situation in Syria. This is not about wars in the Middle East. This is not even about the Syrian conflict. It's about the use of chemical weapons and making sure as a world, (that) we deter their use and we deter the appalling scenes that we've all seen on our television screens.feedback

Sergey Lavrov

We believe resolving this problem will render air strikes on the Syrian Arab Republic unnecessary. Without doubt our American partners, as President Obama has said prefer a peaceful way to solve the problem of chemical weapons in Syria.feedback

John Kerry

In light of what has happened, the world wonders and watches closely whether or not the Assad regime will live up to its public commitments that it has made to give up their chemical weapons, and whether two of the world's most powerful nations can together take a critical step forward in order to hold the regime to its stated promises.feedback

Ban Ki-moon - United Nations

It is the most significant confirmed use of chemical weapons against civilians since Saddam Hussein used them in Halabja in 1988 and the worst use of weapons of mass destruction in the 21st century.feedback

Ban Ki-moon - United Nations

I would like to announce that I have decided to conduct a United Nations investigation on the possible use of chemical weapons in Syria. My senior advisors are working on the modalities in close consultation with the relevant bodies.feedback

Catherine Ashton

In the face of the cynical use of chemical weapons, the international community cannot remain idle. A clear and strong response is crucial, to make clear that such crimes are unacceptable and that there can be no impunity.feedback

Jay Carney

We find it highly likely that chemical weapons, if they were in fact used in Syria – and there is certainly evidence that they were – that the Assad regime was responsible.feedback

Vladimir Putin

Syria has announced that it already considers itself a member of the Chemical Weapons Convention. There are practical steps the Syrian government has already taken.Whether it will be able to bring this process to an end, I cannot be 100 percent sure, but everything we have seen in the last few days gives me confidence that it is possible.feedback

Ban Ki-moon - United Nations

It would be reprehensible if anybody in Syria is contemplating the use of such weapons of mass destruction like chemical weapons. I sincerely hope that the international community keeps an eye on this.feedback

Vladimir Putin

As for the position of our American colleagues, our friends who insist that Syrian government forces used weapons of mass destruction, chemical weapons in this case, and say they have evidence, let them present it to UN inspectors and to the Security Council.feedback

No quotes...
|< <
> >|

Quotes about Chemical weapons

<
>
facebook_page
twitter_page
This webpage has been created by a robot: errors and absent quotes cannot be totally avoided
 
Feedback×

Quote :

Mistake :

Comments :