Syrian leader gives interview to PBS reporter, who says he suggested 'some kind of retaliation if a strike was made' 
 
 The Syrian president, Bashar Assad, has said there is no evidence he is responsible for the deadly gas attacks the US government claims left 1,429 people dead, including 426 children. 
 
 In an exclusive interview secured by Charlie Rose of PBS, Assad said: "There has been no evidence that I used chemical weapons against my own people." 
 
 Assad refused to confirm or deny that he had chemical weapons but said if he did, they were under "centralized control". 
 
 The interview will air in its entirety on PBS on Monday night, as president Barack Obama is due to sit down with six television networks for recorded interviews and press his case for a targeted attack on Syria. 
 
 Rose said Assad "does accept some of the responsibility" for the attack. He said: "I asked that very question: 'Do you feel any remorse?' He said, 'Of course I do,' but it did not come in a way that was sort of deeply felt inside. It was much more of a calm recitation of anybody who's a leader of a country would feel terrible about what's happened to its citizens." 
 
 Rose said Assad "suggested that there would be, among people that are aligned with him, some kind of retaliation if a strike was made". Assad, however, "would not even talk about the nature of the response". 
 
 Rose said: "He had a message to the American people that it had not been a good experience for them to get involved in the Middle East in wars and conflicts … that the results had not been good." 
 
 Later on Sunday, US secretary of state John Kerry was reported to have dismissed Assad's claim there is no evidence he used chemical weapons against his own people, saying "the evidence speaks for itself". The remark was reported by a US reporter attending a photo session in London, as Kerry prepared to meet the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, to discuss the resumption of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. 
 
 Earlier in the day, the White House asserted that "common sense" proved Assad's government was responsible for the chemical attacks in Syria as the US weighs military action. Chief of staff Denis McDonough told NBC's Meet The Press there was "no question in my mind" that Assad had ordered the 21 August attack, outside Damascus. 
 
 Obama will set out his case for a strike against Assad in a speech from the White House on Tuesday, amid signs that a majority in the House of Representatives are against intervention. 
 
 McDonough told CNN's State of the Union that the evidence available so far showed Assad was to blame. "The material was used in the eastern suburbs of Damascus, that have been controlled by the opposition for some time," he said. "It was delivered by rockets, rockets that we know the Assad regime has and we have no indication that the opposition has." 
 
 With video of the consequences of the attack, McDonough said all this added up to "a quite strong common sense test irrespective of the intelligence that suggests the regime carried this out". 
 
 McDonough said "nobody doubts the intelligence". "The question for Congress this week is what are the consequences for having done so," he said, on Meet The Press, adding that Congress's decision would be watched closely by Iran and Hezbollah. "This is an opportunity to be bold with the Iranians." he said. "To make sure they understand that they do not have greater freedom of action, they do not have greater operating space to pursue a nuclear weapon that would destabilize that entire region, threaten our friends and allies and ultimately threaten us." 
 
 The United Nations is currently investigating the 21 August attack. Speaking in Paris this weekend, secretary of state Kerry said said he planned to discuss whether to wait for the UN findings with Obama, adding that the president had not decided on the matter. 
 
 White House chief-of-staff Denis McDonough speaks to Bob Schieffer on CBS. Photograph: Chris Usher/AP 
 
 McDonough said: "Obviously we are interested in what the UN inspectors have to say." But he added that the UN is "not going to be able to tell us, because their mandate will not allow them to tell us, who is responsible for the attack … We are right now focused on Washington … the president ultimately is going to make this decision in consultation with Congress on our timeline as best suits our interests." 
 
 On ABC's This Week, McDonough said the US was considering a "targeted, consequential, limited attack against Assad forces and Assad capabilities so that he is deterred from carrying out these actions again. 
 
 "Here is what it is not. It is not boots on the ground. It is not an extended air campaign. It is not Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya. This is a very concentrated, limited effort that we can carry out and that can underscore and secure our interests." 
 
 Michael McCaul, a Texas Republican and chairman of the House homeland security committee, gave voice to Congressional opposition to strikes on Syria when he told Meet The Press: "The problem is I think lobbing a few Tomahawk missiles will not restore our credibility overseas. It's kind of a face-saving measure for the president after he drew the red line. 
 
 "Little wars start big wars and we have to remember that. Who are we supporting in this war? We are supporting a rebel faction, a rebel cause, that has now been infiltrated and hijacked by many al-Qaida factions." 
 
 McCaul said there was a risk that chemical weapons could end up in the hands of al-Qaida operatives after a US attack. McCaul said, "ironically", that Congress had been debating its next step in Syria on the eve of 9/11. 
 
 McCaul also said that while images of victims of the gas attacks were "horrific" and Assad was "a brutal dictator", "I don't want to see those images broadcast in the United States with American kids." ||||| Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption President Barack Obama: ''I have no interest in any kind of open-ended conflict in Syria'' 
 
 US President Barack Obama has said he has not yet decided on a plan for retaliatory action against Syria. 
 
 But he said he had concluded Syrian government forces were behind a recent chemical weapons attack near Damascus. 
 
 Speaking on US television, Mr Obama said the use of chemical weapons affected US national interests and that sending a "shot across the bows" could have a positive impact on Syria's war. 
 
 His comments follow a day of behind-the-scenes wrangling at the UN. 
 
 The UK had been pushing for permanent members of the UN Security Council to adopt a resolution which would have authorised measures to protect civilians in Syria. 
 
 But Syrian ally Russia refused to agree to the resolution and the meeting produced no end to the diplomatic stalemate which has long characterised the UN position on Syria. 
 
 The US State Department criticised "Russian intransigence" and said it could not allow diplomatic paralysis to serve as a shield for the Syrian leadership. 
 
 Russia is sending an anti-submarine ship and a missile cruiser to the eastern Mediterranean. 
 
 The ships are being sent to strengthen the navy's presence in the area because of the "well-known situation" there, the Russian news agency Interfax has said. 
 
 But another news agency, RIA Novosti, quotes a senior naval command spokesman as saying that this is just a planned rotation, unconnected with Syria. 
 
 'Strong signal' 
 
 Critics have questioned what purpose a limited strike on Syria could serve, but Mr Obama told the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) it would send the government of Bashar al-Assad "a pretty strong signal that it better not [use chemical weapons] again". 
 
 The US has yet to produce the intelligence it says shows Mr Assad's government is guilty of using chemical weapons, and UN weapons inspectors are still investigating inside Syria. 
 
 The team has just begun a third day of on-site investigations, and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has appealed for it to be "given time to do its job". He said the inspectors would finish their investigations and be out of the area by Saturday morning. 
 
 Syria denies using chemical weapons and blames opposition fighters for the attack near Damascus on 21 August, which reportedly killed hundreds of people. 
 
 If there was action it would be to send the Syrian regime a 'pretty strong signal' 
 
 It accused the West of "inventing" excuses to launch a strike. 
 
 In a sign of growing fears about an impending attack among Syrians, the Associated Press quoted Lebanese officials as saying at least 6,000 Syrians crossed into Lebanon in a 24-hour period through the main Masnaa crossing - compared to a normal daily tally of between 500 and 1,000 refugees. 
 
 "Isn't it enough, all the violence and fighting that we already have in the country, now America wants to bomb us, too?" one 45-year-old woman, entering Lebanon with her five children, told AP. 
 
 In Damascus senior military commanders are reportedly staying away from buildings thought likely to be targeted. You "could hear a pin drop" at one of them, a local resident said. 
 
 'Consequences' 
 
 President Obama told PBS that the US had "not yet made a decision, but the international norm against the use of chemical weapons needs to be kept in place, and hardly anyone disputes that chemical weapons were used in a large scale in Syria against civilian populations". 
 
 Military intervention is morally justified Anthony Luder, Safed, Israel 
 
 Intervening now in Syria would be a terrible mistake Demetrios Nicolaides, Limassol, Cyprus Global readers' voices on Syria 
 
 "We've looked at all the evidence, and we don't believe the opposition possessed chemical weapons of that sort," he said. 
 
 He added he had concluded that the Syrian government carried out the chemical weapons attack. 
 
 "There need to be international consequences, so we are consulting with our allies," he said. 
 
 There was "a prospect that chemical weapons could be directed at us - and we want to make sure that doesn't happen". 
 
 The BBC's David Willis in Washington says Mr Obama looked cautious and spoke in a measured way, and he was clearly concerned about getting Congress on board as well as the American public. 
 
 Opinion polls until now have shown very little interest among the US public in getting involved in the Syrian conflict. 
 
 In an open letter to the president, US House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner demanded he explain "the intended effect of military strikes", and how he would prevent the intervention escalating, if he wanted to win public and congressional backing for action. 
 
 More than 110 members of Congress have signed a letter formally requesting that Mr Obama seek congressional approval for any action in Syria. 
 
 US officials are expected to give senior members of Congress a classified briefing on the evidence that the Syrian government carried out the alleged chemical attack on Thursday. 
 
 Models for possible intervention Iraq 1991: US-led global military coalition, anchored in international law; explicit mandate from UN Security Council to evict Iraqi forces from Kuwait 
 
 US-led global military coalition, anchored in international law; explicit mandate from UN Security Council to evict Iraqi forces from Kuwait Balkans 1990s: US arms supplied to anti-Serb resistance in Croatia and Bosnia in defiance of UN-mandated embargo; later US-led air campaign against Serb paramilitaries. In 1999, US jets provided bulk of 38,000 Nato sorties against Serbia to prevent massacres in Kosovo - legally controversial with UN Security Council resolutions linked to "enforcement measures" 
 
 US arms supplied to anti-Serb resistance in Croatia and Bosnia in defiance of UN-mandated embargo; later US-led air campaign against Serb paramilitaries. In 1999, US jets provided bulk of 38,000 Nato sorties against Serbia to prevent massacres in Kosovo - legally controversial with UN Security Council resolutions linked to "enforcement measures" Somalia 1992-93: UN Security Council authorised creation of international force with aim of facilitating humanitarian supplies as Somali state failed. Gradual US military involvement without clear objective culminated in Black Hawk Down disaster in 1993. US troops pulled out 
 
 UN Security Council authorised creation of international force with aim of facilitating humanitarian supplies as Somali state failed. Gradual US military involvement without clear objective culminated in Black Hawk Down disaster in 1993. US troops pulled out Libya 2011: France and UK sought UN Security Council authorisation for humanitarian operation in Benghazi in 2011. Russia and China abstained but did not veto resolution. Air offensive continued until fall of Gaddafi Syria crisis: Western military options Models for possible intervention Press apprehension as Syria tension builds Syria crisis: Where key countries stand 
 
 The US has said it will not take action alone - but one of its primary allies, the UK, has agreed to wait until UN inspectors report back before taking a parliamentary vote on potential action. 
 
 Russia rejected a UK push to try to agree a resolution on Syria among permanent UN Security Council members on Wednesday, with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov saying the UN could not consider any draft resolution or proposed action in Syria before the UN weapons inspectors reported back. 
 
 The use of force without a sanction of the UN Security Council would be a "crude violation" of international law and "lead to the long-term destabilisation of the situation in the country and the region", Mr Lavrov has said. 
 
 UN 'moment' 
 
 The UK, US and France are continuing their discussions following the meeting of the five permanent members. 
 
 The UK will want to be seen to be exhausting every diplomatic avenue, says the BBC's Nick Bryant at the UN headquarters in New York. 
 
 For the UK, there needs to be a UN "moment" - despite the fact that UN action will likely again be blocked by Russia or China. 
 
 But even without UN backing the US and its allies have been clear that they see the military option still open to them, our correspondent says. 
 
 "This is the first use of chemical warfare in the 21st Century," said UK Foreign Secretary William Hague. "It has to be unacceptable... or we will confront even bigger war crimes in the future." 
 
 More than 100,000 people are estimated to have died since the conflict erupted in Syria in March 2011, and the conflict has produced at least 1.7 million refugees. 
 
 Forces which could be used against Syria: ||||| Story highlights The United States respects the vote by the British not to participate in a potential military strike 
 
 UK vote raises questions about effect on a possible U.S. timeline 
 
 It's "highly likely" Syria's regime is responsible for the chemical weapons attack, UK says 
 
 Remember war dead before rushing to strike us, Syria warns British parliament 
 
 (CNN) -- [Breaking news update at 11:50 p.m. Thursday] 
 
 The United States respects the vote by the British parliament not to participate in a potential military action against Syria, U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said Friday. 
 
 "Every nation has a responsibility to make their own decisions, and we respect that of any nation," he told journalists in Manila, the Philippines. 
 
 In spite of the British decision, it remains the goal of the Obama administration that any decision be "an international collaboration," he said. 
 
 [Original story, posted at 10:36 p.m. Thursday] 
 
 (CNN) The United States may have to take action against Syria without the support of one of its staunchest allies, U.S. officials said Thursday after British lawmakers voted down a proposal for military action. 
 
 Washington will continue to consult with Britain, but "President Obama's decision-making will be guided by what is in the best interests of the United States," National Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said in a statement issued Thursday evening. 
 
 The reaction followed news the House of Commons rebuffed Prime Minister David Cameron's call for a strong response to claims Syria used chemical weapons against its own people, raising questions about what, if any, timeline the United States may follow for a possible strike. 
 
 Obama has not spelled out what steps the United States will take in response to last week's reported attack against civilians in a Damascus suburb, allegedly leaving hundreds dead. 
 
 "He believes that there are core interests at stake for the United States and that countries who violate international norms regarding chemical weapons need to be held accountable," Hayden said. 
 
 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – A convoy of inspectors from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons prepares to cross into Syria at the Lebanese border crossing point of Masnaa on Tuesday, October 1. Inspectors from the Netherlands-based watchdog arrived in Syria to begin their complex mission of finding, dismantling and ultimately destroying Syria's chemical weapons arsenal. Hide Caption 1 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – The U.N. Security Council votes to approve a resolution that will require Syria to give up its chemical weapons during a meeting on Friday, September 27. The vote came after assertions by the United States and other Western nations that the Syrian government used chemical weapons in an August 21 attack outside Damascus that U.S. officials estimate killed 1,400 people. Hide Caption 2 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said the world community was imposing a binding obligation on the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to get rid of its chemical weapons stockpile. Hide Caption 3 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – A man mourns over the bodies of those killed in a suspected chemical weapon attack in a suburb of Damascus, Syria, on Wednesday, August 21. Syrian rebels said poisonous gas rained down from rockets, but authorities have denied the allegations that they used chemical weapons and accused the opposition of staging the attacks. U.S. officials, however, said there were "strong indications" that there was a chemical weapons attack by the government. Hide Caption 4 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Hide Caption 5 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – People attend to the victims of the attack on August 21 in Damascus. British intelligence said at least 350 people died, while rebel leaders have put the death toll at more than 1,300. Hide Caption 6 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – Constricted pupils was listed as a symptom in victims of the alleged attack on August 21. Hide Caption 7 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – Victims of the attack are laid in the back of a truck in the Hamoria area of Damascus on August 21. Hide Caption 8 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – A young survivor takes shelter in a mosque in the Duma neighborhood of Damascus on August 21. Hide Caption 9 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – Victims are buried in a suburb of Damascus on August 21. Hide Caption 10 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – People search for the dead to collect samples to check for chemical weapon use in the Zamalka area of Syria on Thursday, August 22. Hide Caption 11 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – A group of young Salafists chants and waves black flags during a protest against the Egyptian and Syria regimes in the southern Gaza Strip on August 22. Hide Caption 12 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – A young woman holds a Syrian revolution flag and a candle during a protest of President Bashar al-Assad in front of the U.N. headquarters in Gaza City on Friday, August 23. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon intends to conduct a "thorough, impartial and prompt investigation" into the alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria. Hide Caption 13 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – Pigeons' bodies litter the ground in the Damascus suburbs of Arbeen on Saturday, August 24. Hide Caption 14 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – Syrian soldiers are deployed in the Jobar neighborhood of Damascus on August 24. Hide Caption 15 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – Syrian President Bashar al-Assad speaks with the Russian newspaper Izvestia in Damascus, Syria, on Monday, August 26. He told the newspaper that Western accusations that the Syrian government used chemical weapons are an insult to common sense. Hide Caption 16 of 17 Photos: Photos: Suspected chemical attack in Syria Suspected chemical attack in Syria – Representatives of Arab countries discuss Syria at the Arab League headquarters in Cairo, Egypt, on Tuesday, August 27. President al-Assad vowed to defend his country against any outside attack. "The threats of launching an aggression against Syria will increase its commitments," and "Syria will defend itself against any aggression," he said, according to Syrian state TV. Hide Caption 17 of 17 
 
 JUST WATCHED What intel does U.S. have on Syria? Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH What intel does U.S. have on Syria? 01:47 
 
 JUST WATCHED Syrian group claims it hacked NY Times Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Syrian group claims it hacked NY Times 02:44 
 
 JUST WATCHED U.N. Security Council deadlocked on Syria Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH U.N. Security Council deadlocked on Syria 02:45 
 
 Unilateral action was "a possibility" following the results of the late-night Parliament vote in London, a senior U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told CNN. 
 
 "We care what they think. We value the process. But we're going to make the decision we need to make," the official said. 
 
 The vote among UK lawmakers came after a long day of debate, and it appeared to catch Cameron and his supporters by surprise. 
 
 For days, the prime minister has been sounding a call for action, lending support to talk of a U.S.- or Western-led strike against Syria. 
 
 "I strongly believe in the need for a tough response to the use of chemical weapons, but I also believe in respecting the will of this House of Commons," the prime minister said. 
 
 "I get that and the government will act accordingly," he said. 
 
 The head of the opposition Labour Party, Ed Miliband, called Cameron's call for action "cavalier and reckless." 
 
 "I think today the House of Commons spoke for the British people who said they didn't want a rush to war, and I was determined we learned the lessons of Iraq and I'm glad we've made the prime minister see sense this evening," he told Press Association. 
 
 At the United Nations, a closed-door Security Council meeting ended with no agreement on a resolution to address the growing crisis in Syria, a Western diplomat told CNN's Nick Paton Walsh on condition of anonymity. 
 
 "It was clear there was no meeting of minds, and no agreement on the text. It is clear that our approaches are very different and we are taking stock (of the next steps)," the diplomat said of the session, which was called by Syria's longtime ally, Russia. 
 
 The members of the Security Council expect U.N. weapons inspectors to brief Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon shortly after they depart Syria on Saturday. Ban, in turn, will swiftly brief the Security Council on the findings, the diplomat said. 
 
 China, which along with Russia has staunchly opposed any military intervention in Syria, called for U.N. weapons inspectors to be allowed to complete their investigation. 
 
 "China calls on parties concerned to exercise restraints and calmness, adhering to the right track of political solution," Foreign Minister Wang Yi said in a statement. 
 
 Britain's Joint Intelligence Committee has concluded it was "highly likely" that Syrian government forces used poison gas outside Damascus last week in an attack that killed at least 350 people, according to a summary of the committee's findings released Thursday. 
 
 Speaking in the House of Commons before the vote, Cameron said failure to respond would undo "decades of painstaking work" to prevent such weapons from being unleashed. 
 
 "The global consensus against the use of chemical weapons will be fatally unraveled," he said. "A 100-year taboo will have been breached." 
 
 JUST WATCHED Syrian intervention: Case for and against Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Syrian intervention: Case for and against 06:16 
 
 JUST WATCHED Analysis: How will Syria respond? Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Analysis: How will Syria respond? 04:44 
 
 JUST WATCHED Hollen: We need more evidence in Syria Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Hollen: We need more evidence in Syria 04:27 
 
 JUST WATCHED Damascus prepares for airstrikes Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Damascus prepares for airstrikes 01:27 
 
 In Washington, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Obama was still weighing a potential response, but said his administration was working on a "compressed timeline." 
 
 U.N. weapons inspectors are now in Syria trying to confirm the use of chemical weapons. The inspectors are expected to leave the country by Saturday morning, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said. 
 
 Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's government denies using the weapons against opposition forces and says its troops were the victims, not perpetrators, of recent gas attacks; but both British and U.S. officials say the rebels have no capability to use poison gas on the scale of the August 21 attack near Damascus, which opposition sources said killed more than 1,300. 
 
 "There is no credible intelligence or other evidence to substantiate the claims or the possession of CW by the opposition," Britain's Joint Intelligence Committee concluded in a document released Thursday. "The JIC has therefore concluded that there are no plausible alternative scenarios to regime responsibility." 
 
 Cameron said the debate was not about regime change or invasion. And he said his government would not act without first hearing from the U.N. inspectors, giving the world body a chance to weigh in and giving Parliament another chance to vote. 
 
 But the prime minister said failing to act would give al-Assad the unmistakable signal that he could use poison gas "with impunity." The British dossier on Syria also concluded the government had used chemical weapons on 14 previous occasions, and Cameron said al-Assad stepped up their use last week as a sort of test for the world. 
 
 The government said it could justify the use of force against Syria on humanitarian grounds, to stop the suffering, even if the United Nations declined to authorize a strike. 
 
 "The aim is to relieve humanitarian suffering by deterring or disrupting the further use of chemical weapons," the government said. 
 
 Syria's government offered its own arguments against such an intervention. In an open letter to British lawmakers, the speaker of Syria's parliament riffed on British literary hero William Shakespeare, saying: "If you bomb us, shall we not bleed?" 
 
 But in a veiled warning to the United Kingdom, the letter also invoked Iraq, a conflict justified on the grounds that Iraq had amassed stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and was working toward a nuclear bomb -- claims that were discovered to have been false after the 2003 invasion. 
 
 "Those who want to send others to fight will talk in the Commons of the casualties in the Syrian conflict. But before you rush over the cliffs of war, would it not be wise to pause? Remember the thousands of British soldiers killed and maimed in Afghanistan and Iraq, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi dead, both in the war and in the continuing chaos." 
 
 British Commons Speaker John Bercow published the letter. And al-Assad has vowed to defend his country against any outside attack. 
 
 "The threats of launching an aggression against Syria will increase its commitments to its rooted principles and its independent decision that originated from the will of its people, and Syria will defend itself against any aggression," the Syrian president said Thursday in a speech to Yemeni politicians. 
 
 Obama faces calls for American vote on force 
 
 Across the Atlantic, Obama said in a televised interview Wednesday that he has no doubt Syria used chemical weapons on its own people. He said government claims that the opposition used them were impossible. 
 
 "We do not believe that, given the delivery systems, using rockets, that the opposition could have carried out these attacks. We have concluded that the Syrian government in fact carried these out. And if that's so, then there need to be international consequences," he said on "PBS NewsHour" Wednesday. 
 
 Obama said that he has not made a decision about whether to conduct a military strike in Syria. A senior administration official said the United States would continue to consult with British officials, but declined to say if the slowdown in London would affect U.S. decision-making on Syria. 
 
 The president is facing doubts at home as well: More than 160 members of Congress, including 63 Democrats, have now signed letters calling for either a vote or at least a "full debate" before any U.S. action. 
 
 The author of one of those letters, Democratic Rep. Barbara Lee of California, said Obama should seek "an affirmative decision of Congress" before committing American forces. 
 
 More than 90 members of Congress, most of them Republican, signed another letter by GOP Rep. Scott Rigell of Virginia. That letter urged Obama "to consult and receive authorization" before authorizing any such military action. 
 
 Congress is currently in recess until September 9.
– John Kerry said it. Joe Biden said it. But now the person who truly matters has said it: President Obama has concluded that Syria used chemical weapons, he tells PBS NewsHour. Obama, however, said he has not made a decision about a possible military strike. The president said it's clear that chemical weapons were used, and he said the US has ruled out the possibility that the rebels were responsible, as Bashar al-Assad's government claims. "We have concluded that the Syrian government, in fact, carried these out, and if that's so, then there need to be international consequences." The US is in consultation with its allies, he said, adding that "I have no interest in any kind of open-ended conflict on Syria." Pressed on what such a limited action would accomplish, Obama said it would send a "pretty strong signal" to the Assad regime that it must stop the chemical attacks. The bigger message to Assad? "You are not only breaking international norms and standards of decency, but you're also creating a situation where US national interests are affected."