Even if you want to take the American story, they say we used chemical weapons the same day the team or the investigation team came to Syria ; is it logical ? It's not logical. Even if a country or army wanted to use such weapon, they should have waited a few days till the investigation finished its work. It's not logical, the whole story doesn't even hold together.

Any American strike will not destroy as much as the terrorists have already destroyed in Syria ; sometimes the repercussions could be many doubles the strike itself.

The other thing we did as government is to open gates for the civilians to leave that [ eastern part] area [in Aleppo], and at the same time for the humanitarian convoys and help to go through those gates inside that part of Aleppo, but the terrorists publicly refused any solution, so they wanted to keep the situation as it is.

You cannot be desperate when the army is making advances. That should have happened - if we take into consideration that this presumption is correct and this is reality - you use it when you're in a desperate situation.

The problem with the West is that they start with political reform going towards democracy.

America must listen. It must listen to the interests of others. But the US government has no interest in similarities, no matter how obvious.

We are facing an external attack against us, which is more dangerous than any other previous wars... We are dealing with those who are extremists, who only know the language of killing and criminality.