[Chemical weapons] isn't about what the United States believe in, it's about the reality that we have, and this reality, we own it, we don't have to discuss it.

Let's presume that a country or army has this weapon ; this kind of armaments cannot be used by infantry for example or by anyone. This kind of armament should be used by specialized units, so it cannot be in the hand of anyone.

I never rejected any responsibility, but that depends on the decision.

When you use an armament, you use it to defend the civilians. You kill terrorists in order to defend civilians. That's the natural role of any army in the world.

Our democracy should reflect our culture and our habits and our customs and our reality at the same time.

My decision was, and the decision of the different institutions, and the decision of the different officials in Syria - I'm on top of them - was to have dialogue, to fight terrorists, and to reform as a response at the very beginning, response to the allegations, let's say, at that time, that they needed reform in Syria, we responded.

Regarding fighting terrorism, we are ready to cooperate with anyone in this world with no conditions. That's crux of our policy, not today, not yesterday; for years, even before the war on Syria, we always said that.