This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23967190

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Syria crisis: US Senate panel backs use of force Syria crisis: US Senate panel backs use of force
(35 minutes later)
A Senate panel has approved the use of military force in Syria, in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack. A US Senate panel has approved the use of military force in Syria, in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack.
By 10-7, the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations moved the measure to a full Senate vote, expected next week. By 10-7, the Committee on Foreign Relations moved the measure to a full Senate vote, expected next week.
The vote comes as President Barack Obama tries to build support in the US for punitive military action against the Syrian government. The proposal allows the use of force in Syria for 60 days with the possibility to extend it for 30 days. It prevents the use of US troops on the ground.
The much-debated measure allows the use of limited military force in Syria for 90 days. President Barack Obama is battling to build support at home and abroad for military action.
It also prevents the use of US troops on the ground. The Senate committee approved the bill on Wednesday after accepting an amendment by Republican Senator John McCain that advocated increasing support for rebel forces.
Despite Wednesday's vote, the bill's fate in the wider Senate is still unclear. Despite the senators' vote, the bill's fate in the wider Senate is still unclear. And the US House of Representatives must also approve the measure.
French debate
So far, only 21 senators have said they support or are likely to support the resolution, according to a tally by ABC News.So far, only 21 senators have said they support or are likely to support the resolution, according to a tally by ABC News.
Thirteen have said they oppose or are likely to oppose the resolution, while 66 votes are undecided or unknown.Thirteen have said they oppose or are likely to oppose the resolution, while 66 votes are undecided or unknown.
However, those numbers are expected to shift as the language in the resolution changes, the White House and their congressional allies apply pressure, and lawmakers hear from their constituents.However, those numbers are expected to shift as the language in the resolution changes, the White House and their congressional allies apply pressure, and lawmakers hear from their constituents.
Earlier in the day, France - whose government has strongly advocated intervention - held an extraordinary debate in the National Assembly, though MPs will not vote on the matter as the country's president can mobilise the military without their backing.Earlier in the day, France - whose government has strongly advocated intervention - held an extraordinary debate in the National Assembly, though MPs will not vote on the matter as the country's president can mobilise the military without their backing.
The government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is accused of using chemical weapons against civilians on several occasions during the 30-month conflict, most recently on a large scale in an attack on 21 August on the outskirts of Damascus.The government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is accused of using chemical weapons against civilians on several occasions during the 30-month conflict, most recently on a large scale in an attack on 21 August on the outskirts of Damascus.
The US has put the death toll from that incident at 1,429 - though other countries and organisations have given lower figures - and says all the evidence implicates government forces.The US has put the death toll from that incident at 1,429 - though other countries and organisations have given lower figures - and says all the evidence implicates government forces.
During a press conference in Sweden on Wednesday, President Obama said the evidence gives him "high confidence that Assad carried this out". During a press conference in Stockholm, Sweden, on Wednesday, President Obama said: "My credibility is not on the line. The international community's credibility is on the line.
He said action must be taken to deter the regime from using chemical weapons again. "America and Congress's credibility is on the line, because we give lip-service to the notion that these international norms are important."
No 'pin prick'
Mr Obama said he believed the US Congress would approve intervention, but stressed that as commander-in-chief, he had the right to act in his country's national interest regardless.Mr Obama said he believed the US Congress would approve intervention, but stressed that as commander-in-chief, he had the right to act in his country's national interest regardless.
Wednesday's vote in did not break down by party lines.
Senator Dick Durbin, a senior Democrat on the Senate foreign relations committee, said he had voted against the war in Iraq, but insisted "this is different".
"What we've done today is a step in the right direction. I hope it makes a safer world," said Sen Dick Durbin.
But another Democrat, Senator Tom Udall, said: "I'm voting no because this policy moves the United States toward greater involvement in the Syria civil war."
He was joined by five Republicans in voting against the resolution, including Rand Paul and Marco Rubio, both of whom are tipped as potential 2016 presidential candidates.
Two top Obama administration officials, Secretary of State John Kerry and Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel, meanwhile continued to press the president's case for intervention, this time before a House of Representatives panel.
Mr Hagel said any US military strike on Syria would not be a mere "pin prick" but would reduce Syria's military capability.
He said he thought there was a "very high" likelihood that Mr Assad would use chemical weapons again if the US did not act.
The defence secretary estimated the cost of such a strike would be in the "tens of millions" of US dollars.