Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Cameron

Syria takes the deal

99 posts in this topic

But Obama said the threat of American force would remain, "And we don't want just a stalling or delaying tactic to put off the pressure that we have on there right now."

 

Sen. John McCain, a leading Republican voice in calls for military action against Syria, said Tuesday there could be "a very good initial test" of such a solution.

 

"That would be for the immediate dispatch of international monitors to these chemical weapons sites" in Syria, he told CNN's "New Day."

 

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/10/politics/us-syria-obama-solutions/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A red line was crossed (yes... a certain someone with the propensity for making off the cuff remarks should be muzzled).

The Secretary of the State of Brothels operates under the delusion that he is the President of some and seeks to set his own policy.

Syria and Russia using the policy making statements of the latter, outmaneuver the former.

 

The ObaCain rebel scum can only look on with dismay as their bad gas ploy gets foiled again.

 

Qatar and Saudi Arabia can only howl with rage as their plans to run a natural gas pipeline from the former's North Field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and into Turkey, bypassing Russia, to supply Europe (odd that the Europeans need any foreign sources of energy as the windmills and solar panels should be enough to supply unlimited energy) are placed on hold, again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A red line was crossed (yes... a certain someone with the propensity for making off the cuff remarks should be muzzled).

The Secretary of the State of Brothels operates under the delusion that he is the President of some and seeks to set his own policy.

Syria and Russia using the policy making statements of the latter, outmaneuver the former.

 

The ObaCain rebel scum can only look on with dismay as their bad gas ploy gets foiled again.

 

Qatar and Saudi Arabia can only howl with rage as their plans to run a natural gas pipeline from the former's North Field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and into Turkey, bypassing Russia, to supply Europe (odd that the Europeans need any foreign sources of energy as the windmills and solar panels should be enough to supply unlimited energy) are placed on hold, again.

We could also ship LNG to Europe so they would not be held hostage to Russia. Unfortunately the Energy Department has only approved one company in the US to liquify natural gas for transport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A red line was crossed (yes... a certain someone with the propensity for making off the cuff remarks should be muzzled).

The Secretary of the State of Brothels operates under the delusion that he is the President of some and seeks to set his own policy.

Syria and Russia using the policy making statements of the latter, outmaneuver the former.

 

The ObaCain rebel scum can only look on with dismay as their bad gas ploy gets foiled again.

 

Qatar and Saudi Arabia can only howl with rage as their plans to run a natural gas pipeline from the former's North Field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and into Turkey, bypassing Russia, to supply Europe (odd that the Europeans need any foreign sources of energy as the windmills and solar panels should be enough to supply unlimited energy) are placed on hold, again.

Have you been posting under another name? There's someone posting who sounds just like you, i'll flag it next time I notice it.

 

And let's see: Obama wants Syria to give up chemical weapons. Syria is giving up same. By you, this is being "foiled?"

 

Wish I could negotiate with you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have you been posting under another name? There's someone posting who sounds just like you, i'll flag it next time I notice it.

 

And let's see: Obama wants Syria to give up chemical weapons. Syria is giving up same. By you, this is being "foiled?"

 

Wish I could negotiate with you!

 

I have only ever but posted under one name.

 

Obama has shown a startling propensity for opening craw and inserting his own arse. The unscripted commentary of 'red line(s)' is but one case of this operative paradigm. With the red line crossed, excluding for the moment the lack of any credibility that one could reasonably assign to the domestic regime's claims of attribution of responsibility for the latest 'bad gas' attack, Obama, from step one, talked himself into a corner. This foolishness was compounded by having Lurch, with his delusions of being in the role of setting policy, as the head of State Brothels. Obama's desire is for engaging in an illegitimate, aggressive, colonial, racist and imperialistic military attack against the legitimate government of another country. This desire, on his part, is so great that he has stuffed the whole 'working well with others' and 'being a part of a global community' under the wheels of the bus (the adults at the Security Council firmly told him 'no' in regards to his infantile tantrum throwing). Now, with Lurch's unscripted rhetorical policy making statement, Putin and Assad have placed the red line(s) leader of some in a position where he is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. His red line(s) remain crossed and his desire to carry out his brutish revival of the colonial era had been stymied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have only ever but posted under one name.

 

Obama has shown a startling propensity for opening craw and inserting his own arse. The unscripted commentary of 'red line(s)' is but one case of this operative paradigm. With the red line crossed, excluding for the moment the lack of any credibility that one could reasonably assign to the domestic regime's claims of attribution of responsibility for the latest 'bad gas' attack, Obama, from step one, talked himself into a corner. This foolishness was compounded by having Lurch, with his delusions of being in the role of setting policy, as the head of State Brothels. Obama's desire is for engaging in an illegitimate, aggressive, colonial, racist and imperialistic military attack against the legitimate government of another country. This desire, on his part, is so great that he has stuffed the whole 'working well with others' and 'being a part of a global community' under the wheels of the bus (the adults at the Security Council firmly told him 'no' in regards to his infantile tantrum throwing). Now, with Lurch's unscripted rhetorical policy making statement, Putin and Assad have placed the red line(s) leader of some in a position where he is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. His red line(s) remain crossed and his desire to carry out his brutish revival of the colonial era had been stymied.

 

If and it is a big if, Syria surrenders these weapons it's a big win for everybody. Sorry, know you prefer the dark and despair--happy is so trite, you know what Tolstoy said. No worries, lots of other bad stuff happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I'm very, very skeptical," he told CNN's "New Day." "But the fact is, you can't pass up this opportunity -- if it is one."

 

Lets see where this goes, hopefully in a positive way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have you been posting under another name? There's someone posting who sounds just like you, i'll flag it next time I notice it.

 

And let's see: Obama wants Syria to give up chemical weapons. Syria is giving up same. By you, this is being "foiled?"

 

Wish I could negotiate with you!

 

So that whole thing about Obama wanting to attack Syria is now down the memory hole?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So that whole thing about Obama wanting to attack Syria is now down the memory hole?

 

Not at all. Obviously, minus the threat of attack, do you seriously think Syria would be accepting this plan? Of course not.

 

Of course let's not count our chickens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some thoughts/questions. 1.) Why would Russia ever propose and why would Syria ever accept such a proposal? Answer might be that the weapons have already been removed back to Russia or Iran. 2.) If the Russian proposal works, why not apply it to Iran who also have chemicals and either have or soon will have the mother of all bombs? 3.) If Syria did move the chemicals so they can't be found in any serious supply, where did they go and why not extend the search and disclosure beyond the Syrian borders? Borders mean nothing, especially over there. 4.) If the World is in accord about banned chemical use as per agreement, why not have all agree to open inspection/investigation? Of course that will not happen but now is an opportunity to suggest such expansion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here are some thoughts/questions. 1.) Why would Russia ever propose and why would Syria ever accept such a proposal? Answer might be that the weapons have already been removed back to Russia or Iran. 2.) If the Russian proposal works, why not apply it to Iran who also have chemicals and either have or soon will have the mother of all bombs? 3.) If Syria did move the chemicals so they can't be found in any serious supply, where did they go and why not extend the search and disclosure beyond the Syrian borders? Borders mean nothing, especially over there. 4.) If the World is in accord about banned chemical use as per agreement, why not have all agree to open inspection/investigation? Of course that will not happen but now is an opportunity to suggest such expansion.

 

1. Because it is in Russia's best interest to keep Assad in power (access to ports) and Assad has to toe the Moscow line.

2. The nation in question (Iran) has to agree. They won't.

3. Seems unlikely lacking any proof that another nation has accepted the weapons.

4. You're suggesting random checks? Hard to envision how that would work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here are some thoughts/questions. 1.) Why would Russia ever propose and why would Syria ever accept such a proposal? Answer might be that the weapons have already been removed back to Russia or Iran. 2.) If the Russian proposal works, why not apply it to Iran who also have chemicals and either have or soon will have the mother of all bombs? 3.) If Syria did move the chemicals so they can't be found in any serious supply, where did they go and why not extend the search and disclosure beyond the Syrian borders? Borders mean nothing, especially over there. 4.) If the World is in accord about banned chemical use as per agreement, why not have all agree to open inspection/investigation? Of course that will not happen but now is an opportunity to suggest such expansion.

 

Assad says that he agrees with you.

 

In the Charlie Rose interview, he noted that Syria introduced a UN Resolution in 2001 to ban all wmd's in the entire MidEast, but the US stood against the resolution.

 

“Israel has WMD and it has to sign. And Israel occupying our land. So that’s why we talked about Middle East, not Syria, not Israel. It should be comprehensive."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Assad says that he agrees with you.

 

In the Charlie Rose interview, he noted that Syria introduced a UN Resolution in 2001 to ban all wmd's in the entire MidEast, but the US stood against the resolution.

 

“Israel has WMD and it has to sign. And Israel occupying our land. So that’s why we talked about Middle East, not Syria, not Israel. It should be comprehensive."

Seems under International law a country can posses WMD, at least the chemical types. They just can't use them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Assad says that he agrees with you.

 

In the Charlie Rose interview, he noted that Syria introduced a UN Resolution in 2001 to ban all wmd's in the entire MidEast, but the US stood against the resolution.

 

“Israel has WMD and it has to sign. And Israel occupying our land. So that’s why we talked about Middle East, not Syria, not Israel. It should be comprehensive."

 

Shocker that a country without nuclear weapons wants to band wmds when their enemy possesses nuclear weapons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If and it is a big if, Syria surrenders these weapons it's a big win for everybody. Sorry, know you prefer the dark and despair--happy is so trite, you know what Tolstoy said. No worries, lots of other bad stuff happening.

 

The irony is that Mr. "I'll Talk to Anyone" painted himself into a corner of claiming a military attack was the first and only option, and only because of Kerry's blunder (he must be hanging with Fightin' Joe Biden ALOT) did Obama trip over the possibility of diplomacy after having ruled it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Total withdrawal from the ME. Not that I think that's ever happening

 

Well ok, the isolationist position I don't agree with but it is one way to go. Won't stop people getting killed though and arguably getting chem weapons out of Assad's hands will. Such a cluster****.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The irony is that Mr. "I'll Talk to Anyone" painted himself into a corner of claiming a military attack was the first and only option, and only because of Kerry's blunder (he must be hanging with Fightin' Joe Biden ALOT) did Obama trip over the possibility of diplomacy after having ruled it out.

 

Irony nonwithstanding, the point is that if this works, it's great. I know something great happening on Obama's watch is anathema to many, but what the heck, just grin and bear it. Of course, way too early to say it will work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Irony nonwithstanding, the point is that if this works, it's great. I know something great happening on Obama's watch is anathema to many, but what the heck, just grin and bear it. Of course, way too early to say it will work.

 

I think it's great too. But Obama had to be made to look foolish to even bring up the possibility. I thought the days of "Cowboy Foreign Policy" were over. Guess not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well ok, the isolationist position I don't agree with but it is one way to go. Won't stop people getting killed though and arguably getting chem weapons out of Assad's hands will. Such a cluster****.

 

Air strikes also won't stop people from getting killed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0