Syria 'welcomes' proposal to hand over control of chemical weapons

Damocles said:
It's insane, don't you think? And the "evil in Desh's eye" Russians giving him his escape hatch just adds to the embarrassment. Kerry's gaffe may open a path for others to help him out of his danged hole he just can't stop digging.
Click to expand...

It's simply frightening as was Obama's response tonight on CNN, I didn't use that, but it's at the opening of the article linked to.

I don't know if what they are doing is total cluelessness or actual desire to weaken the country.
 
This thread is hilarious to anyone who doesn't have a dog in this hunt. I don't love Obama, I don't hate Obama. I very much care whether we get into yet another bs war. So this is all good news to me.

You guys all don't realize you look exactly like each other to someone like me.
 
Darla said:
This thread is hilarious to anyone who doesn't have a dog in this hunt. I don't love Obama, I don't hate Obama. I very much care whether we get into yet another bs war. So this is all good news to me.

You guys all don't realize you look exactly like each other to someone like me.
Click to expand...

Most people on here do not hate Obama or love Obama. You are not as special as you think you are.
 
FYI Darla... most of us are in agreement... from left to right... Putin is allowing Obama to save face and is taking advantage of Obamas ineptitude yet again.
 
Darla said:
This thread is hilarious to anyone who doesn't have a dog in this hunt. I don't love Obama, I don't hate Obama. I very much care whether we get into yet another bs war. So this is all good news to me. You guys all don't realize you look exactly like each other to someone like me.
Click to expand...

Tell me again how you judge Democrats, something about shirtless, wasn't it?
 
evince said:
telling them they can avoid the attack by handing over the weapons is not a threat.
Click to expand...

telling them they can avoid the attack by handing over the weapons is not a threat.---DESH


Now how can you argue with logic like that...........................................:palm::rofl2::rofl2::rofl2::whiteflag:

If I didn't see it with my own eyes, I wouldn't believe it.
 
Kerry renegs and says it was just rhetoric. Obama's war looks even more threatened. And the US looks even less credible in the eyes of the rest of the world if it goes ahead with it's war plans.

Call it US incompetence or whatever, it's pretty obvious that Russia has not got the world behind it with it's pickup on Kerry's remarks.

I'm still not convinced that it's Obama's intention to get a war but I know very well that the US will not be denied when it starts to make plans for war. And of course we all should know by now that an alleged gas attack or even a real gas attack has nothing to do with it.

This is a march to aggression in the same manner that it was pulled off for the Iraq war.
 
Darla said:
The Jedi Master thing is funny though...
Click to expand...

Must be a Jedi Master if he can conjure up 1429 dead people who aren't.


1. Administration continues to use inflated casualty number, 1429.

Doctors Without Borders has reported that 355 reportedly died from the August 21 chemical attack. The group also reported that “3,600 patients displaying neurotoxic symptoms over a period of “less than three hours” on the morning” of August 21.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights “confirmed 502 dead, including about 100 children and ‘tens’ of rebel fighters,” according to McClatchy. That is still far less than 1429. The organization demanded Secretary of State John Kerry “provide the names of the victims included in the US tally.”
http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/20...rs-myth-addled-speech-on-waging-war-on-syria/

Is the Death Count in Syria’s Sarin Attack Phony?

Another point of dispute is the death toll from the alleged attacks on Aug. 21. Neither Kerry’s remarks nor the unclassified version of the U.S. intelligence he referenced explained how the U.S. reached a tally of 1,429, including 426 children. The only attribution was “a preliminary government assessment.”

Anthony Cordesman, a former senior defense official who’s now with the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, took aim at the death toll discrepancies in an essay published Sunday.

He criticized Kerry as being “sandbagged into using an absurdly over-precise number” of 1,429, and noted that the number didn’t agree with either the British assessment of “at least 350 fatalities” or other Syrian opposition sources, namely the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which has confirmed 502 dead, including about 100 children and “tens” of rebel fighters, and has demanded that Kerry provide the names of the victims included in the U.S. tally.

“President Obama was then forced to round off the number at ‘well over 1,000 people’ – creating a mix of contradictions over the most basic facts,” Cordesman wrote. He added that the blunder was reminiscent of “the mistakes the U.S. made in preparing Secretary (Colin) Powell’s speech to the U.N. on Iraq in 2003.”

An unclassified version of a French intelligence report on Syria that was released Monday hardly cleared things up; France confirmed only 281 fatalities, though it more broadly agreed with the United States that the regime had used chemical weapons in the Aug. 21 attack.
http://antiwar.com/blog/2013/09/03/is-the-death-count-in-syrias-sarin-attack-phony/
 
blackascoal said:
Must be a Jedi Master if he can conjure up 1429 dead people who aren't.


1. Administration continues to use inflated casualty number, 1429.

Doctors Without Borders has reported that 355 reportedly died from the August 21 chemical attack. The group also reported that “3,600 patients displaying neurotoxic symptoms over a period of “less than three hours” on the morning” of August 21.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights “confirmed 502 dead, including about 100 children and ‘tens’ of rebel fighters,” according to McClatchy. That is still far less than 1429. The organization demanded Secretary of State John Kerry “provide the names of the victims included in the US tally.”
http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/20...rs-myth-addled-speech-on-waging-war-on-syria/

Is the Death Count in Syria’s Sarin Attack Phony?

Another point of dispute is the death toll from the alleged attacks on Aug. 21. Neither Kerry’s remarks nor the unclassified version of the U.S. intelligence he referenced explained how the U.S. reached a tally of 1,429, including 426 children. The only attribution was “a preliminary government assessment.”

Anthony Cordesman, a former senior defense official who’s now with the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, took aim at the death toll discrepancies in an essay published Sunday.

He criticized Kerry as being “sandbagged into using an absurdly over-precise number” of 1,429, and noted that the number didn’t agree with either the British assessment of “at least 350 fatalities” or other Syrian opposition sources, namely the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which has confirmed 502 dead, including about 100 children and “tens” of rebel fighters, and has demanded that Kerry provide the names of the victims included in the U.S. tally.

“President Obama was then forced to round off the number at ‘well over 1,000 people’ – creating a mix of contradictions over the most basic facts,” Cordesman wrote. He added that the blunder was reminiscent of “the mistakes the U.S. made in preparing Secretary (Colin) Powell’s speech to the U.N. on Iraq in 2003.”

An unclassified version of a French intelligence report on Syria that was released Monday hardly cleared things up; France confirmed only 281 fatalities, though it more broadly agreed with the United States that the regime had used chemical weapons in the Aug. 21 attack.
http://antiwar.com/blog/2013/09/03/is-the-death-count-in-syrias-sarin-attack-phony/
Click to expand...

The death counts are always phony. They are very good at deflating them too, when it's one of our strikes. It's all bullshit, I never even read that propoganda.
 
monty1 said:
Kerry renegs and says it was just rhetoric. Obama's war looks even more threatened. And the US looks even less credible in the eyes of the rest of the world if it goes ahead with it's war plans.

Call it US incompetence or whatever, it's pretty obvious that Russia has not got the world behind it with it's pickup on Kerry's remarks.

I'm still not convinced that it's Obama's intention to get a war but I know very well that the US will not be denied when it starts to make plans for war. And of course we all should know by now that an alleged gas attack or even a real gas attack has nothing to do with it.

This is a march to aggression in the same manner that it was pulled off for the Iraq war.
Click to expand...

Yeah, looks very much like a Kerry gaffe. I bet Joe Biden is the happiest man on the planet right now. You know smart money would have been on him for this.
 
Darla said:
Mmm hmmm...
Click to expand...

tumblr_lsig01GFPb1qcgj62o1_500.gif
 
He did not renig folks why are you claiming that?


He said it was NOT a real possibility because the Assad had been sticking with denying he even had the weapons when they told him to give them up.

He was playing fucking games and at the last minute changed his mind and admitted he had them and would give them up.
 
Russia Trumps Obama War Plan

It’s tempting to enjoy the moment, that is, the humiliation of President Obama and the short-circuiting of Obama’s war push by a brilliant coup conducted by Vladimir Putin, that sly old dog and ju-jitsu expert, along with Russia’s ally, Syria. President Obama might as well not bother giving his Oval Office speech tonight, because the chances that Congress will approve Obama’s Authorization to Use Military Force are zero, and the possibility that the United States will go to war against Syria without congressional support are now less-than-zero.

But here’s the thing: the Russian proposal, now accepted by Syria, ought to be seized on by the White House enthusiastically, because it could open the door to, first, a political settlement of the war in Syria and then an accord with Iran.

Perhaps the signal failure of the Obama administration in the past five years has been its utter inability to achieve a decent working relationship with Moscow. Despite some successes, including limited success on arms talks and a cooling-down on NATO expansion and the placement of missiles in eastern Europe, Obama has allowed U.S.-Russia relations to drift toward a Cold War-like hostility. That’s unfortunate, because a positive U.S.-Russia approach toward issues such as the war in Syria, the confrontation over Iran, the struggle against Al Qaeda and Islamist extremism, and a whole range of disarmament and nuclear-weapons issues could succeed in making the world a better and safer place.

We’ll see if President Obama, stung now by Russia’s Syria plan, embraces a more intelligent strategy in regard to Moscow, or not.

Meanwhile, the incompetence and bumbling of Obama and Secretary of State Kerry on Syria is staggering. Obama’s mistakes on Syria make a long list: first, calling for the fall of Assad in 2011, without any means to make it happen; second, drawing a “red line” on chemical weapons in 2012, thus boxing himself in when reports of Syrian gas use began piling up; third, promising to arm the Syrian rebels months ago, thus escalating the war and getting the rebels excited, with no real follow-up; fourth, oddly allowing Qatar and Saudi Arabia to take the lead in Syria policy, led by Prince Bandar and Saudi intelligence, while the United States took a back seat and the war was taken over by Islamists, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Al Qaeda types; fifth, opting for a military strike with no obvious strategic value; and sixth, tossing the whole mess into Congress’ lap.

Today, facing defeat in Congress – perhaps the first-ever rejection of the use of the American military by a president who sought the approval of those 535 experts on foreign policy on Capitol Hill – Obama finds himself bailed out by Putin.

more
http://www.thenation.com/blog/176095/russia-trumps-obama-war-plan#axzz2eV9TfszD
 
I have no doubt that Putin is celebrating. The loss for the administration is staggering. Why wouldn't Obama immediately grab this chance to get out of the mess of his own making? He doesn't like Putin.

That the 'smart diplomacy' just hasn't worked, he finds unbelievable. They cheered his election and seeing the door slam on his predecessor. So, what's keeping them from following wherever he wishes to go? He's been 'leading from behind,' for 5 years, why wouldn't they just follow him on this?

The job is hard.
 
Annie said:
I have no doubt that Putin is celebrating. The loss for the administration is staggering. Why wouldn't Obama immediately grab this chance to get out of the mess of his own making? He doesn't like Putin.

That the 'smart diplomacy' just hasn't worked, he finds unbelievable. They cheered his election and seeing the door slam on his predecessor. So, what's keeping them from following wherever he wishes to go? He's been 'leading from behind,' for 5 years, why wouldn't they just follow him on this?

The job is hard.
Click to expand...

It's a fool's mission to claim you are in someone's head.

That was creative though. And not at all colored by your party preferences.

For what it's worth, I don't like PUtin either. If you do, raise your hand and get counted!
 
The swiftness from which we've switched from Obama the war-monger to Obama the bumbling pushover who may avoid war while obtaining a better outcome is staggering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top