# Can anyone defend the Admin Syria drive? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 9, 2013, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417 "2013-09-09T16:04:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 42
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2013, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/821 "2013-10-11T03:09:41Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I cite the statement made before putting together the political infrastructure needed to make such a statement. > > Putin is the fox guarding the chicken coop. He got exactly what he wanted from the UN. That’s not caving, that’s getting what he wanted from the UN. The UN deal came after Putin’s abrubt cave. So your timeline is way off. The UN deal cannot constrain Obama from using military force, so what did Putin get? He got to admit that he was late in controlling his partner and could have stopped a murderous attack with the use of CW. Obama can still bomb Syria if Assad gets caught cheating. For two years Putin refused to help Obama force Syria to give up its CW. Obama did not change his position on CW - Putin did. 180. That is caving. And I still await how you claim to know Obama’s intent on the red line. I see he intended to put a stop to Assad using them and killing with them - if Assad uses them again it is likely he will be bombed by the US and French and perhaps a few others That is why Assad won’t use them- he will dutifully destroy them as he has agreed to do. Why didnt Putin do this two years ago if that is what he wanted? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2013, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/822 "2013-10-11T03:40:46Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > The UN deal came after Putin’s abrubt cave. Putin IS the UN deal. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Obama can still bomb Syria if Assad gets caught cheating. cite. Syria poses no threat to the United States. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Why didnt Putin do this two years ago if that is what he wanted? Because there was no UN pressure 2 years ago. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2013, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/823 "2013-10-11T05:44:42Z")
> [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by NotfooledbyW > > The UN deal came after Putin’s abrubt cave. > > Putin IS the UN deal. -Magiver No! Putin caved, when he cut a deal in Geneva with Kerry. The UN affirmed the Kerry/Putin deal. It was Putin changing position (caved) after Obama threatened military action against Putin’s client pariah state - Obama did not change position on CW- Putin did. Do you think it was the UN that forced Putin to cave? How did that work? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2013, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/824 "2013-10-11T05:56:29Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > No! Putin caved, when he cut a deal in Geneva with Kerry. The UN affirmed the Kerry/Putin deal. It was Putin changing position (caved) after Obama threatened military action against Putin’s client pariah state - Obama did not change position on CW- Putin did. > > Do you think it was the UN that forced Putin to cave? How did that work? He got exactly what he wanted. He can’t stop the UN from making resolutions but he can and did influence this one and as I’ve already cited the US went along with it. How is that caving? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2013, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/825 "2013-10-11T06:02:24Z")
> [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by NotfooledbyW: Obama can still bomb Syria if Assad gets caught cheating. > > cite. Syria poses no threat to the United States. -Magiver I have cited the War Powers Act and it is the President who gets to decide (not you Magiver) if Syria is a threat to us at home or Americans working abroad - plus you’ve gone on about al Qaeda types engaged in the civil war there. Terrorists +1000 Tons of chemical weapons = THREAT. Now if you are in a position to determine what is a threat or not a threat for the president of the USA could you reveal your official connection to the President. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2013, 6:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/826 "2013-10-11T06:12:14Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > He got exactly what he wanted. He can’t stop the UN from making resolutions but he can and did influence this one and as I’ve already cited the US went along with it. How is that caving? Cite Putin getting what he wanted. Prior to Obama threatening to Bomb Syria, Putin refused to push Assad to go public with his CW inventory and agree to destroy it. If Putin always wanted to do that he could have done it prior to Obama’s threat to launch cruise missiles. That is the sequence of events that you cannot make go away. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2013, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/827 "2013-10-11T06:25:12Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally Posted by NotfooledbyW: Why didnt Putin do this two years ago if that is what he wanted? > > Because there was no UN pressure 2 years ago. -Magiver Question: Can Putin veto any pressure, military or diplomatic pressure such as sanctions if 14 members on the UNSC decided to take action against Syria? So how can you argue that Putin succumbed to pressure by the UNSC last month when he continued to have the veto that he always has available? Did he forget that he has the veto? Your argument is devoid of logic and reason where you are taking it. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2013, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/828 "2013-10-11T21:01:03Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > I have cited the War Powers Act and it is the President who gets to decide (not you Magiver) if Syria is a threat to us at home or Americans working abroad - plus you’ve gone on about al Qaeda types engaged in the civil war there. Terrorists +1000 Tons of chemical weapons = THREAT. > > Now if you are in a position to determine what is a threat or not a threat for the president of the USA could you reveal your official connection to the President. According to your reasoning anyone who is not an ally of the US (or actually refuses to walk-step besides it) is a potential enemy of same – after all, they have weapons…_all_ of them :eek: Preposterous. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2013, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/829 "2013-10-11T21:49:00Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > According to your reasoning anyone who is not an ally of the US (or actually refuses to walk-step besides it) is a potential enemy of same – after all, they have weapons…_all_ of them :eek: > > Preposterous. Cite where I promote reasoning that comes close to anything resembling your claim. This is about use of chemical weapons. Conventional weapons are not the issue. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2013, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/830 "2013-10-11T22:56:48Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > I have cited the War Powers Act and it is the President who gets to decide (not you Magiver) if Syria is a threat to us at home or Americans working abroad - plus you’ve gone on about al Qaeda types engaged in the civil war there. Terrorists +1000 Tons of chemical weapons = THREAT. > > Now if you are in a position to determine what is a threat or not a threat for the president of the USA could you reveal your official connection to the President. By that logic we could attack Canada because they have Al Qaeda cells and CW’s. The only threat at this point from Syria would be in retaliation for our involvement. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2013, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/831 "2013-10-11T22:58:32Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Cite Putin getting what he wanted. Already did. Waste your own time looking it up. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2013, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/832 "2013-10-11T23:00:27Z")
You are, of course, talking about [this](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/06/syria-chemical-weapons-destroyed), aren’t you? UN inspectors have begun this week the task of destroying Syria’s chemical weapons. Not bad for a failed president that let Russia bully him, eh? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2013, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/833 "2013-10-11T23:18:02Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > You are, of course, talking about [this](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/06/syria-chemical-weapons-destroyed), aren’t you? UN inspectors have begun this week the task of destroying Syria’s chemical weapons. > > Not bad for a failed president that let Russia bully him, eh? [Not bad for a Russian President you mean](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/06/syria-chemical-weapons-destroyed): Last month Obama said: “It is too early to tell whether [the Russian plan] will succeed, and any agreement must verify that the Assad regime keeps its commitments. But this initiative has the potential to remove the threat of chemical weapons without the use of force, particularly because Russia is one of Assad’s strongest allies.” ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2013, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/834 "2013-10-12T02:19:52Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Already did. Waste your own time looking it up. I can cite Putin to show what Putin wanted: He only got what he wanted after he caved on the CW matter. > [@](#): > > From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future. We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law. We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos. The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not. Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression. > > [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from-russia-on-syria.html?pagewanted=all&\_r=0](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from-russia-on-syria.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0) Again Magiver, why did Putin give up Assad’s CW arsenal so quickly after Kerry went public with a way to avoid war? Putin had to know about Obama’s red line before the August CW attack and if he truly wanted a UN Resolution to rid Syria of CW peacefully, why did he oppose the UNSC in passing a Resolution in 2012? Obama’s red line would not have been crossed and Obama would for sure have agreed to a UN resolution in 2012 as he has done the past few weeks. For persoective on what Putin wanted with regard to Syria’s CW you would have to go back to June 2012 by reading this report: > [@](#): > > Insight: Assad chemical weapons plans blocked by Moscow > By Samia Nakhoul > BEIRUT | Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:18pm EDT > [Assad chemical weapons plans blocked by Moscow | Reuters](http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE86N11Z20120724?irpc=932) The question is why didnt Putin push for disarming Syria at the UN in 2012 when it would have been welcomed by Obama and most leaders in the world? From the above link: “”"But “the Russians got hold of him and told him ‘don’t even think about it’”. Moscow went further on Monday, publicly warning Assad not to use chemical weapons, which it said was barred by Syria’s 1968 ratification of an international protocol against using poison gas in war. “The Russian side proceeds from the assumption that Syrian authorities will continue to strictly adhere to the undertaken international obligations,” it said. SHARED INTEREST The diplomat believes Syria’s statement, by foreign ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi, was put out at Russia’s insistence. Despite the diplomatic “debacle” over Syria at the UN Security Council, where Moscow has vetoed tougher action against Damascus, “there is a clear shared interest between Russia and the United States to control the chemical weapons”, he said.“”" ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2013, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/835 "2013-10-12T02:44:10Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > [Not bad for a Russian President you mean](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/06/syria-chemical-weapons-destroyed): > > Last month Obama said: “It is too early to tell whether [the Russian plan] will succeed, and any agreement must verify that the Assad regime keeps its commitments. But this initiative has the potential to remove the threat of chemical weapons without the use of force, particularly because Russia is one of Assad’s strongest allies.” The threat of force made Putin finally act. Had Obama done the Rand Paul - isolationist duck and run dance - it is not likely Putin would have moved to hand Obama exactly what Obama wanted Putin to do as Assad’s ally. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2013, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/836 "2013-10-12T02:50:58Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > By that logic we could attack Canada because they have Al Qaeda cells and CW’s. The only threat at this point from Syria would be in retaliation for our involvement. You forgot to explain your qualification to determine if Syria’s CW stockpile in a civil War poses a threat or not. I trust Obama more than I trust you. And your Canada diversion is weak. There is no civil war raging in Canada and CW are not at risk to falling into al Qaeda’s terrorist hands, Could you limit your arguments to points that I make? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2013, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/837 "2013-10-12T04:37:54Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > You forgot to explain your qualification to determine if Syria’s CW stockpile in a civil > War poses a threat or not. > > I trust Obama more than I trust you. well you’re in the minority. He doesn’t have the support of Congress or the American people, or the International community. He was spared the embarrassment of a Congressional no vote by Putin. Syria poses no threat to the United States despite your weak assertion CW’s may fall into rebel hands. That doesn’t even qualify as a strawman. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2013, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/838 "2013-10-12T05:33:23Z")
> [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > You forgot to explain your qualification to determine if Syria’s CW stockpile in a civil > > War poses a threat or not. I trust Obama more than I trust you. -Originally Posted by NotfooledbyW > > > [@Magiver](#): > > > > well you’re in the minority. He doesn’t have the support of Congress or the American people, or the International community. He was spared the embarrassment of a Congressional no vote by Putin. > > > > Syria poses no threat to the United States despite your weak assertion CW’s may fall into rebel hands. That doesn’t even qualify as a strawman. Over 50,000 million Americans voted for Obama in the last election and most of which trust him. I know of no one who trusts you Magiver. That is not a minority. Putin was also concerned about the threat that CW could fall into rebel hands. It’s in what I cited from June 2012: > [@](#): > > SHARED INTEREST > > The diplomat believes Syria’s statement, by foreign ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi, was put out at Russia’s insistence. > > Despite the diplomatic “debacle” over Syria at the UN Security Council, where Moscow has vetoed tougher action against Damascus, “there is a clear shared interest between Russia and the United States to control the chemical weapons”, he said. > > “The Israelis are pretty serious about trying to stop it happening, and the Americans too,” the envoy said. > > Diplomats said the United States, Israel and Western powers were in close contact on how to deal with the nightmarish eventuality of Assad losing control and his chemical weapons falling into the hands of militant groups - al-Qaeda style Sunni Jihadi insurgents or Assad’s pro-Iranian Shi’ite Lebanese fighters from Hezbollah. > > Israel has publicly discussed military action to prevent Syrian chemical weapons or missiles from reaching Hezbollah. > > Some Western intelligence sources suggested that Hezbollah and Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, both close allies of Syria, have sent some special units to back Assad in his fight against Sunni insurgents and might get hold of the chemical weapons in the case of a total collapse of government authority. > > Hezbollah, backed by Syria and Iran, has tried to distance itself publicly from the Syrian quagmire but it believes a defeat for Syria would mean the group might be targeted next. > > Asked whether Hezbollah would try to obtain Syria’s chemical weapons, one diplomat said: "If you think of this as a fight to the death, either with Sunnis or Israelis or both, you’d have an interest in trying to get your hands on chemical weapons. > > “It’s one more deterrent against Israel and a big stick to wave,” he said. > > President Barack Obama said on Monday that Assad would be held accountable if he made the “tragic mistake” of using his chemical weapons. > > Washington said it was keeping a close eye on Syria’s chemical stockpiles and was “actively consulting with Syria’s neighbors and friends to underscore their common concern about the security of these weapons, and the Syrian government’s obligation to secure them”. > > REALPOLITIK? > > For the Kremlin, revelations about the chemical arsenal will add to its fears about how chaos in Syria could pose risks to Russia, but will not prompt a shift in Moscow’s stance on a crisis that is poisoning its relations with Arabs and the West. > > For President Vladimir Putin, making the point that foreign interference is unacceptable trumps other concerns when it comes to Syria. > > But Dmitry Trenin, director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, suggested Russia was working with the United States and other countries to try to safeguard chemical weapons or at least is discussing it, although the Kremlin probably believes the concerns are overblown. > > “I think Russia is working with everyone, with America first of all … Putin met the Turkish prime minister, he was in Israel, and is in constant contact with the Americans. Of course, nobody wants chemical weapons to be used, let alone to get into the hands of terrorists”. > > Russia has blunted Western efforts to condemn Assad and push him from power after voicing anger over NATO air strikes that helped Libyan rebels oust Gaddafi last year. > > Since Putin announced in September that he intended to return to the presidency this year, Russia has vetoed three resolutions designed to step up pressure on Assad, angering Western and Arab states that say Moscow is protecting a brutal regime. > > That contention will only be compounded by Syria’s acknowledgement on Monday that it has chemical and biological weapons and warning that it could use them if foreign countries intervened. > > Alexander Golts, an independent military analyst, said: > > “Russia’s position is not dictated by the nature or the actions of the Syrian regime. Russia’s position is very much dictated by an ideological approach - by 19th century Realpolitik, if you will: the overthrow of our ally, our son of a bitch, is a victory for our opponent. Putin still thinks in terms of a zero-sum game.” > > [Assad chemical weapons plans blocked by Moscow | Reuters](http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE86N11Z20120724?irpc=932) In June 2012 the entire civilized world c ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2013, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/839 "2013-10-12T05:45:48Z")
> [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > You forgot to explain your qualification to determine if Syria’s CW stockpile in a civil > > War poses a threat or not. I trust Obama more than I trust you. -Originally Posted by NotfooledbyW > > > [@Magiver](#): > > > > well you’re in the minority. He doesn’t have the support of Congress or the American people, or the International community. He was spared the embarrassment of a Congressional no vote by Putin. > > > > Syria poses no threat to the United States despite your weak assertion CW’s may fall into rebel hands. That doesn’t even qualify as a strawman. Over 50,000 million Americans voted for Obama in the last election and most of which trust him. I know of no one who trusts you Magiver. That is not a minority. Putin was also concerned about the threat that CW could fall into rebel hands. It’s in what I cited from June 2012: > [@](#): > > SHARED INTEREST > > The diplomat believes Syria’s statement, by foreign ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi, was put out at Russia’s insistence. > > Despite the diplomatic “debacle” over Syria at the UN Security Council, where Moscow has vetoed tougher action against Damascus, “there is a clear shared interest between Russia and the United States to control the chemical weapons”, he said. > > “The Israelis are pretty serious about trying to stop it happening, and the Americans too,” the envoy said. > > Diplomats said the United States, Israel and Western powers were in close contact on how to deal with the nightmarish eventuality of Assad losing control and his chemical weapons falling into the hands of militant groups - al-Qaeda style Sunni Jihadi insurgents or Assad’s pro-Iranian Shi’ite Lebanese fighters from Hezbollah. > > Israel has publicly discussed military action to prevent Syrian chemical weapons or missiles from reaching Hezbollah. > > Some Western intelligence sources suggested that Hezbollah and Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, both close allies of Syria, have sent some special units to back Assad in his fight against Sunni insurgents and might get hold of the chemical weapons in the case of a total collapse of government authority. > > Hezbollah, backed by Syria and Iran, has tried to distance itself publicly from the Syrian quagmire but it believes a defeat for Syria would mean the group might be targeted next. > > Asked whether Hezbollah would try to obtain Syria’s chemical weapons, one diplomat said: "If you think of this as a fight to the death, either with Sunnis or Israelis or both, you’d have an interest in trying to get your hands on chemical weapons. > > “It’s one more deterrent against Israel and a big stick to wave,” he said. > > President Barack Obama said on Monday that Assad would be held accountable if he made the “tragic mistake” of using his chemical weapons. > > Washington said it was keeping a close eye on Syria’s chemical stockpiles and was “actively consulting with Syria’s neighbors and friends to underscore their common concern about the security of these weapons, and the Syrian government’s obligation to secure them”. > > REALPOLITIK? > > For the Kremlin, revelations about the chemical arsenal will add to its fears about how chaos in Syria could pose risks to Russia, but will not prompt a shift in Moscow’s stance on a crisis that is poisoning its relations with Arabs and the West. > > For President Vladimir Putin, making the point that foreign interference is unacceptable trumps other concerns when it comes to Syria. > > But Dmitry Trenin, director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, suggested Russia was working with the United States and other countries to try to safeguard chemical weapons or at least is discussing it, although the Kremlin probably believes the concerns are overblown. > > “I think Russia is working with everyone, with America first of all … Putin met the Turkish prime minister, he was in Israel, and is in constant contact with the Americans. Of course, nobody wants chemical weapons to be used, let alone to get into the hands of terrorists”. > > Russia has blunted Western efforts to condemn Assad and push him from power after voicing anger over NATO air strikes that helped Libyan rebels oust Gaddafi last year. > > Since Putin announced in September that he intended to return to the presidency this year, Russia has vetoed three resolutions designed to step up pressure on Assad, angering Western and Arab states that say Moscow is protecting a brutal regime. > > That contention will only be compounded by Syria’s acknowledgement on Monday that it has chemical and biological weapons and warning that it could use them if foreign countries intervened. > > Alexander Golts, an independent military analyst, said: > > “Russia’s position is not dictated by the nature or the actions of the Syrian regime. Russia’s position is very much dictated by an ideological approach - by 19th century Realpolitik, if you will: the overthrow of our ally, our son of a bitch, is a victory for our opponent. Putin still thinks in terms of a zero-sum game.” > > [http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE86N11Z20120724?irpc=932](http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE86N11Z20120724?irpc=932) In June 2012 the entire civilized world considered Syria’s arsenal falling into terrorists hands to be a major threat. That includes the Republican contender for US President at the time. So we Putin, Netanyahu, Romney, and dozens of other world leaders and security experts recognizing the CW to be a threat, and along comes Magiver telling me that all of them were wrong and he somehow knows better. It is so bold to think you are that important Magiver. Here’s the money quote from the above cite that I doubt you will respond specifically to: “”““I think Russia is working with everyone, with America first of all … Putin met the Turkish prime minister, he was in Israel, and is in constant contact with the Americans. Of course, nobody wants chemical weapons to be used, let alone to get into the hands of terrorists”.”“”. Magiver contradicts this as if saying nobody cares if CW were to be used or get into the hands of terrorists. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2013, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417/840 "2013-10-12T13:37:25Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Over 50,000 million Americans voted for Obama in the last election and most of which trust him. Your figures are a little off - it was actually a million zillion jillion. > [@](#): > > In June 2012 the entire civilized world considered Syria’s arsenal falling into terrorists hands to be a major threat. If you think France makes up the entire civilized world, then you must be Parisian. But if it was such a major threat, why did everyone except the French decline to assist Obama in his desires to go all Everquest on Assad? Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417.md?page=41) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-anyone-defend-the-admin-syria-drive/668417.md?page=43)