Yes, and you must have missed my quote and link from the Washington Post that said they were to be sent to Russia for destruction (maybe)?
See, that’s the thing - this is just a framework right now, nothing has been finally or formally decided, yet Victory is at Hand.
Get back to me in mid-November when everything is resolved and they’re dancing in the streets of Damascus.
Well. I don’t think anyone has claimed that we’ll be greeted as liberators.
We’re not going to be greeted at all, we’re not going to Damascus.
And I have a feeling that the UN inspectors won’t be going there, either. Despite the nicely worded resolution. Or, if they do get there, they will be totally ineffective.
:smack:
…you knew what I meant.
With all due respect, your feelings aside, that remains to be seen. What we do have, bottom line, is a potential agreement for Syria to stop using chemical weapons and to destroy the chemical weapons they possess.
Have a heart-if they can’t be gleeful about Obama failing, at least let them have their potential glee at a possible failure.
Hey. I said with all due respect.
I’m not trying to be gleeful—but I am being realistic.
The agreement looks great on paper. But , like so many UN issues, it totally lacks teeth.
So right now, we can only hope that somehow it works. But, for me, it’s hard to see how.
A few days ago, Obama was talking about taking action and launching missiles. I’m not sure it was a good idea–but it did seem to scare Assad.
Now, Obama is talking about dismantling WMD, which is a great idea, of course. But with no threat of action if it fails, I dont see why Assad will be scared enough to comply.
But we’ll have to wait several months to see.
Have you considered sending this to Glenn Beck? He’ll sell a million copies.
In the middle of an ongoing war?
Thanks for providing a good discussion.
Consider this point on US leverage in Syria. Putin’s Syria predicament is huge. He cannot lose his Naval Base because at home he would be ridiculed.
Sour grapes produce the bitterest of whines.
Absolutely. The production facilities we know where they are and the are not in rebel laden areas. These facilities can be destroyed/decommissioned immediately by the Syrian Army and then the UN inspecters buzz in to verify it.
The rest of any stockpile CW that exist are reported to be in two to four locations. One is a major port.
This is doable.
Sorry if the answer to your question disappoints you.
This is coming down on Syria like a ton of bricks? It gives Assad some time to stall and negotiate while he kills the rebels, and in a few months when everyone has lost interest, he can hand over some chem weapons and say he is done. Or just declare that he can’t agree to anything. Nothing will happen - nobody except the French were willing to go along with military action, so they aren’t going to use military force six months from now either. Russia and Putin come out of this pretty well - Syria is a client state, so Russia can get some hard currency from selling Assad weapons, and does not have to worry about another Islamofascist regime in the area. Obama looks fairly weak, ineffectual, and lucky. It is only Putin who is giving Obama an out. BHO wasn’t even sure he could get his own Congress to authorize him to do something he could have done all along.
I suppose this deal, if it goes thru, is better than air strikes, but that isn’t saying much. And it is really hard to see this as any kind of master stroke by Obama. Obama tried to get permission from everybody to do something, couldn’t get it, and now Putin is pulling his chestnuts out of the fire.
[QUOTE=jtgain]
The deal should have included a UN authorization for force if the agreement was breached.
[/QUOTE]
Should have. Didn’t. And won’t. They are all too aware of what happened when they passed resolutions about Iraq that implied that they meant what they said.
Regards,
Shodan
Soooo… how does Russia getting their ally to give up some of their firepower ensure Russia won’t lose their base, which you seem to think is the lynchpin of all of this?
The only way that happens is if Assad stays in power… so you’re saying there’s some kind of deal to make that happen?
Seems you’d be against that, but… with you, there’s no telling.
And the converse is true - we can let you have your *potential *glee at a possible success.
However, our version of success ends with Assad out of power and the war over. YOUR version of success ends up with Assad still in power and the war continuing.
Which is the better option…?
Well, you have such leverage - you just have to go all missile-crisis brinksman on them, and Syria’s not a fraction important enough for that.
Anyhoo, Syria’s going to be feeding itself though a meat-grinder for the next few months regardless.
The consensus actually seems to be 45 to 50. It’ll be a great result if it works, but inaccurate numbers and immediate ad hominems don’t inspire a lot of confidence.
Sure, because all of the different rebel factions will join together in a harmonious government of unity and cooperation, and not fight among themselves at all. Just like in Libya.