For emphasis to my previous post here are two very significant lines of text from the news link I provided.
“Israel has long expressed concerns that Syrian President Bashar Assad, clinging to power during a 22-month civil war, could lose control over his chemical weapons.”
Keeping this quote in mind:
Plus the fact that Magiver wrote on 02-01-2014 at 11:08 AM, “It’s silly to think Putin cares about anything except keeping Assad in power.”
One has to wonder if Magiver actually thinks that Putin does not care about Russia’s relationship with Israel and therefore must pay heed to what some of Israel’s security concerns are and what Russia can do about it.
The concern by Israelis that Assad, clinging to power, could lose control over his chemical weapons, is something that Putin could do something about and he is actually doing it.
Tell us Magiver, do you think Putin cares about keeping in good standing with Israel to promote any of this;
*Israel Seeks Stronger Security Ties with Russia Nov. 23, 2013 - 09:48AM | By BARBARA OPALL-ROME *
Read More Indeed: http://www.defensenews.com/article/20131123/DEFREG04/311230009/Israel-Seeks-Stronger-Security-Ties-Russia
Here’ more:
Report: Putin Backs Israel’s Security Needs in Middle East
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/175364
Dec 20, 2013 … State Department: Kerry ‘Frustrated’ by Claims He’s Anti-Israel … PM Binyamin Netanyahu with Russian President Vladimir Putin … He added that despite the close relationship between Israel and the US - with whom Russia’s …
Russian-Israeli relations have their own value – Putin - News …
http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_11_20/Russian-Israeli-relations-have-their-own-value-Put…
Nov 20, 2013 … Russian-Israeli relations have their own value – Putin … Israel will be prepared to ensure the security of the Jewish state by itself, i.e. it won’t …
Putin’s Visit and Israeli-Russian Relations | Stratfor
Stratfor: The World's Leading Geopolitical Intelligence Platform
Jun 26, 2012 … By George Friedman. Russian President Vladimir Putin arrived in Israel on June 25 for his first state visit since retaking the presidency. The visit …
Russia – Israel: The status of their relationship - Valdai Club
http://valdaiclub.com/middle_east/58440.html
May 17, 2013 … The USSR officially recognized the State of Israel 65 years ago. Coincidentally, Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu was visiting Russia during …
Putin’s Pro-Israel Policy :: Middle East Quarterly - Middle East Forum
Putin's Pro-Israel Policy - Middle East Forum
During the Yeltsin years (1991-99), Russian-Israeli relations were relatively … However, Russia mitigated its traditional pro-Arab position with …
Note that the OP and title of this thread is not saying that the act of removing and destroying CW is ‘masterful’… it is the accomplishment of the getting to the ‘deal’ that leads to that process of removal and destruction that I have characterized as ‘masterful’. However the process*** is ***being done masterfully, safely and significantly and it appears, I am confident to predict, to be completed close to the original schedule plus a month or two on some of the interim milestones.
Just in case your reference to “masterful” was some kind of snark leveled against the title of this thread.
Too Funny! I have a feeling some reasonable people don’t post here a lot because of responses such as That one by Ravenman. The debate was not settled in September… it discontinued and was put on hold … because of the masterful deal that arose when Putin caved.
But the really funny part is that the debate that was placed on hold was not about US air strikes on al Qaeda safe-havens located in Syria, it was about punitive strikes for Assad’s crossing the red line of Sarin Gas use to kill civilians. Everyone knows that. If not Everyone should know that.
Are you ever going to try to explain how you arrived at the untrue conclusion that the CW Issue and the Civil War were indeed separate issues prior to when you claim Putin separated them. The CW issue preceded the Civil War. How can they have ever been one issue for Putin to separate.
Israel is worried that Assad could **lose access **to CW, not the he would **use **them.
Does Putin want a nice relationship with Israel? Sure, but he would as soon rape Israel’s mum if it’s good for him.
Having a deal that doesn’t accomplish much isn’t masterful, unless it’s a deal for a deal’s sake. Putin threw a bone to Obama so Assad could be in power.
I notice your first response did not address my point. This is a discussion/debate forum so I would appreciate hearing what your response to my questions/points might be.
As to you the hypothetical in your response. What could happen to Putin is not much different than what could happen to him/Russia if he did not make the deal in the first place. So on the first level if that is your concern - it does not matter.
However all options are still on the table including US air strikes on Assad’s military assets as punishment for using CW and then now for breaking the deal.
Putin could lose Diplomatic opportunities around the world, and economic investment opportunities for Russia in Israel as I have pointed out elsewhere if he proves to NOT be a world leader who’s word means something of high diplomatic value.
Chemical Weapons in Syria forced Putin to admit officially that Syria actually had Chemical weapons and his word was being tarnished by denying they were theret. So under the threat of even limited US military force Putin desided it was in his best interest to take Obama’s advice that started in Mexico at least a year before the deal to get rid of the CW in Syria… so that matter could be shoved out of the way and the world and Syria can concentrate on resolving the civil war issue… which is entirely separate from the CW issue.
the foot-in-mouth red line was in response to the killings in Syria. The agreement stops non of the killing but does allow him to see his foot again. Mission accomplished.
[QUOTE]
Post number, please, and I’ll answer.
No. If he didn’t make the deal, he would’ve given Obama the ball. With the deal, he’s tied Barry’s hand for at least another year.
While the option of airstrikes still exists, simply because there are aircraft carries in the Mediterranean, I can’t see a scenario where it is viable politically (in the US). Say Assad stores the weapons and drags his feet on the removal. Will the US bomb Damascus for that? You think the US wants Assad out and the rebels in with CW still in storage?
Yeah, nobody’s buying anything from China now that they’re making moves on the Spratlys. Russia in not, say, Peru (my country), which you could ignore and block from FB.
You and i have extremely different views on the number of fucks Putin gives about other people’s/contry’s opinions (my number is -10000000). He will always find more than enough conutries ready to do buiness with him. The “ignore” button doesn’t work with Vladi.
I’m not aware of Putin’s denying there were CW, but he could’ve said it and then recanted; classic VP.
You picture Putin saying “OMG, I’ll do whatever Obama wants, he’s bested me, take all the CW and my lunch money”.
I picture Putin saying “He wants to break one of my toys. Will this largely symbolic and inconsecuetial action shut him up so that my toy can continue his murderous ways unabated?”
“His word was being tarnished”. What does that mean in the real world? Aside from, of course, harshly worded statements. Putin’s reputation is that of someone who cares for power and more power and is not afraid of doing what he wants (this may not be really true, but perception is one’s reality), not that of a wise statesman with a vision of brotherhood.
You quoted it and then did not respond to it. It is My Post 720. But here is what you did not respond to in the first place…
“What agreement in the world can or would address the “safe haven concern”? Think about it. The CW deal is backed by international law negotiated in political reality between two opposing sides of permanent members seated on the UN Security Council”
I look forward to your response.
Magiver or Ravenman, are you saying that the red line was in response to the Chemical Weapons killings in Syria? Or are you saying the red line was in response to all the killings in Syria? Do let us know which one you mean.
I, for one, can see absolutely no option of Assad’s Syria becoming an AQ safe haven. AQ infiltration sure, but I can’t even remotely see Assad on purpose helping AQ or letting anyone get CW (of course, good-ol’ Bashar is crazy evil motherfucker sonofabitch, so, it’s not like he’s my financial advisor). Any deal that takes CW out of Assad’s hands is good, don’t get me wrong. Assad wants Syiria, not a worldwide struggle.
I’d be more concerned about an AQ safe haven if Assas is deposed and rebels take power.
So, the short answer is: no agreement can do it. Assad’s power hunger, Russia’s threat or US threats, but no paper at all.
What data and statistics have you used to determine that he gave up 1% of killing power. CW were used a few days out of nearly two years of killing people. But those few lbs killed a high number of people. How many tons of his 1000+ tons did he use to kill 1400 people? Do you have back up for your claim about the 1%.
You did not address this: I wrote on 02-06-2014 at 03:24 AM, “… if the Assad regime were weakened to a point (by US air assault alone) then the problem arises as to what happens to command and control of the [sp]remnants of the Syrian Army which is fully responsible for safekeeping of over a thousand tons of deadly chemical weapons in the midst of a war zone being infested with al Qaeda and other terrorists by the day.”
Chaos following an Assad regime that was weakened from US air strikes would have left 1000+ tons of CW potentially unprotected by the Syrian Army.
On 02-06-2014 at 10:09 AM Ají de Gallina wrote, “If I were Assad and giving some/most my CW will placate Obama’s [sp]conscience so he’ll let my continue with my murdering my people.”
In that statement are you saying that Obama has options available to stop Assad from murdering his people. I’d like you to be clear on this, since the only options I am aware of would be using a very robust US military intervention into the civil war. That is troops on the ground. Are you an American insisting that Americans should be sent into combat?
How does Obama NOT LET Assad kill people with his conventional weapons as he has been doing?
Emphasis added.
Cue the response that “masterfully” can be defined as “stalling”.
Oh, wait. I totally misunderstood. You meant that Syria was “masterfully” playing us by stalling the process. OK, that totally makes sense now!
:smack: *Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. *
I have not argued that “masterfully” can be defined as stalling. Who or what are you talking about?
Anyway you need to keep up with current events:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/06/us-syria-crisis-chemicals-idUSBREA151JP20140206
and this:
Syria can meet June 30 chemical weapons deadline: U.N. chief SOCHI, Russia Thu Feb 6, 2014 8:20am EST
Anyway. This is the ‘process’ is being done masterfully:
Stalling is not part of the masterful process that has been set up.
Syria is claiming a convoy was attacked by terrorists and that has caused the delay:
I believe Ravenman has put a low threat priority on the terrorists getting their hands on this CW… whether it stays or on its way to removal.
What J.Mace may be calling stalling could very way be what is known as extra caution to keep the CW out of the hands of the terrorists.
See Reuters link above, “No I don’t think so,” Sigrid Kaag told reporters when asked if the Syrian government may be deliberately stalling. “Delays are not insurmountable. Delays have a reason, there’s a rationale, there’s a context.”
What does J.Mace want? A little extra time for safe-guarding the shipments or take risks that the terrorists might get to the CW and then who knows what becomes of them.
Yes, it could be. It could also be extra caution to keep the CW out of the hands of time-travelling Nazis who want to smuggle them back to the past and change the outcome of WWII.
None at all. Simply that CW were not part of usual murderous ways. He may have simply tested the waters to see how far he could go into genocide. The answer is “very far, but don’t use CW”
This thread started with “taking CW away from Assad so he could not use them”, now you’ve taken it to “lest they should fall on rebel hands”.
Since you said:
Obama can do anything fro surgical attacks to massive bombing to invasion. He is the president of the US and has aircraft carriers. His limits are more domestic than foreign. The foreign reason he doesn’t try to stop Assad is that all those non-Assad guys are possibly worse.
However, another genocide is going on, and we can watch it live.
Hey, you said “masterfully”, which was your opinion, and I’m just quoting the facts as reported in the news.
But maybe you argued that “masterfully” can also be defined as “foot dragging”:
US says Syria ‘dragging its feet’ on chemical weapons
It would appear that Obama’s SecDef disagrees with you. But I’m probably wrong. Surely “masterfully” can easily be defined as “incompetence” in NFBW-speak. Or are you going to tell us that “the process” is different from “the process itself”?
What incompetence are you suggesting exists? Anyone can toss unsubstantiated charges around. The ‘deal’ allows for some security related delays that yet allow the remival to be completed on time. Planning for security delays was masterful. Sorry you can’t accept competence.