Posted on 09/09/2013 1:46:08 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Can I borrow that?
perfect
You know.. in light of this and other incidents of recent Russian sanity...
It’s sad as hell when we have to look to the Soviets for same.
But then it would be hard for anyone to perform worse than our esteemed “leadership”.
Like they really have a choice not to.
Translation: Kerry tried to take credit for the Russian proposal before it was made public. Sensitive diplomatic discussion was leaked to make Kerry/Obama look good.
A country with an arsenal of 10K nukes isn’t bluffing. And it doesn’t need to. They know no American president (except maybe McCain, but he ain’t the prez yet) will risk even a limited nuclear exchange over an issue that doesn’t involve US interests.
obama would love to see nukes going off if they only hit US and Israel. He wants this country destroyed.
The Zero administration was against it this morning, before they were
for it, this afternoon.
This administration is a joke.
Hate to burst your bubble, but who knows what this cast of clowns will do from one moment to the next!
This just in: Kerry Tells Lavrov Chemical Disarmament Demand Was "Rhetorical", Not Meant To Be Proposal
Sigh
Syria policy is a mess.
Whose fault is that?
0bama backed himself into this stupid corner.
0bamas humiliation, despair and political defeat must serve as an example so that no president ever so stupidly puts our credibility on the line.
No bombing for Al Qaeda!
I can’t help but think this is a head fake by someone.
On the one hand, Obama will be able to spin this as his victory. By his pressure he forced the WMDs out of the hands of Assad and into the safe-keeping of the international community. It would involve a covert alliance between Putin and Obama and perhaps even Assad.
On the other hand, it could be Assad agreeing to a condition that is not real. One has no idea what “international control” means. It could mean anything, but my sense is that it means nothing. Otherwise, any sane group once they had control would destroy those weapons.
If “international control” does not mean destroyed, then someone is lying. (again). Why would the international community want to keep WMDs intact if they have “control” of them? That makes no sense.
The key is the destruction of those weapons. If they are not destroyed, and if they are not provably destroyed, then Assad retains some control over them.
Finally, all of this ignores the reality of chemical weapons that we learned in Iraq. If Assad retains the recipe for making them, and he has access to the precursor chemicals that make up the recipe, then he is turning over current weapons that degrade pretty rapidly.
Any deal that doesn’t seize precursers and forbid their shipment to Syria is a phony deal.
All in all, this “saves” Obama and can be spun as his ingenious plan all along.
Silly post.
Great analysis. I especially liked the details.
Sounds like a Russian trap to me.
If Russia proposes the idea, then Russia will be involved in the details. And the details will somehow give Assad access to those weapons.
If they don’t get destroyed, then this is simply a move in a game.
Obama megafail.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.