Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
I don't think Kerry's statement was a slip up at all. Obama's in a difficult situation and this was an even better option. For all we know Obama and Putin could have set the whole thing up last week. The timing of the three statements sounded nearly staged.
Now, instead of military strikes you have the potential for the WMD to simply be taken off the table...now the rebels won't have access to them either.
Assad's control is still pretty centralized. I don't think removing weapons will be an issue as they don't appear to have to pass through rebel territory.
-spence
|
"I don't think Kerry's statement was a slip up at all"
You don't? Well, Kerry's spokeswoman said it wasn't a real offer. Here is what she said...
“Secretary Kerry was making a rhetorical argument about the impossibility of Assad turning over chemical weapons he has denied he used. This brutal dictator with a history of playing fast and loose with the facts
cannot be trusted to turn over chemical weapons"
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013...nty-of-strike/
Spence, take off your tin-foil hat for a change.