Syria , the Presidents biggest embarrasment of all

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Or...it could be some brilliant political maneuvering in a nearly impossible situation with significant consequences.

If Obama can negotiate via Russia a WMD disarmament without force that would be huge. It also draws a very clear line for future action that even UN veto darlings won't be able to contain.

Hell, it has the potential to stall the entire civil war and the rise of radicalism underway.

I remember just after 9/11 thanking the expert foreign policy team Bush had in place...and look what happened then.

Perhaps these people are a hell of a lot smarter than you're giving them credit for.

-spence

First off this idea started with a slip up by Kerry. Putin played it brilliantly . Think for a moment Spence.
In order to negotiate a deal Assad has to be in charge. Exactly what Obama did not want .
You are going to retrieve chemical weapons from a nation in civil war?? It will take years if it can happen with any success at all.
By negotiating this deal Putin now looks like the world's leader.
Putin has handed Obama a face saving out and the self serving commander and chief will run with it .
Nothing accomplished , just a step in the wrong direction. His legacy !!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

First off this idea started with a slip up by Kerry. Putin played it brilliantly . Think for a moment Spence.
In order to negotiate a deal Assad has to be in charge. Exactly what Obama did not want .
You are going to retrieve chemical weapons from a nation in civil war?? It will take years if it can happen with any success at all.
By negotiating this deal Putin now looks like the world's leader.
Putin has handed Obama a face saving out and the self serving commander and chief will run with it .
Nothing accomplished , just a step in the wrong direction. His legacy !!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

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

[Jim in CT]

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.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"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.

Exactly Jim.
And why wouldn't Kerry say he was working on it ...what would the harm be of that ? Fools
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Now, instead of military strikes you have the potential for the WMD to simply be taken off the table...

-spence

You are too cute Spence. My nieces say cute things all the time that have a tinge more credibility
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by buckman

First off this idea started with a slip up by Kerry. Putin played it brilliantly .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That's exactly what happened. Kerry opened his big fat mouth, even his own spokesperson claimed that it wasn't a real offer. Putin absolutely played it brilliantly, he played Obama's team like a Stradivarious deluxe. Putin looks like an absolute genius, Obama looks like the clueless unic that he is.

Spence, here's what you and your ilk haven't figured out yet. There is a huge difference between actually doing things in the world, versus talking about doing things in an Ivy League faculty room. What sounds brilliant in the faculty room at Harvard, doesn't always work in the real world.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by buckman

Putin has handed Obama a face saving out and the self serving commander and chief will run with it .
Nothing accomplished , just a step in the wrong direction. His legacy !!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Also exactly correct. Putin offers Obama an out that will (1) save Obama the humiliation of having Congress collectively tell him to 'get lost', and (2) leaves Putin's puppets in Syria and Iran happy and still in place, right where Putin wants them.

We're geting absolutely steamrolled by Russia on this one. Unless it plays out very differently than the direction it's currently heading.

Carter version 2.0