Will US Back Syria Deal?

Sergei LavrovMost people don’t know it, but the original phrase was, “Be careful what you wish for US Secretary of State John Kerry, you might just get it.” Okay, it wasn’t really, but it should have been! While in London, a reporter asked if the Assad government could do anything to avoid an attack. Kerry took the bait and replied, “Sure. He could turn over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week—turn it over, all of it without delay and allow the full and total accounting. But he isn’t about to do it and it can’t be done.” Au contraire, you empty headed animal food trough wiper!

Within 5 hours, the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov put just such a proposal together and gave it to his Syrian counterpart. And Syria said that they welcomed the proposal. Lavrov said, “If the establishment of international control over chemical weapons… makes it possible to avoid strikes, then we will immediately get to work with Damascus.”

Of course, we will have to see. After all, in Kerry’s original statement there was not only the firm statement that Assad wouldn’t do it but that it can’t be done. And such statements are typical of people like Kerry. They want to go to war but they also want to seem like they are being forced to do so. The United States will likely claim that they would love to accept the deal but unfortunately, they just can’t trust that all the chemical weapons are gone. There might be one microgram somewhere. According to Reuters:

White House officials made clear their skepticism of the workability of the Russian proposal. Syria is a battleground where access for foreign experts would be dangerous. And it would be very hard to verify whether all sites had been sealed.

What’s more, the administration is working the other side. Deputy National Security Adviser Tony Blinken said, “It’s important to note that this proposal comes in the context of the threat of U.S. action and the pressure that the president is exerting. So it’s even more important that we don’t take the pressure off and that Congress give the president the authority he’s requested.” So maybe Russia shouldn’t broker this deal because it will send the wrong message to the Obama regime!

Even more obvious, the rebels hate the idea. A rebel commander said, “It is a trap and deceitful maneuver by the Damascus regime and will do nothing to help the situation. They have tons of weapons hidden that would be nearly impossible for international inspectors to find.” How exactly he would know that, I can’t say. But I find it particularly interesting that he said it would do nothing to help the situation. I’m sure that’s true… from his perspective. My understanding is that the rebels are losing this war and an attack by the United States may be their last best chance to win the conflict.

Meanwhile, the administration continues its bellicose rhetoric. Kerry continues to make outrageous statements that he can’t back up. He said that during is (brief) time in the DA’s office, he had successful prosecuted cases with less evidence than he has against Assad. Well, that may be. After all, poor people are convicted of all kinds of things that they didn’t do. But one would think that the case for going to war would be a little stronger. Instead, the administration just keeps pushing more deceptive intelligence. On all 5 of the Sunday talk shows, White House Chief of State Denis McDonough repeated the same line about how no one has refuted the intelligence. That’s true, but most people also don’t find it that compelling. Just like for the Iraq War, the administration is massaging the intelligence to deceive.

But this proposal by Russia could really be good. In addition to stopping a bombing campaign, it would get rid of a large stockpile of chemical weapons. That’s a win-win from my perspective. What we are going to find out is if Obama really wants to go to war or not. If the speculation is right that he simply painted himself into a corner, he will use this opportunity to get out of an attack. If he really does want war, he will find a way to kill this proposal. It will be interesting to hear what he has to say during his media blitz the next two days.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized by Frank Moraes. Bookmark the permalink.

About Frank Moraes

Frank Moraes is a freelance writer and editor online and in print. He is educated as a scientist with a PhD in Atmospheric Physics. He has worked in climate science, remote sensing, throughout the computer industry, and as a college physics instructor. Find out more at About Frank Moraes.

0 thoughts on “Will US Back Syria Deal?

  1. [quote] On all 5 of the Sunday talk shows, White House Chief of State Denis McDonough repeated the same line about how no one has refuted the intelligence. [/quote]

    That reminds me of typical creationist rhetoric: "You haven’t proven that God [i]doesn’t[/i] exist!" The burden of proof lies with the person making the positive claim, not with the people who are skeptical of the claim. In this case, we don’t have to prove the intelligence wrong; the White House has to prove to us that the intelligence is reliable. And using fallacies like the one above, rather than using actual evidence to back up their claim, is not a good sign that the intelligence is indeed reliable.

  2. @Mack – It is all part of their deceptive propaganda campaign. The implication is that everyone accepts the intelligence, but of course that isn’t technically what he’s saying. I thought Obama’s speech tonight was terrible. He kept talking about things that we "know." I don’t know it. I’m totally confused now and I’m not inclined to take this administration’s word for it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.