Syria Gas Attack- What Now?

[JHD]

Im sure they will be putting them to good use 'cause the rebels are the good guys!

Yeah, nothing the CIA has ever backed has gone awry...cough...Afghan rebels...cough.:wall:

 

[Chopstick]

Well THAT was easy. It took only 3 days of talks apparently. It remains to be seen if everyone follows through on this agreement, of course.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/15/world/middleeast/syria-talks.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0&hp

Under a “framework” agreement, international inspectors must be on the ground in Syria by November, Mr. Kerry said, speaking at a news conference with the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey V. Lavrov.

An immediate test of the viability of the accord will come within a week when the Syrian government is to provide a “comprehensive listing” of its chemical stockpile.

“The real final responsibility here is Syrian,” a senior administration official said of the deal.

If Mr. Assad fails to comply with the agreement, the issue will be referred to the United Nations Security Council.

Im sure the UN Security Council will immediately issue a sternly worded letter if that should happen.

Security will be a major worry for the inspectors who are tasked with implementing the agreement; no precedent exists for inspection, removal and destruction of a large chemical weapons stockpile during a raging civil war. Mr. Lavrov said the agreement would require the cooperation of Syrian rebels and not just the government of President Bashar al-Assad. Much of the Syrian opposition is bitter about President Obama’s decision to shelve the threat of military action and to negotiate with Russia, which is a major arms supplier to the Assad government.

“This is very, very difficult, very, very difficult,” an American official said of the agreement. “But it is doable.”

While I am very glad that this discussion and agreement is taking place as opposed to military action I still can relate it all to Nate Beeler's work of yesterday:

 

[Brill]

Putin's letter to the American people:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/o...from-russia-on-syria.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Interesting viewpoint:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ote-the-new-york-times-op-ed-himself/?hpid=z2

 

[DA SWO]

Someone should ask Putin what UN resolution authorized combat ops in Georgia (2008?).

 

[SpitfireV]

Someone should ask Putin what UN resolution authorized combat ops in Georgia (2008?).

Probably the whole "invasion of de facto Russian territory" thing.

 

[Marauder06]

Putin STILL has us reacting to his first moves:

Sen. McCain's rebuttal to Putin's NYT op-ed may appear in Pravda:
http://news.msn.com/us/mccain-to-counter-putin-ny-times-op-ed-with-one-for-pravda

 

[JHD]

Putin STILL has us reacting to his first moves:

Sen. McCain's rebuttal to Putin's NYT op-ed may appear in Pravda:
http://news.msn.com/us/mccain-to-counter-putin-ny-times-op-ed-with-one-for-pravda

This is such a bad idea, I don't know where to begin. Will try to be brief. In summary:

1. I don't think McCain's rebuttal will be truly reflective of how the US PEOPLE feel about this situation.
2. Russia's leader provides an open letter (even if he didn't draft, it, he blessed it), and the US counters, not with a response from our President, but a senior Senator. That tells the rest of the world what they need to know right there.
3. Our leadership's best option, JMOO, is to just STFU and move forward with Russia's proposal.

 

[Chopstick]

I found this interesting. This is the cover of Time Magazine September 16, 2013 that the United States will see:



This is the cover of Time Magazine September 16, 2013 the rest of the world will see:

 

[Marauder06]

Secretary Kerry makes an offhanded remark about Syria turning over its chem weapons... Putin calls him on it.

Senator McCain makes an offhanded comment about writing an op-ed in Pravda... Pravda calls him on it.

Combined with President Obama calling chem weapons a "red line" and then Syria calling him on that, America is looking pretty silly right now.

 

[JHD]

I found this interesting. This is the cover of Time Magazine September 16, 2013 that the United States will see:
View attachment 9236


This is the cover of Time Magazine September 16, 2013 the rest of the world will see:
View attachment 9237

Scary. 1st amendment issue???

Secretary Kerry makes an offhanded remark about Syria turning over its chem weapons... Putin calls him on it.

Senator McCain makes an offhanded comment about writing an op-ed in Pravda... Pravda calls him on it.

Combined with President Obama calling chem weapons a "red line" and then Syria calling him on that, America is looking pretty silly right now.

Absolutely...Sad, but true.

 

[TLDR20]

Scary. 1st amendment issue???

What are you talking about?

 

[JHD]

Just the difference in the covers, and why Time might have elected to have different covers, or were they encouraged to do so due to political pressure? It is probably not as sinister as it seems to me, but my level of trust in the political machine has continued to deteriorate.

 

[TLDR20]

Just the difference in the covers, and why Time might have elected to have different covers, or were they encouraged to do so due to political pressure? It is probably not as sinister as it seems to me, but my level of trust in the political machine has continued to deteriorate.

Or they showed their bias, I doubt it was sinister, they want to sell magazines, and Americans don't like Russians.

 

[Marauder06]

Just the difference in the covers, and why Time might have elected to have different covers, or were they encouraged to do so due to political pressure? It is probably not as sinister as it seems to me, but my level of trust in the political machine has continued to deteriorate.

I think it was more reflective of what people think is important. IMO, Americans are far more concerned with what's going on with their sports teams than they are with world politics. So athletics is going to sell more copies of Time in the US than will a picture of Putin... a man many Americans may not even be able to identify. I don't see anything sinister at play, although I do think it's a sad reflection of what Americans might tend to value.

 

[JHD]

Or they showed their bias, I doubt it was sinister, they want to sell magazines, and Americans don't like Russians.

That could be as well, but Time hasn't hesitated to be controversial in the past concerning Person of the Year, etc. and, yes, America loves its college football, but as a supposedly "hard hitting" publication, I question there cover choice.

 

[TLDR20]

That could be as well, but Time hasn't hesitated to be controversial in the past concerning Person of the Year, etc. and, yes, America loves its college football, but as a supposedly "hard hitting" publication, I question there cover choice.

Don't get me wrong I question it as well. Just out of taste not because of a 1st amendment violation.

 

[JHD]

Agreed, and I only raised the 1st amendment issue IF Time was encouraged/persuaded to have a different cover due to the current brouhaha. Again, IF Time did bow to pressure, that smacks of overreach of influence to me.

 

[AWP]

College football's kicked off and print magazine sales have declined. A story about paying college athletes is low-hanging fruit AND serves to hide any bias which may (quite probably IMO) exist on Time's staff.

 

[Chopstick]

Speaking of Time's "Person of the Year". Show of hands. Who thinks it will be Putin? <raises hand>

 

[ThunderHorse]

<Raised Hand>