General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsKerry to Assad: Turn over chemical weapons to prevent strikes
Secretary of State John Kerry said Monday that Syrian President Bashar Assad would be able to prevent a military strike on his nation if he were to turn over "every single bit" of his chemical weapons to the international community within a week.
Kerry was speaking at a news conference in London with British Foreign Secretary William Hague.
The comments came in response to a question from a journalist.
Kerry was meeting with Hague to discuss the case for launching an attack on the chemical weapons stock of the Syrian regime, alleged to have carried out an illegal attack under international law in the suburbs of Damascus on Aug. 21.
<snip>
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/09/09/syria-kerry-hague/2784809/
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)joshcryer
(62,269 posts)They're easily countered.
It's in the US's interest to prolong this thing and the US doesn't want Assad ending it by using chemical weapons against the rebels. That's Juan Coles' take and I can't see any illogic to it. Assad gets to go scorched earth either way.
Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)The only motive on Barack Obama's part for which I see any evidence is Assad's use of chemical weapons. Remove the chemical weapons from the equation and his motive for the strikes is gone.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)The only option available (unless Congress approves of more funding for more operations): training the moderate rebels. Obama is only asking for open strikes now because of the chemical weapons. They go, the call for the strikes would go, and it's back to business as usual.
htuttle
(23,738 posts)I think Lucy's yanked that football out of the way one too many times for this to work.
Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)MisterP
(23,730 posts)before, and we insisted it was "just a ploy" (Israel's taught us well on how to handle the natives)
bowens43
(16,064 posts)kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)go after finding and destroying all the chemical weapons storage spots. It can work. It will save lives all the way around.
Andy823
(11,495 posts)Saying the same thing, for that Syria should turn over their chemical weapons to be dismantled if that would avoid the US missile attack. So why wouldn't this be a good idea? If both sides are talking about it, it could happen.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)...
The State Department was forced to clarify the remarks, calling them "rhetorical" and making clear its desire to strike could be tempered by a Syrian offer. Kerry's point, according to spokeswoman Jen Psaki, "was that this brutal dictator with a history of playing fast and loose with the facts cannot be trusted to turn over chemical weapons."
...
http://gma.yahoo.com/did-us-offer-syrian-president-125806202--abc-news-topstories.html
Auntie Bush
(17,528 posts)They are now useless if he doesn't want to get blasted to oblivion. Syria now knows thanks to Obama that we mean business. Actually know no one could ever use chemicals on anyone and expect to live. Since Syria can't use those weapons anymore then why not give them up to avoid getting missiles down their throats?
civil war will continue without end in sight, atrocities will be committed by each side, children will die, families will grieve, and the MIC will grow ever bolder and richer and oil will flow to fuel the Machine.
Yay for us!