Skip to main content

View Diary: US, Russia call on Syria to put chemical weapons under international control ... and Syria says okay (330 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  here (19+ / 0-)
    Mr. Kerry said his suggestion was more of a debating point than a serious ultimatum. He added that he did not believe Mr. Assad would take such action, and expressed doubt about whether it was even feasible as a civil war rages in Syria. “But he isn’t about to do it, and it can’t be done,” Mr. Kerry said.

    “Secretary Kerry was making a rhetorical argument about the impossibility and unlikelihood of Assad turning over chemical weapons he has denied he used,” Jen Psaki, the State Department spokeswoman, said in an e-mail to reporters after Mr. Kerry’s comments. “His point was that this brutal dictator with a history of playing fast and loose with the facts cannot be trusted to turn over chemical weapons, otherwise he would have done so long ago. That’s why the world faces this moment.”

     it was spoken as a rhetorical argument, more of Kerry's nonstop senator speak, from a man who cant shut up, and he just got called on it.
    •  "it can't be done" (5+ / 0-)

      Definitely goes to show that the US didn't honestly believe that Assad would do this.

      And while I would be delighted if Kerry came back and said that the USA at the very least will hold back and take a wait-and-see approach, I'm guessing that whatever Assad does (or at least claims he's going to do) on this point won't be seen as enough.

      I'd love to be proven wrong.

      "As the madmen play on words, and make us all dance to their song / to the tune of starving millions, to make a better kind of gun..." -- Iron Maiden

      by Lost Left Coaster on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:48:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  That's not an "um" (3+ / 0-)

      In fact, it sounds to me as if Kerry is simply clarifying the facts that we should not expect Assad to turn over his Sarin gas, that he used to gas his people to death, because if he has never wanted to give up his chemical weapons in the past.

      Secretary Kerry was making a rhetorical argument about the impossibility and unlikelihood of Assad turning over chemical weapons he has denied he used,” Jen Psaki, the State Department spokeswoman, said in an e-mail to reporters after Mr. Kerry’s comments. “His point was that this brutal dictator with a history of playing fast and loose with the facts cannot be trusted to turn over chemical weapons, otherwise he would have done so long ago. That’s why the world faces this moment.”
      To me, that is not an "um" moment, rather it is a "keep it real" moment.
    •  another case of outright deception than by Kerry (0+ / 0-)

      We can't tolerate lies and deception from our leadership, in trivial or grave matters.

      free the information

      by freelixir on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:52:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  WHAT?!? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kayfromsouth, NYFM, doroma

        "deception" ... what the heck are you talking about.

        Kerry clarified that we are dealing with a lying sack of shit who used Sarin to gas his people to death so don't expect Assad to just change his stripes

        ... hardly "deception" from Kerry.

        •  kerry clarified after... (0+ / 0-)

          ...that he wasn't telling the truth either, but was spinning a yarn, to influence, only events forced him to come back later and "explain" the context of his yarn, which negates the influence, the rhetoric, thus being an admission of deception, of what proper people call lying.

          free the information

          by freelixir on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:18:54 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  statesmanship (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Hiranyagarbha

            Kerry and others would likely suggest this form of deception is rather statesmanship and diplomacy, which is further evidence of the rot in my opinion, although I understand the classic sources of such understanding, which don't share the values of the American revolution, and outside of that expect more foresight and wisdom in the exercise of "statesmanship", which in this case is really just "press diplomacy" as a means to influence the population to support a muddled but clearly violent objective, which undoubtedly will result in the deaths of civilians and innocents, only by our hand this time.

            free the information

            by freelixir on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:24:46 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Your comment is dishonest (0+ / 0-)

            Kerry did not say he was not telling the truth

            You made that up

            From your comments, I am beginning to think you have ODS

            •  no (0+ / 0-)

              the counter-factual that Kerry posed as serious in one forum but un-serious later (once the terms of the counter-factual seemed preliminarily to be accepted), is in my opinion dishonest and an admission of deception, I don't need Kerry or the administration to confirm or agree, especially given they are the deceptive party in this case

              if rather Kerry disputes the department's characterization of his remarks, and instead states he stands behind his statements, than yes we can mark it as confusion and then seek to ascertain whether the department was being deceptive or untruthful

              free the information

              by freelixir on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:52:11 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Kerry's just (0+ / 0-)

      talking out of his ass again.

      The only trouble with retirement is...I never get a day off!

      by Mr Robert on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:14:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site