Skip to main content

View Diary: UN Security Council Reaches Deal on Syrian Chemical Disarmament (69 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  OK, so this leaves an opening for (4+ / 0-)

    U.S. military intervention down the road. Guess Vlad didn't have what it took to keep that from happening.

    And, domestically, that means that those of us who don't want this war are going to have to keep on alert, pretty much indefinitely.

    It would have made our jobs a hell of a lot easier if that concession had not been made. But that's life.

    I tried to go online to find a similar bear head...but when I searched “Big Bear Head” it gave me a San Diego craigslist ad entitled “Big Bear needs some quick head now” and then I just decided to never go on the internet again.--Jenny Lawson

    by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50:53 AM PDT

    •  it leaves a figleaf (5+ / 0-)

      I suspect that Russia will veto any UN resolution that calls for military action.

      But this agreement will at least allow Obama to claim (very tenuously) that Russia is breaking its word by doing so, and perhaps that is enough political cover for him.

      No one should be surprised that Obama is still pushing for war. Only the British parliament, a super-supermajority of the American people, and a last-minute Russian offer, were able to stop him last time. If he's given even the slightest opening, he's likely to renew his push harder than ever.

      Neither the US nor the Russians are moving to end this war. The US is arming the rebels, who are now fighting among themselves and saying they no longer recognize the authority of the Syrian National Coalition (the so-called "moderate opposition").

      The longer the war goes, the more people die and the more chance there is of the US being sucked in. And it looks like it's getting worse.

      "In America, the law is king." --Thomas Paine

      by limpidglass on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 11:01:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, I kind of thought that we weren't out of (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ericlewis0, limpidglass, NoMoJoe

        the woods yet, but I was hoping Putin might have been able to stick a wrench in that machine. Unlike you, I don't think Putin actually wants the U.S. involved directly in any war that involves Syria. For selfish, non-humanitarian reasons, of course.

        I tried to go online to find a similar bear head...but when I searched “Big Bear Head” it gave me a San Diego craigslist ad entitled “Big Bear needs some quick head now” and then I just decided to never go on the internet again.--Jenny Lawson

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 11:04:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  But what will China do? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ericlewis0, limpidglass

        And will Parliament ignore the will of the British people if that fig leaf is there?

        I tried to go online to find a similar bear head...but when I searched “Big Bear Head” it gave me a San Diego craigslist ad entitled “Big Bear needs some quick head now” and then I just decided to never go on the internet again.--Jenny Lawson

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 11:05:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  good questions (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ericlewis0, SouthernLiberalinMD

          I must say I have no idea. It depends greatly on what the Syrian provocation is.

          That there will be a provocation, I have no doubt. If the Syrian government doesn't give us one, one will be arranged by outside parties that want the US to be engaged.

          "In America, the law is king." --Thomas Paine

          by limpidglass on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 11:12:41 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Which is probably why Kissinger is involved. n/t (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ericlewis0

            I tried to go online to find a similar bear head...but when I searched “Big Bear Head” it gave me a San Diego craigslist ad entitled “Big Bear needs some quick head now” and then I just decided to never go on the internet again.--Jenny Lawson

            by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 11:51:40 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  heh (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ericlewis0, Laurence Lewis
        I suspect that Russia will veto any UN resolution that calls for military action.
        We've been there before.  UNSC Resolutoin 1441, remember?

        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

        by corvo on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 12:46:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  wow, what a stupid comment. (0+ / 0-)

        Just why, is "Obama pushing for war", if he can achieve his aims without it?  I've seen multiple posts from the likes of you claiming that Obama is thirsting for war, and none of you have been able to give a motive behind that thirst, other than you guys just think he's an evil, immoral individual that puts zero value on life and likes war just for the fun of it.

    •  But I think the reality is (13+ / 0-)

      Russia and Syria only agreed to a CW deal because of the threat of force.

      I dont think military force is a good idea, but I dont think you can completely remove the threat of it and expect Syria to carry out the deal.

      •  The threat of force (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ericlewis0, DeminNewJ, enhydra lutris

        possibly resulted in Putin knocking some sense into Assad behind closed doors (figuratively speaking), but 1)I still don't appreciate our government playing chicken with our lives and risking a PNAC future of regional war leading to war with Iran, and 2)I think Assad, or more to the point, Putin, has gotten the point. I doubt there's going to be any more chemical weapons attacks from the Assad regime in the near future, assuming this attack was from the Assad regime in the first place.

        I mean, basically what you're saying is that we have to keep standing on the precipice and threatening war over and over and over and hoping it doesn't happen, or else Assad will do bad things.  I don't think that's a good foreign policy recipe. Are we going to apply it to all the men in the world who are doing bad things? All the tyrants? All the people using particularly nasty weapons? Are we going to be forever threatening war and hoping that nobody takes us up on it? That sounds like a crazy way to go about our business.

        By the way, I still don't understand why the chemical weapons attack launched by the rebels (reported by the UN investigator in April)doesn't create the same level of consternation and resolve in the U.S. government, but that's another question.

        I am far from sanguine that this continued threat of military intervention is because we don't want a war, really, but we want to make the tyrant mind his p's and q's.  As many on this site have said, I've seen this film before. I would feel far more comfortable with an agreement that did not include the fig leaf for U.S. military action.

        I have a hard time coming up with a scenario in which getting involved in Syria's civil war is a good thing for the American people.

        I tried to go online to find a similar bear head...but when I searched “Big Bear Head” it gave me a San Diego craigslist ad entitled “Big Bear needs some quick head now” and then I just decided to never go on the internet again.--Jenny Lawson

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 12:05:03 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I definitely see your points on these issues (5+ / 0-)

          I guess my view is just different. I believe in "speak softly and carry a big stick." To do that, you need to make sure opponents know you have that big stick. I dont see that as perpetually being on the edge of war. I can see why you and others do, but as I said, I think sometimes that threat of force is necessary to push a diplomatic solution.

          Again, here we might have a different view, but I just dont see Obama has someone who wants to go to war. This civil war in Syria has been going on for 2+ years, and Obama only recently said he would use force, made the decision to ask Congress, and he backed away when a diplomatic solution become available. Not that there isnt legitimate criticism of him on this, there definitely is, but I just dont see him as someone eager to get our military involved.

          •  I seriously (and sincerely!) hope you're right. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ericlewis0

            About the President, that is.

            As for the big stick, my feeling is that since we spend more on military than any other nation in the world by far, that it's pretty damned clear where the stick is.

            The only problem is that the stick is powered by fossil fuels, which kind of makes us vulnerable to those who could deny us fossil fuels. But pretty much everybody knows we could blow them to smithereens.

            If they didn't know that just by looking at the figures, JSOC's presence in 75 countries and the various drone attacks probably make it pretty clear.

            I tried to go online to find a similar bear head...but when I searched “Big Bear Head” it gave me a San Diego craigslist ad entitled “Big Bear needs some quick head now” and then I just decided to never go on the internet again.--Jenny Lawson

            by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 01:18:00 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  odd timing (6+ / 0-)

        the theeat didn't work until the british parliament, the american public, and seemingly congress were all against it. the threat seemed to be diminishing.

        The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

        by Laurence Lewis on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 12:57:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  That is really interesting (4+ / 0-)

          and a really good point. Hmmm.

          I tried to go online to find a similar bear head...but when I searched “Big Bear Head” it gave me a San Diego craigslist ad entitled “Big Bear needs some quick head now” and then I just decided to never go on the internet again.--Jenny Lawson

          by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 01:19:20 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  lavrov (3+ / 0-)

            seized the moment:

            Secretary of State John Kerry had just made an offhand remark about how President Bashar al-Assad of Syria could avoid a military strike — and now Sergey V. Lavrov, Russia’s hard-charging foreign minister, was on the phone.

            Mr. Lavrov was not about to let the moment pass.

            What aides to Mr. Kerry were already trying to roll back, Mr. Lavrov seized on, telling Mr. Kerry he would immediately go public with a Russian-led proposal to dismantle the Syrian chemical weapons arsenal. That prompted a sharp response from Mr. Kerry who warned in the 14-minute call, “We are not going to play games.”

            By the time Mr. Kerry’s plane landed back in Washington, the ground had shifted and on Saturday, not a week later, Mr. Kerry and Mr. Lavrov completed the plan sitting by the pool at a Geneva hotel.

            The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

            by Laurence Lewis on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 01:27:41 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Agreed. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Laurence Lewis, RiveroftheWest

          People seem to be jumping to some kind of erroneous conclusion that "threats of military force work" when in fact the opposite was true.

          I think Assad was just waiting for an opening to get rid of his chemical weapons. He didn't want them used but a rogue commander under him used them anyway (apparently). He didn't want them falling into the hands of the rebels. So this incident gave him a perfect out.

          •  exactly (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            RiveroftheWest

            the big secret is that assad had lost control of his commanders. and neither he nor putin wants people to understand what that means.

            The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

            by Laurence Lewis on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 01:58:53 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  A-ha! (0+ / 0-)

              So folks do feel that there's enough evidence assembled that we can state that with some certainty?

              That certainly would explain some things.

              I tried to go online to find a similar bear head...but when I searched “Big Bear Head” it gave me a San Diego craigslist ad entitled “Big Bear needs some quick head now” and then I just decided to never go on the internet again.--Jenny Lawson

              by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 05:01:26 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  That's why for two years of diplomacy without any (0+ / 0-)

            threat of force, zero progress was made, but as soon as there was a threat of force, suddenly Russia ceases obstructing diplomatic progress.  Right?

            Face it, two years of a priori pacifism accomplished ZERO, accept for greenlighting Assad to gas people.

        •  Well, I think the Russians and Assad themselves (0+ / 0-)

          said they did this to avoid a military strike.

          And I think the WH always emphasized they could act on their own.

          •  had obama bombed (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            RiveroftheWest

            without u.n. approval, without congressional approval, and with the american public strongly against it, he would have been in big political trouble. and putin understood that.

            i haven't seen them say they did this to avoid a military strike. this was in both of their best interests, anyway.

            The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

            by Laurence Lewis on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 03:10:14 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  If Syria had no need for any deterrents, they (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ericlewis0

        probably wouldn't have any. In a world where only priveleged states are permitted to have nukes, gas is the next best thing. Terrible, but a sad reality that there are still constant threats of wars of aggression theoughout the globe and especially certain parts of the globe.

        That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

        by enhydra lutris on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 02:38:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  leaves a door open (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SouthernLiberalinMD, ericlewis0

      but does not authorize anyone walk through it.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 12:55:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  neither did 1441 (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ericlewis0, whizdom

        and you know how that turned out.

        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

        by corvo on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 01:39:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  This war, the next war, some other war and/or (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ericlewis0

      the endless, perpetual clandestine and overt war on socialism and on "terror". Those opposed to war can never relax, let alone sleep so long as there is an imperialist superpower bent on global hegemony.

      That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

      by enhydra lutris on Thu Sep 26, 2013 at 02:34:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'd like to be able to focus on other things, like (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        enhydra lutris

        the Keystone XL pipeline and other fossil fuel matters, bringing Wall St to heel, reforming our political system so we have some damned representation, fighting back against the NSA, and creating some jobs around here. To say nothing of constructing some alternative media infrastructure so we can communicate.

        I have enough to fight with the hegemony about without this PNAC nonsense.

        I tried to go online to find a similar bear head...but when I searched “Big Bear Head” it gave me a San Diego craigslist ad entitled “Big Bear needs some quick head now” and then I just decided to never go on the internet again.--Jenny Lawson

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Sep 27, 2013 at 05:04:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (144)
  • Community (68)
  • Elections (42)
  • Bernie Sanders (39)
  • Environment (38)
  • 2016 (38)
  • Hillary Clinton (33)
  • Culture (31)
  • Media (30)
  • Republicans (29)
  • Climate Change (29)
  • Education (24)
  • Spam (23)
  • Congress (23)
  • Barack Obama (22)
  • Civil Rights (22)
  • Labor (22)
  • Science (21)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Texas (20)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site