 |
PUTIN SAVES THE DAY
http://www.cagle.com
|
SYRIA and surrounding regions
http://www.google.com/imgres?
* Special thanks to "Google Images" "cagel.com", "wikipedia.com",
"BBC News", "The Washington Post" , "Reuters" and "The New York Daily News".
* Special thanks to "Google Images" "cagel.com", "wikipedia.com",
"BBC News", "The Washington Post" , "Reuters" and "The New York Daily News".
SYRIA:
THE END OF
NOWHERE
BLOG POST
by Felicity Blaze
Noodleman
Los Angeles, CA
9.13.13
Syrian
soldiers who defected to join the Free Syrian Army are seen among demonstrators
during a protest against Syria's President Bashar al-Assad in Idlib
in this handout picture received January 31, 2012. (Photo Reuters/Handout)
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/01/31/syria-government-forces-retake-damascus-suburbs-as-insurgency-reaches-new-phase/
Over the past few weeks the tone of US involvement in Syria
has become stronger and the President has now issued statements that would
commit this country to yet another war in the Middle East. Here at “The Noodleman Group”, we were
avoiding the topic of Syria all together!
Not our country, not our problem and not our head ache. This is an issue for the United Nations and
it is for the UN to act upon.
In the past the UN has been a force in the establishment of
the Israeli State and in the 1950’s the UN was involved with peace keeping
forces in the Middle East and also in Korea.
These days the UN has become decidedly less active in regional disputes
and civil wars. Sometimes the world’s
major diplomatic medium seems to even have problems with drafting resolutions to
define and condemn the atrocities of our modern world.
To begin our article this week entitled “Syria; The End of
Nowhere” we need to learn a little more about this ancient nation nestled in
the so called cradle of western civilization. As always we are so grateful to be able to
turn to our good friends at “Wikipedia.com” for the inside scoop on Syria.
Syria
From Wikipedia,
the free encyclopedia
This article is
about the modern state of Syria. For other uses, see Syria
(disambiguation).
Syria (/ˈsɪriə/ SIRR-ee-ə ; Arabic: سوريا / ALA-LC: Sūriyā, or سورية / Sūrīyah; Syriac: Kurdish: سوریه, Sûrî), officially the Syrian Arab Republic, is a country in Western Asia, bordering Lebanon and the Mediterranean Sea to the West, Turkey to the north, Iraq to the east, Jordan to the south and Israel to the southwest. A country of fertile plains, high mountains and deserts, it is home to diverse ethnic and religious groups, including Arab Alawites, Arab Sunnis, Arab Christians, Armenians, Assyrians, Druze, Kurds and Turks. Arab Sunnis make up the majority of the population.
In English, the name "Syria"
was formerly synonymous with the Levant (known in Arabic as al-Sham) while the modern
state encompasses the sites of several ancient kingdoms and empires, including
the Eblan civilization of the third millennium BC. In the Islamic era, its capital city, Damascus, among the oldest continuously inhabited cities in the world, was the seat of the Umayyad Caliphate, and a provincial capital of the Mamluk
Sultanate of Egypt.
The modern Syrian state was established
after the first
World War as a French mandate, and represented the largest Arab state to emerge from the formerly Ottoman-ruled Arab Levant. It gained
independence in April 1946, as a parliamentary
republic. The
post-independence period was tumultuous, and a large number of military coups and coup attempts shook the country in
the period 1949–1971. Between 1958 and 1961, Syria entered a brief union
with Egypt, which was
terminated by a military coup. Syria was under Emergency Law from 1963 to 2011,
effectively suspending most constitutional protections for citizens, and its
system of government is considered to be non-democratic Bashar al-Assad has been president since 2000 and was
preceded by his father Hafez al-Assad, who was in office from 1970 to 2000.
Syria is a member of one international
organization other than the United Nations, the Non-Aligned
Movement; it is
currently suspended from the Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, and self-suspended from the Union
for the Mediterranean.
Since March 2011, Syria has been embroiled
in civil
war in the wake of
uprisings (considered an extension of the Arab Spring, the mass movement of revolutions and
protests in the Arab world) against Assad and the neo-Ba'athist government. An alternative
government was formed by
the opposition umbrella group, the Syrian
National Coalition, in March
2012. Representatives of this government were subsequently invited to take up
Syria's seat at the Arab
League. The opposition coalition has been
recognised as the "sole representative of the Syrian people" by
several nations including the United States, the United Kingdom and France.
Etymology
Main article: Name of Syria
The name Syria is derived from
the ancient
Greek name for
Syrians: Σύριοι, Sýrioi, or Σύροι, Sýroi, which the
Greeks applied without distinction to the Assyrians. A number of modern scholars argued that the Greek word
related to the cognate Ἀσσυρία, Assyria, ultimately
derived from the Akkadian Aššur. Others believed that it was derived from Siryon,
the name that the Sidonians gave to Mount Hermon.However, the discovery of the Çineköy
inscription in 2000 seems
to support the theory that the term Syria derives from Assyria.
The area designated by the word has
changed over time. Classically, Syria lies at the eastern end of the
Mediterranean, between Arabia to the south and Asia Minor to the north, stretching inland to
include parts of Iraq, and having an uncertain border to the
northeast that Pliny
the Elder describes as
including, from west to east, Commagene, Sophene, and Adiabene.
By Pliny's time, however, this larger
Syria had been divided into a number of provinces under the Roman Empire (but politically independent from each
other): Judaea, later renamed Palaestina in AD 135 (the region
corresponding to modern-day Israel, the Palestinian Territories, and Jordan) in
the extreme southwest, Phoenicia corresponding to Lebanon, with
Damascena to the inland side of Phoenicia, Coele-Syria (or "Hollow Syria") south of
the Eleutheris
river, and Iraq.
It seems the position best for the United States is as a
very influential mediator in the whole Syrian affair. By a “Influential Mediator” we mean a
mediator who could find a way to make both sides in Syria listen and put an end
to their war. The US needs another
Secretary of State like Dr. Henry Kissinger who can get things done in that
part of the world.
The direction of events in Syria has taken a very bad turn
for the Obama administration and demonstrated the inability of Hillary Clinton
as Secretary of State to carry out the US mission. With the latest news coming out of the White
House, it would appear that the Administration is really putting the horse
before the cart!
As a writer who has viewed the performances of US
Secretaries of State under the Presidential administrations of Presidents Carter,
Clinton and now Obama, we see a very weak and even tolerant attitude towards
civil unrest in this region of the world with little to no reaction for the
upheavals in this fragile part of the Middle East. The coexistence for the
State of Israel always seems to be at stake. Under these Presidents, the peace and stability of Middle Eastern nations has been sacrificed for chaos and the establishment of a zealot Islamic State which spawns world wide terrorism and and hatred for everything which is not Islamic.
The Islamic forces cry out against their nations leadership with accusations of "Dictators" and "Ruthless" have been courted and encouraged by these Presidents. Since the Shaw of Iran was deposed in 1979 during the Carter administration, Islamic revolutionaries have sought to establish an "Islamic State" across the Middle East with zero tolerance for other religions or points of view. We have to wonder who the real dictators are!
The Islamic forces cry out against their nations leadership with accusations of "Dictators" and "Ruthless" have been courted and encouraged by these Presidents. Since the Shaw of Iran was deposed in 1979 during the Carter administration, Islamic revolutionaries have sought to establish an "Islamic State" across the Middle East with zero tolerance for other religions or points of view. We have to wonder who the real dictators are!
 |
WASHINGTON
— Syrian President Bashar Assad
has warned there will be “repercussions”
against any
U. S. military strike launched in response to a
chemical weapons
attack in his country.
http://articles.washingtonpost.com
|
In the case of Syria there seems to be a complete failure of attention for the civil war and the government which has resorted to the use of chemical weapons. A failure of the United Nations and a failure of the United States to dissuade this holocaust of humanity. Well; so much for President Obama's “Nobel Peace Prize award”! We didn’t think he deserved it in the first place and now we can see the reasons why! I’ll take the Bush-Chaney-Dr. Rice approach any day over the Obama program. They were serious about removing any and all WMD’s (Weapons of Mass Destruction) from the Middle East with an emphasis on Iraq and Iran.
Some first responders to a reported
chemical attack in Syria have died after treating victims, providing more
evidence that a weapon of mass destruction was used on August 22, 2013,
opposition forces said Thursday. (Hassan
Ammar, AP
Photo)
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/08/22/syria-chemical-attack-responders-die/2686971/
A man tends to some of the hundreds of
men, women and children killed in the alleged chemical attacks in Damascus,
Syria, on August 21. Graphic evidence of
a failed UN and US missions in Syria. (Photo by AP)
http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Enda-Kenny-condemns-chemical-attacks-as-Syrians-take-to-Dublin-streets-221778441.html
 |
| US Secretary of State Clinton |
Like her husband President Bill Clinton, who allowed too many issues to go unchallenged in the Middle East, the current administration’s Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has been the worst we’ve ever seen. The power and prestige of the United States has become weekend and our ineffective in this region of the world where the security for the State of Israel is always at steak has reached a highly critical stage. It would appear there has been a serious lapse in the dialogue for peace and moderation in Syria.
Since the days of President Theodore Roosevelt the policy of the United States in this part of the world has always been to ”speak softly and carry a big stick”; carry a very big stick, as in “gun boat diplomacy”. It’s also helpful to have a UN Resolution in our back pocket too!
This week we have selected three articles from the media on the current Syrian crises for your consideration. Well; since its Friday the 13th. and it’s also the 13th. year of
the 21st. century who knows what could happen. Check your Zodiac charts for a clue of some sort! I'm Felicity Blaze Noodle and thanks for being with "The Noodleman Group".
“BBC News”
10
September 2013 Last updated at 13:24 ET
Syria Conflict:
Disputes Flare Over
Disputes Flare Over
UN Resolution
Jeremy Bowen reports
from Damascus on reaction to latest developments
A Russian plan for
Syria's chemical weapons to be put under international control has sparked
immediate disputes over resolutions at the United Nations.
The UK, US and France
want a timetable and consequences of failure spelt out, and Washington has
warned it will "not fall for stalling tactics".
Russia said any draft
putting the blame on Syria was unacceptable and urged a declaration backing its
initiative.
Syria has said it
accepts the Russian proposal on its chemical stockpile.
The US alleges that
Syrian government forces carried out a chemical weapons attack in Damascus on
21 August, killing 1,429 people.
Chapter 7 of UN Charter
The Syrian government
blames the attack on rebels fighting to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad, in
a conflict that the UN says has claimed some 100,000 lives.
The UN Security
Council will hold an urgent meeting on Syria at 20:00 GMT.
'Hard
look'
UK government sources
have told the BBC that the exact wording of the joint US, French and British
resolution on Syria's chemical weapons is still to be agreed.
The BBC's Nick
Robinson says diplomats from the three allies are said to be discussing the
questions of "what, where, when, who and how" - in other words what
weapons should be removed from Syria, where should they be taken to, according
to what timetable and who should supervise it.
Russian Foreign
Minister Sergei Lavrov told his French counterpart Laurent Fabius on Tuesday
that it would not countenance a resolution threatening Syria with force.
Chemical weapons plan timeline
5-6 Sept Vladimir Putin and Barack Obama discuss idea
of placing Syria's chemical weapons under international control on sidelines of
G20 summit, Putin spokesman says
Monday 9 Sept
07:30 GMT At press conference with Russia's Sergei
Lavrov, Syria's Walid Muallem hints at chemical weapons plan
09:12 In UK, John Kerry says Mr Assad could avert an
attack if he "turn[s] over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the
international community"
14:00 In second press conference, Mr Lavrov says he
has urged Mr Muallem to "not only agree on placing chemical weapons
storage sites under international control, but also on their subsequent
destruction". Mr Muallem welcomes proposal, and it is prominently reported
on Syrian state TV, suggesting Damascus is behind plan. Mr Obama says a
military strike is "absolutely" on pause if Syria yields control of
its chemical weapons
"Mr Lavrov
stressed that France's proposal to seek approval at the UN Security Council for
a resolution... that puts the responsibility for the possible use of chemical
weapons on the Syrian authorities is unacceptable," the Russian foreign
ministry said in a statement.
Earlier, UK Prime
Minister David Cameron said the UN motion should ensure that Russia's offer was
"not a ruse".
"We need a proper
timetable, process and consequences if it's not done," he said.
Our correspondent says
there is also wrangling over whether the resolution should be Chapter 7 or
Chapter 6.
Chapter 7 permits
military action if other measures do not succeed. Chapter 6 stipulates peaceful
methods of resolving disputes.
BBC diplomatic
correspondent Bridget Kendall says days or even weeks of wrangling can be
expected in the Security Council.
The test will be
whether they can - this time- come up with a formulation they can all agree on,
she says.
'American
aggression'
US Secretary of State
John Kerry earlier told a hearing of the House of Representatives Armed
Services Committee the US was waiting for details of the Russian proposal on
chemical weapons, "but we're not waiting for long".
Syria's chemical weapons
·
CIA believes Syria's
chemical weapons can be "delivered by aircraft, ballistic missile, and
artillery rockets"
·
Syria believed to
possess mustard gas and sarin, and also tried to develop more toxic nerve
agents such as VX gas
·
Syria has not signed
the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) or ratified the Biological and Toxin
Weapons Convention (BTWC)
He said:
"President Obama will take a hard look at it. But it has to be swift, it
has to be real, it has to be verifiable.
"We have to show
Syria, Russia and the world we are not going to fall for stalling
tactics."
Mr Kerry urged
Congress to stand by Mr Obama, saying the president was not asking for a
declaration of war, simply for the power to show that the US "means what
we say".
There have been few
details so far of Russia's plan, but Mr Lavrov said earlier in Moscow that it
was "preparing a concrete proposal which will be presented to all
interested sides, including the US... a workable, specific, concrete
plan".
Syrian Foreign
Minister Walid Muallem, who is in Moscow, was quoted by Russian news agency
Interfax as saying: "We held a very fruitful round of talks with [Mr
Lavrov] yesterday and he proposed an initiative relating to chemical weapons.
And in the evening, we agreed to the Russian initiative."
This would
"remove the grounds for American aggression", he said.
The US Senate had been
expected to vote this week on a resolution authorising military force, but the
Russian plan has led to a postponement.
Mr Kerry said that
"nothing has changed with respect to our request for the Congress to take
action" but that Mr Obama might want to discuss the timing of a vote with
congressional leaders.
Mr Lavrov said the
Russian initiative was "not a purely Russian initiative... it grew out of
contacts we've had with the Americans".
Russian President
Vladimir Putin and President Obama discussed the idea on the sidelines of a G20
summit last week, Mr Putin's spokesman said on Tuesday.
Mr Obama's prime-time
television address to the nation is still scheduled to go ahead on Tuesday
evening, and the White House said he still planned to use it to argue that
Congress should authorise the use of force if required.
"BBC News"
"The Washington Post"
10 Things That Could
Go
Very Wrong
If
We Attack Syria
By Ezra
Klein, Published: September 5 at 3:00 pm E-mail
the writer
Night falls on a
Syrian rebel-controlled area of Aleppo in 2012 after air strikes targeted the
area, killing dozens. (Narciso Contreras/AP)
The White House’s proposed strikes on
Syria almost couldn’t be more limited. They’re likely to cost in the millions
of dollars rather than the billions of dollars, and no U.S. lives are likely to
be in danger. It’s “barely five percent of what we did in Libya,” says Rep.
Brad Sherman.
And it’s not just the White House.
The congressional authorization of force — if one ever passes — will
expressly forbid committing ground troops. So even if the Obama administration
wanted to escalate sharply, they’d need to persuade a reluctant Congress to
pass a new law allowing them to do so.
So why is there so much debate over
such a seemingly costless endeavor? Because things might go wrong. In
particular, these 10 things could go wrong:
1) Our strikes could result in
heavy civilian casualties. It would be the bitterest of ironies if we struck
Syria to punish Assad’s barbarism only to end up killing thousands of innocent
civilians ourselves. The Pentagon is working up a target list with the express intent
of limiting Syrian casualties. But the intelligence behind that list could be
wrong — remember when we bombed the pharmaceutical plant in Sudan, or the Chinese embassy in
Belgrade? — and we could hit a building full of civilians. Or a
missile could malfunction. Or Assad could move civilians into the way of our
strikes expressly to secure a propaganda coup.
2) Our strikes could result in
Assad killing more civilians. Secretary of State John Kerry
was clear before the Senate that he expects our strikes to weaken Assad’s
position in the civil war. David Ignatius interviewed a rebel
leader who said that the strikes “could change the balance of the civil war in
Syria.”
We know that civilian casualties rise
when civil wars turn against the regime. So if Assad feels more threatened
after the strikes, and his forces begin massacring more innocents in an attempt
to break the will of the opposition, what will we do then? Stand by, as long as
they use conventional weapons? This is how escalation happens.
3) Our strikes could
result in Assad killing more civilians with chemical weapons. If the regime is
truly desperate and Assad (correctly) believes that the torturous congressional
debate and low public support signal a limited appetite for engaging in Syria,
Assad might respond to the bombs by doubling down on the attacks. The thinking
here could be to telegraph defiance of the United States to his supporters and
implacable, unstoppable ruthlessness to the opposition. Is it likely? Probably
not. But it could happen. And then what will we do? The arguments being made
before Congress certainly suggest that having committed ourselves to defending
the ban on chemical weapons once, we have to keep defending it.
4) The attacks are so slight
that Assad survives them easily and appears strengthened before the world. Sen. James
Risch worried about this Tuesday. What “if we go in with a limited strike and,
the day after or the week after or the month after, Assad crawls out of his rat
hole and says, ‘Look, I stood up to the strongest power on the face of this
Earth and I won?’ ” He asked.
Kerry replied that “Assad may be able
to crawl out of the hole and say, look, I survived, but there’s no way that
with reality and other assessments he’s going to be able to say he’s better
off.” But perhaps reality and independent assessments don’t matter as much as
the perception inside Syria. And predicting perceptions of the aftermath of
airstrikes that haven’t happened yet is difficult at best.
5) “You bombed it, you own it.” The “Pottery
Barn Rule” —- “you break it, you buy it” — became famous during the Iraq
war. “You are going to be the proud owner of 25 million people,” Colin Powell
told President Bush before the invasion of Iraq. “You will own all their hopes,
aspirations and problems. You’ll own it all.” (As it happens, that’s not the
Pottery Barn’s rule. They simply write off broken merchandise as a loss.)
Syria isn’t Iraq. But a congressional
force authorization followed by a bombing campaign will firmly involve us in
Syria. It will make it much harder for us to say that what happens in Syria
isn’t our problem. It will mean many more members of the Syrian opposition have
contacts with Washington journalists and defense policymakers. The Obama
administration believes it can send some missiles and be done with it. That may
not prove true.
6) Reprisal. The Syrian
army, Syrian army sympathizers, Syrian army allies like Hezbollah, or some
other pro-Syrian — or at least anti-American — element could decide
to exact revenge for our strikes in Syria by launching a terrorist attack
against Americans somewhere else in the world. If 12 American tourists die
after a Syria-related terrorist attack on an international hotel in the Middle
East, what happens next? Do we mourn? Escalate? Is that a cost we’re willing to
pay?
7) Assad falls and the chemical
weapons end up in the wrong hands. Maybe our strikes do tip the
balance against Assad, either by directly degrading his military strength or by
emboldening the opposition. What happens to his chemical weapons then? The
opposition almost certainly doesn’t know where they are. But Assad’s top
loyalists do. And they’ll need to make some money fast …
8) Assad falls and is replaced
by chaos. One reason the United States has been so careful to plan a
limited strike is that though Assad is a monster, we’re not sure that he’ll be
replaced by anyone better. Maybe our strikes unexpectedly tip the balance
against Assad, but what comes next is chaotic jockeying between moderate and
jihadist elements of the opposition, with a dose of revenge killings for good
measure.
9) Assad falls and is
replaced by something worse. Maybe our strikes unexpectedly tip
the balance against Assad and the Al Nusra Front, which claims allegiance
to al Qaeda, wins the resulting power struggle, or has a major role in the
coalition. At Tuesday’s hearings, Kerry said he believes that unlikely. He said
that recent data show that the number of “extremists” in the opposition is
“lower than former expectations.” He also argued that “Syria historically has
been secular, and the vast majority of Syrians, I believe, want to remain
secular.”
But what if he’s wrong? The United
States has officially designated Al Nusra a terrorist organization. Are we
really going to be complicit in permitting them, or anyone like them, to take
over Syria?
10) Escalation. Almost
everything that could go wrong points towards the same ultimate response:
Escalation. That could mean more bombing, or actual ground troops, or some
combination. But the key fear behind intervening in Syria is that even
constrained missions can unexpectedly break free of their limits.
That’s why Kerry’s early equivocation
over whether the authorization of force should expressly forbid ground troops
so scared the Senate, and the White House. He quickly walked it back, but it’s
worth taking his original comments seriously:
In the event Syria imploded, for instance, or in the event there
was a threat of a chemical weapons cache falling into the hands of al-Nusra or
someone else and it was clearly in the interest of our allies and all of us,
the British, the French and others, to prevent those weapons of mass
destruction falling into the hands of the worst elements, I don’t want to take
off the table an option that might or might not be available to a president of
the United States to secure our country.
This is what we call a “Kinsley gaffe“: Kerry was accidentally
telling the truth. If we’re involved in Syria and something goes wrong, ground
troops might make sense. Escalation might make sense. And that’s a major reason
so many people are afraid of intervening in the first place.
One caution here is that much of what
could go wrong if we intervene could go wrong if we don’t intervene, too. But
that’s where the Pottery Barn rule comes in. Once we’re involved, it’s a lot
harder to say that disastrous outcomes in Syria are simply an awful,
regrettable thing happening elsewhere in the world rather than a war we are
directly involved in, and that we have some responsibility in guiding toward a
successful conclusion.
The fact that things could go wrong
in Syria doesn’t mean it’s not worth intervening. As Max Fisher points out, there’s a real
argument to be made for enforcing the ban on chemical weapons. But the upsides
need to be balanced against a realistic view of the risks in any intervention.
Ezra Klein is the editor of
Wonkblog and a columnist at the Washington Post, as well as a contributor to
MSNBC and Bloomberg. His work focuses on domestic and economic policymaking, as
well as the political system that’s constantly screwing it up.
"The Washington Post"
“The New York Daily News”
Russia Suggests Syria
Surrender Chemical Weapons
To Avoid Attack
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid
al-Moallem says Damascus 'welcomes' the proposal as the White House describes
itself as open but skeptical. The recommendation from Russian Foreign Minister
Sergey Lavrov follows Secretary of State John Kerry’s statement that Syrian
President Bashar Assad could avert an attack by the U.S. by turning the weapons
over to the international community.
BY DAN FRIEDMAN , JOSEPH STRAW AND CORKY
SIEMASZKO / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
PUBLISHED: MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2013,
11:32 AM
UPDATED: TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2013,
3:13 AM
President Obama's push for attacking
Syria ran into a surprising detour when frequent antagonist Russian President
Vladimir Putin said he'd persuade all Bashar Assad to turn over Damascus'
deadly gas stockpile to international monitors.AP PHOTO/EVAN VUCCI
On the eve of President Obama’s prime time speech on the Syrian crisis, Russia ripped up the script by suddenly floating a proposal to prevent a U.S.-led attack on its ally.
Obama heralded this as a
possible breakthrough and said he would take a good long look at the Kremlin’s
idea, which would require Syria to turn over all its chemical weapons to
international monitors.
RELATED: OBAMA SEEKS OK OF SYRIA PLANS FROM LAWMAKERS, PUBLIC
J. SCOTT APPLEWHITE/AP
Secretary of State John Kerry
shows frustration at questioning from Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) at a Senate
Foreign Relations Committee hearing about President Obama's request for
congressional authorization for military intervention in Syria.
Senate Majority Leader Harry
Reid (D-Nev.) put off an initial vote, scheduled for Wednesday, on a resolution
authorizing an attack on Syria so senators could consider the proposal.
“I think it’s certainly a
positive development when the Russians and the Syrians both make gestures
toward dealing with these chemical weapons,” Obama said on CNN.
RELATED: HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTS OBAMA'S SYRIA STRIKE PLANS
It was one of six TV interviews
he gave, part of a full-court press that will culminate in Tuesday night’s
nationally televised address on why he thinks the U.S. must act against Syria.
“If we can exhaust these
diplomatic efforts and come up with a formula that gives the international
community a verifiable, enforceable mechanism to deal with these chemical
weapons in Syria, then I’m all for it,” he told CNN.
RIA NOVOSTI/REUTERS
Russian President Vladimir
Putin is a staunch Syrian ally, which adds some weight to his country’s
proposal.
Obama also claimed that the
Syrians wouldn’t even be considering giving up their arsenal had the U.S. not
rattled its sabers — and that he spoke about the crisis with Russian leader
Vladimir Putin last week at the G-20 Summit in St. Petersburg.
“I believe that Mr. Putin does
not see the use of chemical weapons as a good thing inside of Syria or anyplace
else,” he said.
RELATED: WARNING GRAPHIC IMAGES: FOOTAGE OF NERVE GAS ATTACKS IN
SYRIA
In his whirlwind of interviews, Obama also tried to send a
pointed message to Syrian despot Bashar Assad, who continues to deny that he used
chemical weapons on his own rebellious people.
“I would say to Mr. Assad, we need
a political settlement so that you’re not slaughtering your own people, uh,
and, by the way, encouraging some elements of the opposition to engage in some
terrible behavior, as well,” Obama said.
RELATED: FORMER CIA CHIEF DAVID PETRAEUS COMES OUT IN FAVOR OF
MILITARY ACTION IN SYRIA
But when asked in a Fox News
interview whether he would delay a congressional vote on a military strike in
Syria, Obama said, “Right now, the American people are not persuaded.”
Obama got that right. A new ABC
News/Washington Post poll found that nearly two-thirds of Americans now oppose
attacking Syria.
In a sign of just how tough a
sell it’s going to be in Congress, Obama dropped by a meeting National Security
Adviser Susan Rice was having with members of the Congressional Black Caucus at
the White House to discuss Syria. He spent about an hour trying to make his
case.
RELATED: EU NOT READY TO SPANK SYRIA ON GAS ATTACK
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey
Lavrov presented the Kremlin proposal earlier Monday.
“If the establishment of
international control of chemical weapons in the country will help avoid
military strikes, we will immediately start working with Damascus,” Lavrov
said.
“We call on the Syrian
leadership not only to agree to put chemical weapons storages under
international control, but to also to have them destroyed subsequently.”
RELATED: OBAMA WILL ADDRESS NATION TUESDAY ON SYRIA
Syria’s foreign minister
immediately gave a thumbs-up to the pitch from its most powerful ally.
“Syria welcomes Russia’s
proposal for Damascus to put its chemical weapons under international control,”
Walid al-Moallem said.
REUTERS
Free Syrian Army fighters walk
inside a damaged house near Hanano Barracks in Aleppo on Sept. 3. Syrian
President Bashar Assad continues to blame the rebels for a chemical attack that
killed an estimated 1,400 people last month, setting up a showdown with the
U.S. government.
White House and State
Department officials were wary at first, saying they were open to the Russian
idea but that they wanted more assurances from the Syrians that they are not
just “stalling.”
Then Philip Gordon, a top aide
to Obama on the Middle East,
said the administration was
concerned the offer might be a ploy to try and delay military action.
But some Democrats in Congress
— caught between loyalty to the President and growing opposition back home —
were quick to embrace the Russian offer.
RELATED: OBAMA AND PUTIN HAVE PRIVATE TALK AT G20 SUMMIT TO
DISCUSS SYRIA
Sen. Dianne Feinstein,
chairwoman of the powerful Senate Intelligence Committee, expressed no qualms
about the proposal.
“I would welcome such a move,”
the California Democrat said. “I believe that Russia can be most effective in
encouraging the Syrian president to stop any use of chemical weapons and place
all his chemical munitions, as well as storage facilities, under United Nations
control until they can be destroyed.”
Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D.-Ill.),
who said she is leaning toward backing Obama’s request to strike Syria, called
the offer “very interesting.”
“If that would work, that would
be a great thing, I think,” she said.
RELATED: OBAMA PLEADS FOR SUPPORT AT HOME AND ABROAD FOR STRIKE ON
SYRIA
Rep. Pete King (R-L.I.), who
backs attacking Syria and was one of several Republican legislators who met at
the White House on Monday to discuss convincing their reluctant colleagues to
support Obama on this, said he would leave it to the State Department to weigh the
proposal.
And Rep. Steve Israel (D-L.I.)
said that despite the Russians’ offer, the onus remains on Obama “to make his
case” and persuade many undecided members during a national address Tuesday
evening.
“It puts the “prime” in prime
time,” said Israel.
The White House says Assad
should be punished for allegedly killing 1,400 people, including more than 400
children, last month in the deadliest chemical weapons attack in the world in
25 years.
REUTERS
Free Syrian Army fighters and
civilians help a wounded boy rescued from rubble after what activists said was
shelling by forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar Assad in Aleppo on Aug. 16.
The country has been mired in civil war for 2.5 years.
Putin claims there is no
evidence that Assad gassed his own people and has warned the United Nations
that Russia would use its veto power in the Security Council to block any
attempt to authorize military intervention.
Before the whipsawing
diplomatic developments, Kerry suggested Assad could save his own skin by turning
over “every single bit” of his chemical weapons arsenal.
That way, Kerry said, Assad
would be held “accountable without [the U.S.] engaging in troops on the ground
or any other prolonged kind of effort.”
Kerry, who was in London trying
to building international support for military intervention in the Syrian civil
war, added that he didn’t think Assad would agree to his proposal.
RELATED: ARIZONA SEN. JOHN MCCAIN OPPOSES SENATE RESOLUTION ON
SYRIA
An hour later, Assad’s foreign
minister upended Kerry’s expectations.
Obama has asked Congress for
the green light to strike Syria and has stressed repeatedly that he envisions a
“limited” military attack that involves no “boots on the ground.”
Before the Russians floated
their proposal, Assad tried talking tough.
“You should expect everything,”
he warned in an interview with CBS’ Charlie Rose. “If you strike somewhere, you
have to expect the repercussions somewhere else,” he said.
SALAH AL-ASHKAR/AFP/GETTY IMAGES
An opposition fighter holds a
rocket-propelled grenade as his comrades take cover from an attack by regime
forces on Aug. 26 during clashes over the strategic area of Khanasser, which is
situated on the only road linking Aleppo to central Syria.
Assad again blamed the chemical
attack on the rebels who have been trying to oust him for 2.5 years.
“It’s not only the government
[that’s] the only player in this region,” he said. “You have different parties.
You have different factions. You have different ideology. You have everything
in this region now. So you have to expect that.”
Kerry has said that only the
Syrian government has the ability to launch a chemical strike. But the White
House is also leery of the rebels because much of the fighting is being led by
Islamists with Al Qaeda ties.
While Obama has said Assad must
go, he was doesn’t want him replaced with an Al Qaeda symapthizer who would
turn mostly secular Syria into an Islamic state.
• • •
Meanwhile, an ABC News/Washington Post Poll revealed that nearly two-thirds of
Americans oppose a U.S. military strike on Syria:
64% oppose air strikes, up 5
percentage points from week ago
30% are in favor,
down 6 points
If Congress rejects action:
76% oppose air strikes
17% would be in favor
If Congress approves air
strikes:
48% would still be opposed
44% would be in favor
Regardless of congressional
action:
71% of Republicans oppose
attacking Syria, up from 55% last week
55% or Democrats oppose
attacking Syria, up one point from last week
The poll was a random sample of
1,020 adults nationwide. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5
percentage points.
• • •
On Monday, the White House
released a joint statement Obama was able to arrange with 10 other countries on
the Syrian government's alleged use of chemical weapons. That statement appears
below.
THE
WHITE HOUSE
Office
of the Press Secretary
"The New York Daily News"
Syria,
the Apotheosis of Barbarism
http://latuffcartoons.wordpress.com/2012/06/12/cartoon-for-operamundi-syria-the-apotheosis-of-barbarism/
 |
Tell your friends and associates about us!
It's easy! Just copy and paste me into your email!
* “The Noodleman Group” is pleased to announce that we are now carrying a link to the “USA Today” news site.We installed the “widget/gadget” August 20, and it will be carried as a regular feature on our site.Now you can read“Noodleman” and then check in to “USA Today” for all the up to date News, Weather, Sports and more!Just scroll all the way down to the bottom of our site and hit the “USA Today” hyperlinks.Enjoy!
The Noodleman Group is on Google "Blogger"!
