Poll: Syrian Chemical Weapon Attack

LateX'Dog · 10 Sep 2013 at 12:33

awaybreaktoday said:
Kerry's remark was a bluff, Russia called it in with a bluff, US the calls in that bluff to get out the hole they were in.

No one expected the Russians to call in Kerry's bluff, and the Russians were certainly not expecting the Americans to call theirs in. Its now a lose lose for the Russians as the Americans now have the opportunity for getting troops into Syria under the disguise of securing chemical weapons factories...

Unless this is the scenario that was discussed at the G20.

oulton · 10 Sep 2013 at 12:46

awaybreaktoday said:
Its now a lose lose for the Russians as the Americans now have the opportunity for getting troops into Syria under the disguise of securing chemical weapons factories...

Rubbish, it is a lose lose for America. The Syrians will never allow US troops on their soil, the only way they will agree to securing of their chemical weapons is under a UN operation

Danthus · 10 Sep 2013 at 13:03

Breaking news on the BBC says that Syria has agreed to the Russian planed to place chemical weapons under controlled conditions.

doodah · 10 Sep 2013 at 13:04

Errmm OK - this got even more interesting.....

The Syrian government has agreed to proposals put forward by Russia that it place its entire chemical weapons stockpile under international control, according to reports from the independent Russian news agency Interfax.

Source

Tombo · 10 Sep 2013 at 13:11

scorza said:
Good news I think that there's still a chance for the US to avoid military action while still ensuring that Al-Assad can never again use its chemical weapons.

"again"

n111ck · 10 Sep 2013 at 13:15

Now at least all the conspiracy theories can be shredded.

Devlish · 10 Sep 2013 at 13:21

Of course Syria will agree, theyre a russian client state and will do what theyre told. The interesting thing will be how Obama gets out of this one not looking like Russia is dictating american foreign policy. The speech will be interesting if it goes ahead.

XeNoN89 · 10 Sep 2013 at 13:22

OldCoals said:
Breaking news on the BBC says that Syria has agreed to the Russian planed to place chemical weapons under controlled conditions.

I don't know why this wasn't an idea in the first place. If chemical weapons are illegal to use and the Syrian government says they have not and will not use them, why have them at all?

Devlish · 10 Sep 2013 at 13:30

XeNoN89 said:
I don't know why this wasn't an idea in the first place. If chemical weapons are illegal to use and the Syrian government says they have not and will not use them, why have them at all?

It has been discussed before, Russia has blocked it previously though. Seems theyve had a change of heart.

ubersonic · 10 Sep 2013 at 13:43

xibinim said:
Errmm OK - this got even more interesting.....

The Syrian government has agreed to proposals put forward by Russia that it place its entire chemical weapons stockpile under international control, according to reports from the independent Russian news agency Interfax.

Click to expand...

The get out for America is that the general public have no idea that Sarin goes off in month or two* and cannot be stockpiled, so they can blag it that Assad can't possibly be turning over all he has because any stockpile will be tiny compared to what the media have lead people to believe Syria have.

*If its Grade A laboratory stuff well stored it "can" last up to half a year, but the generic middle east grade stuff like Iraq was making is useless in a couple of weeks.

awaybreaktoday · 10 Sep 2013 at 13:55

oulton said:
Rubbish, it is a lose lose for America. The Syrians will never allow US troops on their soil, the only way they will agree to securing of their chemical weapons is under a UN operation

There are already US special forces on their soil...

awaybreaktoday · 10 Sep 2013 at 13:57

LateX'Dog said:
Unless this is the scenario that was discussed at the G20.

This is very most likely to have happened...

awaybreaktoday · 10 Sep 2013 at 14:02

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 US President Barack Obama discussed the idea on the sidelines of a G20 summit last week, Mr Putin's spokesman said on Tuesday.

Looks like it was not a bluff now but all pre-planned between the US and Russia....

magick · 10 Sep 2013 at 14:02

Amp34 · 10 Sep 2013 at 14:06

ubersonic said:
The get out for America is that the general public have no idea that Sarin goes off in month or two* and cannot be stockpiled, so they can blag it that Assad can't possibly be turning over all he has because any stockpile will be tiny compared to what the media have lead people to believe Syria have.

*If its Grade A laboratory stuff well stored it "can" last up to half a year, but the generic middle east grade stuff like Iraq was making is useless in a couple of weeks.

And if that fails then they can just do what they did in Iraq...

US "you still have chemical weapons!"
Syria "No, we gave them all to you!"
US "No you didn't"
UN Inspectors "Yes they did"
US *Declares war due to chemical weapons*
US *Finds nothing*
UN Inspectors "Told you so"
US "Congratulations everyone! Overthrown a ruthless dictator *what about finding chemical weapons...* shifty eyes"

The weapons should/would be turned over to a joint UN crowd or to the Russians, not the US at least.

In reality there are so many get out clauses it makes bugger all difference if the US actually want to invade. Whether it really was a slip that Kerry made that Russia jumped on, or if it is a way to save face for all we will probably never know. However if it was a slip and the US still want to invade we will find out shortly... If syria agree to hand them over to the UN (not the US!), or at least allow monitors into the bases to make sure they aren't being used.

LateX'Dog · 10 Sep 2013 at 14:17

magick said:

Awesome.

Devlish · 10 Sep 2013 at 15:01

magick said:

LOL, the only media over the past couple of weeks I have read act like the majority of people are against it, which is pretty much the case. Dont let that put you off the cute pic though.

areksnumbr1sxylady · 10 Sep 2013 at 15:34

Devlish, never give up...

n111ck · 10 Sep 2013 at 17:50

ubersonic said:
The get out for America is that the general public have no idea that Sarin goes off in month or two* and cannot be stockpiled, so they can blag it that Assad can't possibly be turning over all he has because any stockpile will be tiny compared to what the media have lead people to believe Syria have.

*If its Grade A laboratory stuff well stored it "can" last up to half a year, but the generic middle east grade stuff like Iraq was making is useless in a couple of weeks.

Actually the regime is believed to keep the various agents un-mixed so the above isn't relevant.

areksnumbr1sxylady · 10 Sep 2013 at 17:55

n111ck said:
Actually the regime is believed to keep the various agents un-mixed so the above isn't relevant.

just give up you fool, Assad did not use chemical weapons because its just dumb...

He was winning the war and knew exactly that if he used them he would be playing right into rebels hands and risk NATO intervention.

If he DID decide to use chemos it would be done as last resort when he would be losing the war and it would be done on massive scale and not some silly 1 bomb that covered a house. Chemical Weapons are weapons of mass destruction, nothing justifies using it on a small scale.

Common sense just completely fails, the only thing that might justify this apart from rebel provacation is a rogue drunk/drugged general.

Its much easier to napalm the whole damn area and leave no one alive than using stupid chemical weapons.

Poll: Syrian Chemical Weapon Attack

Would you support a military strike on Syria without a UN Security Council resolution?

Yes

No

Unsure