Russia to push Syria to surrender chemical weapons

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**djones520**

dogma wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

Syria HAS chemical weapons, Russia never said they didn't have them. In fact, the proposition that they relinquish control of their chemical arsenal to international forces, kind of implies that they have to have an arsenal to relinquish in the first place...

Whether or not Syria has chemical weapons has no bearing on whether or not their allies publicly recognize that fact.

Ok, so what does it mean if their allies do publicly recognize it?

**Jihadin**

I do believe Putin totally defanged Obama attempt or gave Obama an "Out" to avoid another Middle East Operation. Basically put a "Hold" on a US strike.

**PhantomViper**

dogma wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

Don't be naive.

You misunderstand. The US is essentially free to intervene in Syria once Kerry's end-of-the-week deadline expires; at least per the restrictions you have outlaid.

The US is free to intervene whenever it wants, but attack Syria after Assad has agreed to relinquish control of its chemical arsenal and while negotiations to do so are under way and Obama will come across just as bloodthirsty and "warmongery" as Bush was. And you are running dangerously low on allies that are whiling to accompany the US in these little adventures without risking pissing off a few more of them with a stunt like that...

dogma wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

Syria HAS chemical weapons, Russia never said they didn't have them. In fact, the proposition that they relinquish control of their chemical arsenal to international forces, kind of implies that they have to have an arsenal to relinquish in the first place...

Whether or not Syria has chemical weapons has no bearing on whether or not their allies publicly recognize that fact.

Russia never said that Syria didn't have chemical weapons. Russia never even hinted that Syria didn't have chemical weapons. Its a publicly known fact that they do have a chemical arsenal and they aren't breaking any international laws by having those weapons, so I fail to see what your point is on insisting that Russia somehow wanted to hide that...

**Jihadin**

What I really want to know about the chemical weapons that Syria has. Did any of them originate out of Iraq. I remember the one incident where the Insurgents rigged 155mm howitzer rounds on railing's by the highway thinking they were HE rounds. So when they command detonated on a US convoy going by they didn't get the HE effect but the two chamber chemical round "POP". They were indentified as rounds that were destroyed by Saddam forces in compliance with UN mandate (?)

**Ouze**

dogma wrote:
Kerry clearly didn't issue an ultimatum so, as SecState, his only recourse was vague frustration.

The notion that it wasn't serious is nonsense as there is no way the SecState did not know about the President's position.

Apparently the President and Mr. Putin discussed this option at the G20 earlier. On the other hand, it's possible that Fox News and Vladimir Putin are dirty libs just trying to whitewash it to make Obama look good - you know they're both in the tank for him.

Jihadin wrote:
What I really want to know about the chemical weapons that Syria has. Did any of them originate out of Iraq.

Keep fething that chicken

WaPo says they came from Egypt and the Soviets, back in the day. I'm sure we have a reciept around here somewhere.

**Jihadin**

I thought we mention on previous threads about the convoys and cargo aircrafts that left Iraq for Syria before we went in

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Jihadin wrote:
I thought we mention on previous threads about the convoys and cargo aircrafts that left Iraq for Syria before we went in

The convoys that contained Xmas cards from Bush Snr to Saddam, most of Iraq's gold, and Saddam's French lingerie collection! That convoy?

I must hand it to Putin and the Syrians, they've totally gazumped the Americans. Al Jazeera is reporting that the government is making more gains against the rebels. So, whilst everybody is distracted by chemical weapons, Assad's forces keep up the progress. The longer the US stalls, the more likely the war is going to be over. Maybe that's BO's plan?

**Seaward**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
I thought we mention on previous threads about the convoys and cargo aircrafts that left Iraq for Syria before we went in

The convoys that contained Xmas cards from Bush Snr to Saddam, most of Iraq's gold, and Saddam's French lingerie collection! That convoy?

I must hand it to Putin and the Syrians, they've totally gazumped the Americans. Al Jazeera is reporting that the government is making more gains against the rebels. So, whilst everybody is distracted by chemical weapons, Assad's forces keep up the progress. The longer the US stalls, the more likely the war is going to be over. Maybe that's BO's plan?

I think it's being generous to assume there is a plan.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

As I mentioned on another thread, Obama lost British support through cack-handedness, so you're probably right. Putin and his white horse have won the day, again!

**Frazzled**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
As I mentioned on another thread, Obama lost British support through cack-handedness, so you're probably right. Putin and his white horse have won the day, again!

once again the KGB saves the day.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Frazzled wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
As I mentioned on another thread, Obama lost British support through cack-handedness, so you're probably right. Putin and his white horse have won the day, again!

once again the KGB saves the day.

This Christmas, I'm demanding my family buy me a white horse!

**Frazzled**

You'll need to take your shirt off. This might be uncomfortable for you Christmas time.

but not for Putin because he's Super Komrade!

**whembly**

So... wow...

SYRIA SAYS IT ACCEPTED RUSSIAN WEAPONS PROPOSAL

Putin comes across as the world leader. Obama and the U.S. come across as laughing stocks.

If Syrian truly does turn over those weapons... then what?

Assad still committed Mass Murder via WMDs...

**d-usa**

Russia wouldn't have done jack-anything if they thought that the US would not be willing to attack Syria. The amount of conservative spin in this thread is amazing.

**pities2004**

d-usa wrote:
Russia wouldn't have done jack-anything if they thought that the US would not be willing to attack Syria. The amount of conservative spin in this thread is amazing.

**PhantomViper**

d-usa wrote:
Russia wouldn't have done jack-anything if they thought that the US would not be willing to attack Syria. The amount of conservative spin in this thread is amazing.

And what is your point?

Russia still comes out of this looking like a level headed negotiator capable of actually solving issues without resorting to violence and the US comes out of it looking like warmongers who just wan't to attack Muslim nations... again...

**whembly**

d-usa wrote:
Russia wouldn't have done jack-anything if they thought that the US would not be willing to attack Syria. The amount of conservative spin in this thread is amazing.

Um... dude... what you're doing is "THE SPIN".

o.O

I'm watching David Axelrod's twitter feed and, it's um... there's some epic spin going on there...

Putin gave Obama an out here...

EDIT: what PhantomViper said!

**schadenfreude**

Jihadin wrote:
What I really want to know about the chemical weapons that Syria has. Did any of them originate out of Iraq. I remember the one incident where the Insurgents rigged 155mm howitzer rounds on railing's by the highway thinking they were HE rounds. So when they command detonated on a US convoy going by they didn't get the HE effect but the two chamber chemical round "POP". They were indentified as rounds that were destroyed by Saddam forces in compliance with UN mandate (?)

2 stage binary sarin weapons have a 5 year shelf life. When expired sarin is mistakenly used in place of a HE round all the exposure to the expired sarin gas did was cause 2 US service members to have constricted pupils and a headache. Syria has had a functional wmd program for decades, and Iraqi manufactured sarin gas is going to be 20 to 30 years old with a 5 year shelf life.

**Frazzled**

d-usa wrote:
Russia wouldn't have done jack-anything if they thought that the US would not be willing to attack Syria. The amount of conservative spin in this thread is amazing.

Don't worry, they're still not doing jack. Its a fig leaf that allows Obama to a shred of self respect after effectively pulling the pin on his own grenade and standing there like a deer in the headlights.

But alls well that ends well I guess.

**juraigamer**

In soviet russia, chemical weapons give up first!

**whembly**

Well... it looks like the UN is back in the picture...

Obama Agrees To U.N. Discussion Of Putting Syria Chemical Weapons Under International Control

WASHINGTON -- A White House official says President Barack Obama has agreed to discussions at the United Nations Security Council on a proposal from Russia to secure Syria's chemical weapons stockpiles.

The official says Obama discussed the proposal Tuesday with French President Francois Hollande (frahn-SWAH' oh-LAWND') and British Prime Minister David Cameron. France's foreign minister says France will float a resolution in the U.N. Security Council aimed at forcing Syria to make public its chemical weapons program, place it under international control and dismantle it.

Obama has said the proposal marks a potential breakthrough that could halt plans for a U.S. military strike, though he said the details remain unclear.

The official requested anonymity because the officials was not authorized to discuss the private conversations by name.

A White House official emailed The Huffington Post with further details:

This morning, the President spoke separately with President Hollande and Prime Minister Cameron. They agreed to work closely together, and in consultation with Russia and China, to explore seriously the viability of the Russian proposal to put all Syrian chemical weapons and related materials fully under international control in order to ensure their verifiable and enforceable destruction. These efforts will begin today at the United Nations, and will include a discussion on elements of a potential UN Security Council Resolution.

So Russia arranges it, France proposes it, and … we... what is it we're doing again?

**djones520**

We're spinning it Whembly.

**schadenfreude**

whembly wrote:
Well... it looks like the UN is back in the picture...

Obama Agrees To U.N. Discussion Of Putting Syria Chemical Weapons Under International Control

WASHINGTON -- A White House official says President Barack Obama has agreed to discussions at the United Nations Security Council on a proposal from Russia to secure Syria's chemical weapons stockpiles.

The official says Obama discussed the proposal Tuesday with French President Francois Hollande (frahn-SWAH' oh-LAWND') and British Prime Minister David Cameron. France's foreign minister says France will float a resolution in the U.N. Security Council aimed at forcing Syria to make public its chemical weapons program, place it under international control and dismantle it.

Obama has said the proposal marks a potential breakthrough that could halt plans for a U.S. military strike, though he said the details remain unclear.

The official requested anonymity because the officials was not authorized to discuss the private conversations by name.

A White House official emailed The Huffington Post with further details:

This morning, the President spoke separately with President Hollande and Prime Minister Cameron. They agreed to work closely together, and in consultation with Russia and China, to explore seriously the viability of the Russian proposal to put all Syrian chemical weapons and related materials fully under international control in order to ensure their verifiable and enforceable destruction. These efforts will begin today at the United Nations, and will include a discussion on elements of a potential UN Security Council Resolution.

So Russia arranges it, France proposes it, and … we... what is it we're doing again?

Stick a fork in US intervention it's done. France is out, the UN approves, and Russia's plan is reasonable.

**djones520**

Russia's plan is more "reasonable" then ours was, which is why we end up as the losers here.

But, that's just conservative spin, so don't listen to it.

**d-usa**

whembly wrote:
Well... it looks like the UN is back in the picture...

Obama Agrees To U.N. Discussion Of Putting Syria Chemical Weapons Under International Control

WASHINGTON -- A White House official says President Barack Obama has agreed to discussions at the United Nations Security Council on a proposal from Russia to secure Syria's chemical weapons stockpiles.

The official says Obama discussed the proposal Tuesday with French President Francois Hollande (frahn-SWAH' oh-LAWND') and British Prime Minister David Cameron. France's foreign minister says France will float a resolution in the U.N. Security Council aimed at forcing Syria to make public its chemical weapons program, place it under international control and dismantle it.

Obama has said the proposal marks a potential breakthrough that could halt plans for a U.S. military strike, though he said the details remain unclear.

The official requested anonymity because the officials was not authorized to discuss the private conversations by name.

A White House official emailed The Huffington Post with further details:

This morning, the President spoke separately with President Hollande and Prime Minister Cameron. They agreed to work closely together, and in consultation with Russia and China, to explore seriously the viability of the Russian proposal to put all Syrian chemical weapons and related materials fully under international control in order to ensure their verifiable and enforceable destruction. These efforts will begin today at the United Nations, and will include a discussion on elements of a potential UN Security Council Resolution.

So Russia arranges it, France proposes it, and … we... what is it we're doing again?

1) The US proposes things, and Russia (you know, Syria's friends) veto anything. It's a dead end as long as Syria is protected by their friends.
2) The US says "fine, we do things on our own. Syria, you are getting bombed. US looks over at Russia "your move, how far are you willing to go to protect your friend"?
3) Russia goes to Syria and says "look you idiots, we are not going to war for you and destabilize any control we have in the region. Hand over the stuff, or you are on your own when the bombs drop."
4) Russia tells the world "Oh look, we suddenly got Syria to agree to give up their stuff. We are the peacemakers of the world!"
5) Dakka and FoxNews celebrate Putin, because at least he is not Obama.

**Ketara**

TheDailyMashington wrote:Shocking new pictures have emerged from the recent G20 summit. In them, Vladimir Putin, the current leader of Russia, is observed to be slapping Obama on the arse whilst shouting, 'Who's your President?!' More to follow....

**schadenfreude**

djones520 wrote:
Russia's plan is more "reasonable" then ours was, which is why we end up as the losers here.

But, that's just conservative spin, so don't listen to it.

Our plans were to bomb them but not hard enough for the rebel army to win and leave Assad in charge of Syria, armed with sarin, and angry at the us. Or plan B leave Al Qaeda in charge armed with sarin, or plan c invade and repeat Iraq all over again.

Seems like we are less of the loser under Russia's plans than our own.

**Seaward**

d-usa wrote:

1) The US proposes things, and Russia (you know, Syria's friends) veto anything. It's a dead end as long as Syria is protected by their friends.
2) The US says "fine, we do things on our own. Syria, you are getting bombed. US looks over at Russia "your move, how far are you willing to go to protect your friend"?
3) Russia goes to Syria and says "look you idiots, we are not going to war for you and destabilize any control we have in the region. Hand over the stuff, or you are on your own when the bombs drop."
4) Russia tells the world "Oh look, we suddenly got Syria to agree to give up their stuff. We are the peacemakers of the world!"
5) Dakka and FoxNews celebrate Putin, because at least he is not Obama.

Kissinger? Is that you?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

schadenfreude wrote:
Seems like we are less of the loser under Russia's plans than our own.

I've been told we're supposed to refer to it as the Kerry Plan.

**Easy E**

dogma wrote:
sebster wrote:
Interesting how this is being played as a way of Obama saving face and Russia resolving the issue. What we're actually seeing is the Russians offering up a solution that prevents a client state of theirs getting bombed while the Russians just sit there looking like donkey-caves.

Russia finally coming to the table to offer a solution, after doing nothing but obstructing UN process, is all about Russia saving face, and would not have happened if the US hadn't moved this far forward in its plans to bomb Syria.

I had the same thought.

Thirded.

Russia isn't trying to help Obama save face. That's for darn sure.

**Frazzled**

Only if it helps them and in this case it does. Now Obama can save face (while nothing actually happens) which is a better option then Obama feeling trapped and pushing the Big Red Button on Russia's ally, and potentially losing them a seaport.