Putin negotiating a peaceful settlement
 

I am baffled how Putin was able to start negotiations with Syria about turning over their chemical weapons (which they claim they don't have) and Kerry never tried this approach. Kerry makes an off the cuff remark this morning about Assad turning over the weapons which the state department immediately tried to distance themselves from and Putin takes it and runs with it. Now the President has a life line being thrown to him by the most unlikely character - Putin - and hopefully all this sabre rattling will end.

So best case scenario - the imaginary chemical weapons are turned over to the UN for safe keeping and Assad and the rebels can keep killing each other without us having to get involved. Wow what a world we live in.

you make an assumption Putin and Syria negotiated anything. Kerry presented an opening in his comments todat that the Russian ambassador jumped on and in a matter of hours connected with Putin who turned around and connected with Syria.

Putin has not only stolen the show, he saved Obama's bacon who now does not need a vote in congress or worry about what the US people think.

We are being played by a professional (Putin).

Can you imagine any decision like this being made in our system within a matter of hours??? Don't work to hard on imagining....it is impossible.

Whew now we can put that one on the back burner. :a20:

btk

I think it is more logical to assume that this is a legitimate temporary delay and perhaps a final solution which was worked out by Putin and Obama at the G-20 Summit. Kerry was assigned to announce it, complete with the public admission that it would satisfy the US. Then, also by script, the White House danced a bit to reduce the level of excitement and give the Russians time to get started on the details. We cannot steal their thunder now and have anyone think it was really our solution.

Syria would never allow their vast chemical weapons stash to be turned over to international authorities, but they might allow monitors to "stand by" at weapon's sites. The problem with that is there are many weapons sites and the Syrians want them to be kept secret. If the Russians are able to broker an agreement for international monitoring, Putin will be seen as the strong hero and Obama the weaker of the two. Putin would be a lock for the next Nobel Peace Prize. This costs us some valuable "world points", but that's a small price. What we gain at the very least is a lengthy delay in the crisis confrontation. Maybe even a long enough delay that the Syria retaliatory strike becomes a moot point.

I'd love to know who thought of this. It's rather brilliant. Maybe a Congressman who was sweating bullets about Thursday's vote, which was just cancelled in the Senate. Not because he/she cared about the result, but because everyone would know how they voted and the Washington pecking order could be disturbed. So Congress wins. Obama also wins because he was really in a no-win situation if he lost the congressional vote.

About the only thing we end up losing in the end is the fact that we failed as a nation, and a world, to respond with action to the senseless slaughter of civilians. This time it was with chemical weapons which we had a treaty with scores of other nations never to accept. Oh well, we've broken lots of treaties before (see: Native Americans), and we've let warmongers everywhere kill millions of civilians in most brutally senseless ways. And none of that seems to matter to a lot of folks today.

Agree with much of what you write; however tonight it was announced that the "talks" had been going on behind the scenes for sometime. It was a foregone conclusion that this would be the outcome, everyone comes out smelling like a rose! Assad can go on killing his people, Putin looks good and Obama comes out of it without having to deal with this useless Congress.

But there is one more thorn in Obama's side - Putin still owes him for Townsend, and I (for one) believe he'll squeeze him for that little embarrassment!

Welcome to international politics in action.

That's a best case scenario? Let the killing go on as long as we aren't involved? Yes, it is quite a world we live in. :doh:

Does anyone really think Putin--General KGB--does or says ANYTHING without something major up his sleeve??

I don't trust him or any of his buddies to resist a chance to make us look like fools. He would love to embarrass the USA and especially our president.

The Russians look like heroes to the world.....a role the U.S. used to have.

What I have read from middle eastern sources from Syrian defectors in 2012 say Russia is the source of the nerve gas and that Iran and Russia "supervised" the use of it against the rebels.

Putin wants to broker a deal? what????

Putin and Syria come to an agreement, everyone saves face ... Win win except for those already gassed I guess.

I guess Obama should cancel his "sales speech" to the American public tonight.

I will make a bet if he does not, we will hear how he some how or other made the Russian move come to pass. In on of his interviews last night (of the very many!!!) when asked if he had spoken to Putin about Syria he mentioned the did discuss it when they met last year.

Really? One would think he might have discussed it when they met last year!!

Are you good at vizualization? CLose your eyes and imagine this:

Obama standing on a platform with a sign on it "sell Americans on Syria"....Putin and Assaad have their hands on the corners ready to yank it out from under him while trying to not laff their a$$ off:D

Just another can, of the many, kicked down the road......current politics modus operendi!!!

btk

I don't car who gets the credit, just as long as the attack from the US DOES NOT HAPPEN.

This whole episode is rich with irony and cynicism .... Assad's chemical weapons came from Russia in the first place as they have been a client state for years. Thus, when Putin magically solves the problem, he's the hero and Obama's the goat. You have to give Putin a grudging amount of credit ... he's the guy calling the shots in this instance.

It's also embarrassing to watch the President and SecState in action. I almost feel sorry for them because it's clear they don't really know what they're doing, but will no doubt claim credit if this issue is postponed a bit. In the end, weakness coupled with incompetence is very provocative and dangerous to world stability and peace.

Actually, none of this makes sense.

One of the strongest supporters of this administration has been Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post....an unabashed fan of our President. This morning, he writes in the Post...

"The Obama administration keeps undermining its own case for a punitive strike in Syria. If the president wants permission from Congress and support from the American people, he and his aides had better get their story straight.

The “messaging,” to use an unfortunate Washington term, has been confusing, contradictory and halfhearted. The nation simply will not approve going to war if its leaders cannot coherently explain what they want to do, how they plan to do it and why.

Secretary of State John Kerry threw mud into turbid waters Monday when he said the attack would be an “unbelievably small, limited kind of effort.” This punch line came at the end of a string of similar assurances: no “troops on the ground,” nothing “prolonged,” merely a “very targeted, short-term” affair.

But if the attack is designed to be so limited, why bother? Why not just send a special envoy to give Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad a stern talking-to, followed perhaps by a reassuring hug? "

Eugene Robinson: Obama fails to make the case for Syria - The Washington Post

Having said that, it will be interesting to see how this develops. Obviously this was not done in advance as some have suggested or they could have all been "heroes" and saved a lot of this confusion but to somebody's point......not bombing is a good thing and it will save whatever the response may have been.

There seem to be more questions than answers....if a strike that small as they keep describing needs to go to congress, you wonder about the strikes in Libya which did no require any approval.

Hard to have an opinion as it is confusing. I assume the President tonight will talk about that potential deal.

The attached link is a very interesting piece from a supporter of the President.

Well said - in my 64 years I never thought I would see the day the US was no longer able to secure that peace and stability you speak of. Being overshadowed by Putin is a slap in our collective face and certainly changes our position in the world.

The worlds population is too large. It really does need cutting...by half or more...it's not sustainable.

Don't trust ANY side...

the new spin is already in play.
Kerry stated this morning the only reason a diplomatic solution has popped up (Russia's proposal) is because of the courage of our president to take action against Syria...the intimidation of America stepping in has brought forth the current effort. He further stated the approval from congress for the strike is still needed to allow Obama to do what he has to if the diplomacy does not work. Kerry said we will not stand for a delaying tactic and we won't wait long.

We can all rest assured Obama's speech tonight will be the very same drum beat. And now more than ever how the American people have to trust him and have faith in the current process.

My only response is these guys are very adept at shooting an arrow into a surface, running up to the arrow and painting a bulls eye around the arrow and then coming back to tell us how effective and accurate they are.

They have yet ro realize the American people have had it with the words and arm waving, mirrors and smoke.

Putin managed to pull the world stage rug on Obama....and did so within a few hours whereas it takes weeks and months if ever to get any movement by our political leaders. In that regard Putin and others have and will retain and make good use of that advantage in the future. They have Obama and the USA hopping around on one foot!!

Let's see how long it takes the adminsttration and the media to get the subject of Syria on the back burner....which by now is pretty crowded....eh?

btk

Does anyone remember the propaganda stories from the USSR back in the early 60's does it make you think of our country today. I dont look at this as political it's just a question.

BTK - I believe you have pinned the tail on the donkey! Looking forward to the spin tonight.:22yikes:

This is confusing...Russian media has IRAN, SYRIA and RUSSIA in Moscow working this out.

Syria, Iran Discuss Russian Chemical Arms Plan in Moscow | World | RIA Novosti

AlJazeera reporting Syria accepting Russian plan, and France going to UN with a proposal to have chemical weapons over.

Syria accepts Russian weapons plan as France seeks UN resolution | Al Jazeera America

1. HOW is this done. There is a war going on in Syria, which I cannot imagine the two parties agreeing to stop warfare while inspections and turnovers of these weapons.

2. WHAT is the upside for Russiaand Syria ? Not being weakened in fight with rebels ? Stalling ? Or are we to beleive they have now become such good guys in the last days that they are doing the right thing ?

3. If this happened as a result of Kerry making a mistake, WHY did we not offer a similar plan in the past ?

A lot more questions but just chewing these. President will be interesting tonight. Does not seem feasible he can hard sell bombing with these proposals floating around !

This is exactly right ... amateur hour at the White House and Foggy Bottom.

The performance of our top "leaders" makes me cringe.

I also have to wonder ... what in the world does it take to actually make them feel embarrassed??

So, the Syrians can keep on killing their men, women, and children...just don't use gas for a while.
WOW! What a deal :mad:

The answer to your question is Yeah, pretty much.

I am not sure why we allowed over 100,000 folks including women and children to die....why we allowed the rebels to become so "polluted' over the last few years with nothing from us. Even when we said a number of months ago we would help the rebels, we still have not. THAT alone is another contradictory story....one has we did not out of fear of WHO were the rebels.....BUT, the Secy of State says the makeup of the rebels is not a problem if we bomb and help them.

Add this to the confusion....

" Russia says a deadly March sarin attack in an Aleppo suburb was carried out by Syrian rebels, not forces loyal to President Bashar Assad, and it has delivered a 100-page report laying out its evidence to the United Nations.

A statement posted on the Russian Foreign Ministry website late Wednesday said the report included detailed scientific analysis of samples that Russian technicians collected at the site of the alleged attack, Khan al Asal in northern Syria. The attack killed 26 people.

A U.N. spokesman, Farhan Haq, confirmed that Russia delivered the report in July.

The report itself was not released. But the statement drew a pointed comparison between what it said was the scientific detail of the report and the far shorter intelligence summaries that the United States, Britain and France have released to justify their assertion that the Syrian government launched chemical weapons against Damascus suburbs on Aug. 21. The longest of those summaries, by the French, ran nine pages. Each relies primarily on circumstantial evidence to make its case, and they disagree with one another on some details, including the number of people who died in the attack

Read more here: Russia gave UN 100-page report in July blaming Syrian rebels for Aleppo sarin attack | McClatchy

Are we members of the UN ?

I am also listening now to a report saying the Rebels are absolutely devastated (reporters words) by this possible agreement.

I used to be able to understand and follow foreign policy but this entire thing just boggles the mind.

Backing the rebels was never a good idea.
Let Putin take the credit - his idea is a lot better
then the "war mongering" Obama was leading up to.

Ditto. Thank you Mr. Putin.

Great post. I thought the same exact thing.

Ditto.....I agree.

What exactly is the difference between shooting someone, blowing them up or killing them chemical weapons. the main difference is that the chemical weapons ie. WMD's are weapons used by terrorists.

So Putin's great gesture inures him to the rest of the world and he is now credited with allowing Obama to save face.

For those of you old enough remember how Kennedy called Russia's bluff and had them remove the strategic missiles from Cuba. Well there still there

If anyone believe that Assad is going to remove his stockpile of WMD well there is this......short of US taking this despot out all you are witnessing right now is noise noise and more noise. McCain is always right but he was right when he said that he looked Putin right in the eyes and what he saw was KGB and Assad is his middle East equivalent

The difference is if chemicals are used, if and when we go to war again, our soldiers have to protect themselves against such an attack. If all countries agree not to use them, and abide by that agreement, it would not be a weapon of war.

Not sure if you suggesting "taking out" Assad, but if you are what then?

I am not being sarcastic or snide.....I honestly compliment our President if he, as he says he did while in Russia, orchestrate this "sting" to get control over Syria's chemical weapons.

So he has been playing us all this time? Wow I don't know which theory is more bizarre?

I find it hard to believe that all of this happened on a Monday back to work after the G20 summit. I am sure that there was a lot if back room discussions being held and what we see are the results. Russia did not want to appear to be taking orders from US. I think this was all orchestrated.

He is hardly a war monger. He has been true to he words regarding foreign policy.

Not sure what you are talking about, but will explain mine.

If the President set up this charade...he says that he and Putin talked about this, and Secy Kerry said it was not an error as reported when he mentioned Syria getting rid of weapons the other day and this is the reaction they were hoping for....well, that is a stroke of genius. If this was done...all this bombing talk...to put the pressure on by both USA and Russia to get Syria to do whatever they are going to do....I am very impressed.

That is all I am saying...that is what I have heard today...will listen to the President, but if what he and Kerry say is true, then they done good and used a lot of folks to get here, but....

The administration will undoubtedly take credit for this, but I don't believe for a minute it was their idea. As soon as Kerry made that "off the cuff" statement about Assad giving up his weapons he dismissed it as well as others in the state department.

I do believe Putin an Assad may have had this up their sleeve to embarrass the US and they are probably laughing their arses off every time they change their story or demands and we react. It's pathetic.

it is nothing more than the strong (Putin) playing the weak (Obama/Kerry) to his advantage.

In my opinion if it were trully the manifestation of an arrangement it would not be swinging as violently as it has in the last 24 hours......only if one side is playing (Putin) and the other side scrambling (Obama).

The mission has been accomplished the new can (Syria) has been kicked down the road with all the rest of the major issues of the day.

btk

Could be....I agree with you most times BTK, but hope you are wrong on this. Now quite honestly do not know what to think. I spent a good amount of time today reading overseas press, and they seem to be treating us as a minor player, but while folks were deriding Kerry yesterday (I might add according to good reports that derision was even inside the WH), today at the hearing, he clearly said it was done on purpose...which means the reporter who asked him the question (I saw this conference) had to be in on it, but he very very clearly today took credit for doing it on purpose.

The President, to my knowledge, never mentioned in all this time any consideration for Syria turning over the weapons..never mentioned, to my knowledge, the Putin discussions, and when he mentioned Putin, he dismissed any help. Today he kept saying, and last eve how he and Putin had discussed this very plan. He now says he had to threaten to get this done.

Would be difficult for me to trust anything if that stuff was made up, but it is puzzling.

Bottom line is, to your point, they move this to the back.....happy if no bombs but will become even more cynical if every one of the players is not being forthcoming.

A question is.....ASSUME THIS WORKS. WHAT THEN IS THE STRATEGY GOING FORWARD ?