• The forum will be going down at about 3:30PM EST to fix logout issues. We should be down less than 20 mins.

  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Russia, Iran, Turkey back new Syria constitution body but fail to agree makeup

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
39,889
Reaction score
9,865
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From Reuters

Russia, Iran, Turkey back new Syria constitution body but fail to agree makeup

GENEVA (Reuters) - Russia, Iran and Turkey, supporters of the main sides in Syria’s complex civil war, on Tuesday failed to agree on the makeup of a U.N.-sponsored Syrian Constitutional Committee but called for it to convene early next year to kick off a viable peace process.

In a joint statement read out by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov after the trio met U.N. Syria peace envoy Staffan de Mistura in Geneva, they said the new initiative should be guided “by a sense of compromise and constructive engagement”.

The foreign ministers of the three nations had hoped to seal their joint proposal on a committee - which could usher in elections - and win U.N. blessing for it.

But the statement by the three made no mention of the composition of the panel, pointing to lingering disagreement over lists of candidates submitted by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his rebel adversaries.

COMMENT:-

So far the White House has not released any details of the position that the US members of the negotiating group has taken.

Do you know why?
 

EnigmaO01

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
13,490
Reaction score
6,009
Location
Indiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Because the president thinks he has more important things on his plate like defending against numerous criminal investigations? And of course this admin is a bunch of amateur flunkies when it comes to diplomacy and national strategic interests. Even if he had good people on his staff the president wouldn't listen to them.
 

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
39,889
Reaction score
9,865
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Because the president thinks he has more important things on his plate like defending against numerous criminal investigations? And of course this admin is a bunch of amateur flunkies when it comes to diplomacy and national strategic interests. Even if he had good people on his staff the president wouldn't listen to them.

Not even close.

Please re-read the actual question asked which was


So far the White House has not released any details of the position that the US members of the negotiating group has taken. Do you know why?
(re-posted without emphasis as a test of reading comprehension)
 

EnigmaO01

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
13,490
Reaction score
6,009
Location
Indiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Not even close.

Please re-read the actual question asked which was


So far the White House has not released any details of the position that the US members of the negotiating group has taken. Do you know why?
(re-posted without emphasis as a test of reading comprehension)

O.K. I'll try again but a little more succinctly: Because they don't have a position as it's not a priority with this president right now, and he doesn't have people with good expertise. If you haven't noticed this president isn't interested in being informed and only cares about his own little orbit.
(re-posted without emphasis as a test of reading comprehension)
 

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
39,889
Reaction score
9,865
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
O.K. I'll try again but a little more succinctly: Because they don't have a position as it's not a priority with this president right now, and he doesn't have people with good expertise. If you haven't noticed this president isn't interested in being informed and only cares about his own little orbit.
(re-posted without emphasis as a test of reading comprehension)

I really hate to see people flailing, so I will tell you the real reason why the White House has not released any details of the position that the US members of the negotiating group has taken.

That reason is - the US members of the negotiating group has taken ABSOLUTELY NO POSITION, because the US government is NOT involved in the negotiations which are likely to lead to a resolution in Syria.

In fact

Syria conflict: US 'planning to withdraw troops'

the US government would like nothing better than to be able to simply pick up its marbles and go home because it realizes that the REAL "players" in Syria consider the United States of America to be irrelevant.

This, of course, is in line with the US government position in Afghanistan,

Taliban say talks focus on US withdrawal from Afghanistan

but that's a separate country.
 

EnigmaO01

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
13,490
Reaction score
6,009
Location
Indiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
There must be an echo in here. You said:

That reason is - the US members of the negotiating group has taken ABSOLUTELY NO POSITION because the US government is NOT involved in the negotiations which are likely to lead to a resolution in Syria.

And I said:
Because they don't have a position as it's not a priority with this president right now.
 

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
39,889
Reaction score
9,865
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
There must be an echo in here. You said:



And I said:

I guess that "Because I was too busy to go." is one way of deflecting from the fact that the US simply wasn't invited to the dance.
 

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
39,889
Reaction score
9,865
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
O.K. I see your point now.

Of the main parties involved in Syria (listed alphabetically):

  1. the Iranian government;
  2. the Kurds;
  3. the Russian government;
  4. the Syrian government;
  5. the Syrian "opposition";
  6. the Turkish government; and
  7. the US government;

only the Kurds and the Syrian "opposition" have declared that the United States of America is NOT irrelevant to the situation. When the vote is 2 to 5, the "5" generally wins (especially when the "2" have no clout whatsoever).

"MISHUN AKOMPLISHD"
 
Top Bottom