• 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!

Will Assad Disarm?

Will Assad Disarm?

  • Yes, he'll disarm like a classy lady after a good bon mot

    Votes: 4 15.4%
  • Yes, he'll disarm, but the sneaky b******, he'll keep some on the down low

    Votes: 12 46.2%
  • No, he's faking it

    Votes: 7 26.9%
  • No, we'll bomb him first

    Votes: 3 11.5%

  • Total voters
    26

aberrant85

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2013
Messages
594
Reaction score
209
Location
SF Bay Area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
After weeks of saber-rattling by both sides, the US and Syria are on the brink of war, awaiting an uncertain vote in Congress and the release of a UN report.

But on Monday, the last best hope to avert war revealed itself after Russia and Syria responded to an off-the-cuff, hypothetical statement by Secretary of State John Kerry, seemingly ready to give up the chemical weapons that initiated the crisis.

Will a peaceful settlement pan out, or is this too good to be true?
 
After weeks of saber-rattling by both sides, the US and Syria are on the brink of war, awaiting an uncertain vote in Congress and the release of a UN report.

But on Monday, the last best hope to avert war revealed itself after Russia and Syria responded to an off-the-cuff, hypothetical statement by Secretary of State John Kerry, seemingly ready to give up the chemical weapons that initiated the crisis.

Will a peaceful settlement pan out, or is this too good to be true?

He may fain disarmament as a delay tactic, and may even turn over some of his WMD, but will not capitulate to turning over all his WMD. And Russia will help him.
 
He may fain disarmament as a delay tactic, and may even turn over some of his WMD, but will not capitulate to turning over all his WMD. And Russia will help him.

I agree.
But it allows both Obama AND Putin a rare opportunity to both save face while backing down.
Not only does it prevent the USA and Russia from becoming further at odds, but it allows us to work together and move in a positive direction.

Maybe we can now get past the Syrian distraction and focus on Iran again, except without an enraged Putin to deal with.
 
I agree.
But it allows both Obama AND Putin a rare opportunity to both save face while backing down.
Not only does it prevent the USA and Russia from becoming further at odds, but it allows us to work together and move in a positive direction.

Maybe we can now get past the Syrian distraction and focus on Iran again, except without an enraged Putin to deal with.

Not sure how it will effect the relationship with Russia. Putin has embarrassed Obama on numerous occasions, and I don't think Obama is one to forget that easily.
 
If he's smart, he'll hand over every bit of it and sign the agreement as quick as they can type one up.

He'll then go back to slaughtering his people with guns which is very old fashioned but worked really well before chemical weapons were invented.

Well, that's what I would do but I'm not....you know....president of anywhere.
 
Not sure how it will effect the relationship with Russia. Putin has embarrassed Obama on numerous occasions, and I don't think Obama is one to forget that easily.

Nor will Putin who the US has tried to embarrass repeatedly. It doesn't matter. If Syria hands over every chemical weapon they control, some rebel will use one somewhere and the US will bomb them anyway. Obama is too smug to ever truly compromise. He needs to attack something for his legacy.
 
Nor will Putin who the US has tried to embarrass repeatedly. It doesn't matter. If Syria hands over every chemical weapon they control, some rebel will use one somewhere and the US will bomb them anyway. Obama is too smug to ever truly compromise. He needs to attack something for his legacy.

I'm afraid you may be correct. He's backed himself into a corner, and if another attack occurs, he has no choice but to attack... but whom?
 
We will lob a couple of missiles over the bow, he will launch on Israel.
 
I'm afraid you may be correct. He's backed himself into a corner, and if another attack occurs, he has no choice but to attack... but whom?

It doesn't matter really. None of them are on our side. They'll blow up a bunch of airbases and declare it the most brilliant military move since D-Day.
 
He may fain disarmament as a delay tactic, and may even turn over some of his WMD, but will not capitulate to turning over all his WMD. And Russia will help him.

I was always intrigued by the notion of chemical weapons falling into the "mass destruction" category given they destroy nothing except human life. They are weapons of mass death and little destruction.

I think Obama went to Congress for the purpose of giving himself an "out". No one wants to actually "punish" Syria (at least alone).
 
I was always intrigued by the notion of chemical weapons falling into the "mass destruction" category given they destroy nothing except human life. They are weapons of mass death and little destruction.

I think Obama went to Congress for the purpose of giving himself an "out". No one wants to actually "punish" Syria (at least alone).

Poison Gas is categorized as a MWD because it is an indiscriminate killer that once launched, has an unknown total effect that cannot be 'aimed', targeted or limited in any way; i.e.: random dispersion, residual killing effects and long term genetic harm just to name a few.

A WMD does not have to cause damage to infrastructure.
 
I'm afraid you may be correct. He's backed himself into a corner, and if another attack occurs, he has no choice but to attack... but whom?

This whole episode has taught me that I know d*** about s*** when a war can hinge on the misplace words of one leader and hinge again at the glib words of another. Even past wars can only teach us so much about the future.

But if a deal is reached, it will probably have the backing of the international community, possibly the UN. If that happens and chemical weapons are used again, they might have put conditions in place that compel everyone to work together this time.

But again, something might happen that changes the whole equation.
 
Not sure how it will effect the relationship with Russia. Putin has embarrassed Obama on numerous occasions, and I don't think Obama is one to forget that easily.

One of Obama's highest goals and one of the few things he worked on as a Senator is preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons and reducing current stockpiles.
Not saying the bill was impressive, but it was a bill he sponsored: Lugar-Obama Bill Seeks to Secure Weapons | Global Solutions
The bill and his ambitions for good relations with Russia is what got me to side with him over Clinton. Of course I was unable to vote in the Democratic primary, but it got me in his corner.

Obama has been embarrassed by many, including himself. But my money is on him forgiving Putin if Putin wants to work with him. He can not achieve his number 1 goal without Putin.
 
One of Obama's highest goals and one of the few things he worked on as a Senator is preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons and reducing current stockpiles.
Not saying the bill was impressive, but it was a bill he sponsored: Lugar-Obama Bill Seeks to Secure Weapons | Global Solutions
The bill and his ambitions for good relations with Russia is what got me to side with him over Clinton. Of course I was unable to vote in the Democratic primary, but it got me in his corner.

Obama has been embarrassed by many, including himself. But my money is on him forgiving Putin if Putin wants to work with him. He can not achieve his number 1 goal without Putin.

I'm no longer sure what his goals are. And more frightening, I'm not sure he is either.
 
Nor will Putin who the US has tried to embarrass repeatedly. It doesn't matter. If Syria hands over every chemical weapon they control, some rebel will use one somewhere and the US will bomb them anyway. Obama is too smug to ever truly compromise. He needs to attack something for his legacy.

i so hope you are wrong in this assessment

i so fear you are spot on


not yet convinced the chem weapons weren't used by the rebels to force the USA into a conflict they cannot otherwise win
 
I love the Con brain trust... they were so sure about President Obama his mindset, arrogance, smugness yadda yadda yadda... and the start of WWIII but now that it has all fallen apart they just shrug and claim the President is unknowable. :doh

Another way of looking at this is ya'll were so off on your analysis the only thing you can claim is you have no clue :)

Assad would be smart to get rid of the Chemical weapons- I doubt he approved of their use. If there is another verifiable use of Gas the process of determining who ordered it and who knew about it starts again. I wouldn't be too quick to say it would be Assad's decision.

Course the folks who were so wrong about how this would turn out are quick to say other wise but I guess some folks can't be wrong fast enough.... :2razz:
 
The bigger question is will we ever realize that this isn't our problem to settle?

At least not until we have a Republican president who wants to do it.

I'm no longer sure what his goals are. And more frightening, I'm not sure he is either.

Obama's goals aren't difficult to understand. Most countries in the Middle East don't have nuclear weapons, so the deterrence that prevents massive losses to civilian populations does not exist there the same way it exists between the great powers on the U.N. Security Council. Massive losses to civilian populations will create economic disruption that are harmful to Western interests (like the Iran-Iraq War), so the use of chemical weapons has to be stopped lest their application spiral out of control and the power and economic structures of the Middle East begin to collapse.
 
Last edited:

They say having "the yawn" on your side in an argument can overcome all the logic and facts in the world, but right-wing hypocrisy in the United States is so widespread and so blatant that I don't think it commands quite the respect it used to.
 
They say having "the yawn" on your side in an argument can overcome all the logic and facts in the world, but right-wing hypocrisy in the United States is so widespread and so blatant that I don't think it commands quite the respect it used to.

And yet, you continue with the blind partisanship, because that's apparently more important than things like sovereignty and human life.
 
Yep. We're all gonna die. Russia and America are gonna bring human history to an abrupt end.

Ya know. Over Syria.
 
Back
Top Bottom