knapplc Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Not saying it's a "huge" or "enormous" win. Mostly it'll be symbolic, if I had to guess. It's still more of a win than we needed to have, since that civil war is not our business anyway, and we should not be acting as the world's police. I don't want to get hung up on the semantics of where that agreement rates on a scale of 1 to Reagan, because it'll differ for each of us, and nobody's opinion is more valid than anyone else's here. Link to comment
knapplc Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 He's been dragging his feet and has missed every deadline so far. He's turned in about 5% of what he was supposed to IIRC. He clearly just cut a deal to get us to shut up and had no intention of carrying it through. I haven't seen a 5% number. This article paints it as nearly 90% of his declared stocks - but the key word here is declared, since he may have some hidden, or be making more as we speak. BEIRUT — With its latest deadline days away, Syria is close to eliminating its stockpile of chemical weapons, monitors said Tuesday, an improbable accomplishment in the midst of civil war that is likely to diminish further the possibility of international intervention. After a slow start that prompted U.S. accusations of stalling, the government of President Bashar Assad has shipped almost 90% of its chemical weapons materials out of the country, raising hope that it can finish the job by Sunday. Syria did miss a couple of earlier deadlines, but declared that it could remove the arsenal by April 27. The shipment Tuesday means that 86.5% of its toxic weapons material has been removed, according to a statement from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the Hague-based group overseeing the destruction of the stockpile. That includes 88.7% of the 700 metric tons of the most toxic chemicals, among them mustard gas and precursor materials for the nerve agents sarin and VX. LINK Link to comment
carlfense Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Wait a second.....You have me very confused now. You do a victory dance and are trying to convince everyone that it is "an enormous" foreign policy victory that Obama got Assad to give up his WMDs so he doesn't kill his people with them. I have said that it's basically good news but I wouldn't call it a victory because he is still killing his people with chemical weapons. Then, you come back with the bolded part? If you aren't concerned about "how" he is killing his people, then why do we care that he gave up his WMDs? Wasn't the whole thing about them that we don't want him to use his WMDs anymore on his people? Thus....we DO car "how" he is killing them? Re-read the bold and re-think what I'm saying. This might help too: But does it leave the barn door open to kill 100k more? Albeit, without WMD capabilities. We can't stop the civil war. That hasn't been the goal (other than among a few hawks who are from a party other than Obama's). The real victory would be that the WMDs are off the market. http://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/63328-syria/page__view__findpost__p__1212998 Link to comment
carlfense Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 And forced a dictator to unilaterally give up his WMDs without firing a shot What dictator gave up WMDs? Because if you mean Assad that didn't really go as planned... How so? He's been dragging his feet and has missed every deadline so far. He's turned in about 5% of what he was supposed to IIRC. He clearly just cut a deal to get us to shut up and had no intention of carrying it through. Honest question: have you followed the story lately? It sure doesn't sound like it . . . Link to comment
carlfense Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Not saying it's a "huge" or "enormous" win. Mostly it'll be symbolic, if I had to guess. It's still more of a win than we needed to have, since that civil war is not our business anyway, and we should not be acting as the world's police. I don't want to get hung up on the semantics of where that agreement rates on a scale of 1 to Reagan, because it'll differ for each of us, and nobody's opinion is more valid than anyone else's here. I think that the destruction of 700 metric tons of mustard, sarin, and VX gas goes quite a bit beyond "symbolic." It's a very good thing. I can't think of any non-partisan reason why anyone would say otherwise. (Not talking about you, knapplc.) What am I missing? Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted May 2, 2014 Author Share Posted May 2, 2014 Not saying it's a "huge" or "enormous" win. Mostly it'll be symbolic, if I had to guess. It's still more of a win than we needed to have, since that civil war is not our business anyway, and we should not be acting as the world's police. I don't want to get hung up on the semantics of where that agreement rates on a scale of 1 to Reagan, because it'll differ for each of us, and nobody's opinion is more valid than anyone else's here. I think that the destruction of 700 metric tons of mustard, sarin, and VX gas goes quite a bit beyond "symbolic." It's a very good thing. I can't think of any non-partisan reason why anyone would say otherwise. (Not talking about you, knapplc.) What am I missing? That is all a very good thing. Are you saying Chlorine gas isn't a WMD? I'm still very confused on your post to me about "how" he kills his people. I don't want him killing his people in any way. Link to comment
Excel Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 I haven't been following it that closely I'll admit that, just snippits here and there. If he's really ramped up his shipments in the past three months that's a good thing. The Obama administration said 5% at the end of January http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/31/dragging-their-feet-us-scrambles-to-persuade-syria-to-honor-chemical-weapons/. Link to comment
carlfense Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 That is all a very good thing. Agreed! Are you saying Chlorine gas isn't a WMD? Not in the same way that mustard, sarin, and VX are WMDs. Chlorine can (and has been!) used to kill people but it isn't regulated as a WMD because it's not anywhere near as lethal as other gas weapons and because it has very legitimate industrial uses. Are you saying chlorine is a WMD? If so, do you think that it's OK that anyone can buy it with virtually no regulation? I'm still very confused on your post to me about "how" he kills his people. I don't want him killing his people in any way. I also don't want him killing his people in any way. I'm also quite glad that extremists in the middle east will have a more difficult time acquiring WMDs that they can use against us. Link to comment
carlfense Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 I haven't been following it that closely I'll admit that, just snippits here and there. If he's really ramped up his shipments in the past three months that's a good thing. The Obama administration said 5% at the end of January http://www.foxnews.c...emical-weapons/. Like knapplc pointed out, 90% turned over already and on pace for 100% (last I checked). The deadliest have already been destroyed aboard a US flagged cargo ship. Link to comment
Excel Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 I haven't been following it that closely I'll admit that, just snippits here and there. If he's really ramped up his shipments in the past three months that's a good thing. The Obama administration said 5% at the end of January http://www.foxnews.c...emical-weapons/. Like knapplc pointed out, 90% turned over already and on pace for 100% (last I checked). The deadliest have already been destroyed aboard a US flagged cargo ship. Aren't we still seeing stories out of Syria about chemical weapons being used? Wouldn't that seem to indicate that he hasn't destroyed/exported his stock or like knapp said the key word might be "declared" inventory...and yea I get that the reports may not be accurate or that the rebels could conceivably make their own. Not arguing, just axing. Link to comment
carlfense Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Aren't we still seeing stories out of Syria about chemical weapons being used? Wouldn't that seem to indicate that he hasn't destroyed/exported his stock or like knapp said the key word might be "declared" inventory...and yea I get that the reports may not be accurate or that the rebels could conceivably make their own. Not arguing, just axing. Reports that they used chlorine in barrel bombs. Chlorine is a common industrial chemical not banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention that Syria signed last year. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/30/world/middleeast/syria.html?partner=rss&emc=rss Link to comment
Excel Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Interesting. I don't know what to think of that. Just a messy situation all around. Syria, just like Iraq, is a country that never should have existed. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted May 2, 2014 Author Share Posted May 2, 2014 I also don't want him killing his people in any way. I'm also quite glad that extremists in the middle east will have a more difficult time acquiring WMDs that they can use against us. Until he makes more. A more accurate statement would be....."I am also quite glad that extremists in the middle east won't be able to use the WMDs that were turned over." They are quite different statements. Link to comment
carlfense Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Until he makes more. A more accurate statement would be....."I am also quite glad that extremists in the middle east won't be able to use the WMDs that were turned over." They are quite different statements. You're really reaching. Accept that it's a good thing, credit W. if necessary, and let's move on. Link to comment
carlfense Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 And if you're wondering Syria can't just decide to make more . . . Link to comment
Recommended Posts