Image 01 Image 03

Syria endgame emerging: Turn over chemical weapons

Syria endgame emerging: Turn over chemical weapons

The threat of possible military action, as attenuated as Congressional authorization now seems, has led to what may be the endgame.

John Kerry floated the idea of Syria turning over its chemical weapons or else, the Russians seized on the idea, and Syria in principle has accepted it:

It may very well be that Assad merely is buying time, and never will turn over anything to anyone, particularly if there is some other condition attached, such as a war crimes tribunal which puts Assad and his senior military at risk.

But this type of deal gets Obama and Assad out of a jam.

Which is why it has a chance of being the endgame as to Assad’s use of chemical weapons.

Updates: The White House is bumbling over whether it was a U.S. “offer” or not, but it still is the most likely solution, in my estimation, because the other choice may be Obama acting without Congressional authorization:

With the Cloture vote taking place Wednesday, and the prospects even in the Senate looking bleak, this may be Obama’s only way out.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



Meantime, in Maaloula this: convert or die.

It wold be nice if Obama would tell his Sunni terrorist pals to go easy on Christians.

And who exactly would control them? Where would they physically reside? So the solutions are emerging or in other words, making it up as they go. Scary.

    Juba Doobai! in reply to mikulin. | September 9, 2013 at 11:57 am

    Making it up as he goes along has always been Obama’s modus operandi.

    punfundit in reply to mikulin. | September 9, 2013 at 1:02 pm

    What, give the chemical weapons to the UN? Or just give them to Russia?

    So all of a sudden these weapons end up in “international” hands. Fine. What happens when Syria wants to take them back? Will the Syrians still have physical custody and these “international hands” are just observers? Or will the “international” custodians actually have physical possession? How will these weapons be guarded? Will the guards be armed? Who will be in command of these “international” armed guards?

    And from Syria’s perspective, why have them if you can’t threaten to use them?

    GrumpyOne in reply to mikulin. | September 9, 2013 at 4:25 pm

    Expect the administration to wiggle its way out of what “it proposed.”

    I don’t think that this will go anywhere even though it could be a viable solution. Just the fact that it is viable is reason enough for the administration to reject it.

    Losers… All of ’em!

Now we are getting into an area that fits the Obama character: bribery. BO should offer Assad a bribe.

Calculate the cost of the attack, offer that in exchange for the weapons, with the proviso that the funds will be spent on Syria’s infrastructure, as verified by American accounting practices. The Russians can take control of the weapons, as far as I am concerned, so long as they tell us where they are and what happens to them.

Phillep Harding | September 9, 2013 at 11:59 am

First assumption, he has control of all of them. Second assumption, he was the one to use them.

This sounds soooo much like Iraq.

If you look at the history of this administration they have lied through their teeth about just about everything. Why would any intelligent person believe anything they say no matter what potential phony evidence they produce? This poison gas story just does not pass the smell test.

And we’re going to trust that they turn them ALL over? Yeah right, like that is going to happen.

Would be funny as hell if they held a press conference to turn them over and they uncovered a bunch of barrels stamped ‘Made in Iraq’.

No, no, no, Professor.

This is all just a huge mistake. It’s all about the Cheerios.


I can see an ultimate positive result. I agree with most of this article about why support is so low for this adventure:

The last part, about ownership of that “red line” is particularly on point.

Our government is designed to inhibit the damage done by individuals in high public office. If America puts a stop to Obama’s human mistake, the whole world can see that we, of all people, can impose the rule of, not only law, but also better judgment, on our rulers. This is something new under the sun.

What could possibly speak better for us that we should refrain from going over a cliff because our President said something his better advisors immediately regretted?

The New Testament has a story that is highly relevant. King Herod was at a party and pleased by the dancing done by his stepdaughter, Salome. In a fit of magnanimity, he offered her gift, and the conversation finally went to “anything she wanted.” She didn’t know how to reply (she was a young teen) so she asked her mother (Heroditas) who told her to ask for the head of John the Baptist.

Which is how John the Baptist, a man Herod admired, got killed.

The problem of people in high public office making promises they should not keep, and then trying to fulfill them against everybody’s better judgment, is an old one.

We can show that we have a better government than the one imposed by the Romans on the Jews a couple of centuries ago.

If this happens, do you think the media lapdogs will be so excited they’ll be peeing themselves? “Obama obviously dominated Putin, forcing him to pressure Assad.”

Who’ll be the first to suggest “another Nobel Prize”?

Such a farce!

What endgame? Assad’s still in charge. And, if he has to “turn something over,” what about all the saudi rebels in syria, who are armed to their teeth? And, who have used Sarin Gas to get this story into the news for more than a month, now.

Merkel is up for re-election. On September 22nd, you will learn if she keeps her seat. Or if she tumbles out of it.

It’s like gas farts all over the place.

Unverifiable without a significant foreign military footprint on the ground in Syria. Dumbest idea yet.

    Observer in reply to Merlin. | September 9, 2013 at 4:01 pm

    The fact that it’s unverifiable is probably what appeals to both sides about this “solution.”

    Putin gets to claim victory by merely placing a phone call to Assad and telling him, “hey, if anybody asks, we’ve taken control of all your chemical weapons.” Assad laughs and says thanks. Putin gets to boast to his allies that he protected Syria from the big bad U.S.

    Meanwhile, Barry gets to save face, and claim that he was able to solve the crisis without military action. His sycophants in the media gasp and swoon and tell the LIV’s what a great triumph this was for the lightbringer; he solved the problem using international diplomacy, not missiles. He’s a genius, just like they always said!

    Meanwhile, nothing has changed in Syria.

[…] The U.S. cannot guarantee that our military intervention would result in a just peace or that there would be mercy in peace.  On the contrary, the revised text of the use of force resolution adopted by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and to be debated by the full Senate this week, by referencing the provision of lethal aid to the Syrian opposition, virtually guarantees the opposite of a peaceful outcome. […]

“But this type of deal gets Obama and Assad out of a jam.”

Oh, it’s even better than that. If you could look into his teleprompter, you’d see a five-dimensional chessboard, with attacks and bluffs calculated 100 moves into the future, before a magical background of receding seas and rising stars. Einstein’s failure at a unified theory? Obama hadn’t been born yet.

1) Millions of leftover Facebook postings can be easily recycled, healing the environment (see point #2) and helping low-information voters to celebrate his latest chess-match victory while simultaneously taking a jab at those racist, birther Republicans.

2) The resolution of this problem will help to counteract global warming and the realization of the prophecy that “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow” will nevertheless leave teabaggers inundated in their low-lying harbors of racism. Chess move, again.

3) And in shades of Bobby Fischer in Reykjavik, it will be revealed that all along “Smart Power” actually referred to “Smart Samantha Power,” and as the seas fall, her diplomatic star will rise, shining over a new era of Peace in our time.

LHC (who would like to inform Demi and Ashton that he’s ready to take “the Pledge.” Luke sheeple-ishly admits he’s been living in a simple three-dimensional world of checkers)

    That, madam, is excellent: “…a five-dimensional chessboard, with attacks and bluffs calculated 100 moves into the future…”

    Which is how politics works. However, while the world is playing chess, The Won is barely playing tiddlywinks.

John Kerry, Sec. of State today in London and Chief of Staff Denis McDonough on all yesterdays Sunday morning political talk shows, putting forth U.S./Obama’s position with Syrian intervention simultaneously, do Obama proud while they convey two very different types and opposite messages, one for the American public and one for the international community. Is it no wonder Obama holds the title of “Leader from Behind” . It will be interesting to listen tonight as he tries to spin these two “lines” together no less than 6 times as he is confronted by MSM and Cable news anchors.

This is a no-win for the US. Let’s say Assad turns over 100% of his weapons to the Russions. The Russians look good as they ended this crisis w/o saber-rattling and makes the US looks bad because we were going to use force.

Now let’s say he doesn’t turn over jack. Obama will have to use force (because the he’s painted himself into a corner), unless he continues to waffle and mince words because he’s useless.

Either way, the US looks bad because we’re either war mongers or big talkers w/o the desire to back up our words.

Final result: American credibility has been further reduced in the world, which Obama would consider a victory for himself.

I, for one, feel quite comfortable that the Russians will assume custody and control of these weapons and assure that they are always used to advance the interests of Vladimir Putin.

This will provide an opportunity to determine what chemical was used, the method for delivery, the source of the chemical, and the actors who used it. So many questions and only circumstantial evidence to justify a declaration of war.

Obama faces another hurdle: Russian leadership.

    Another Voice in reply to n.n. | September 9, 2013 at 4:16 pm

    And who “currently” is carrying weight and equal standing with the U.N. on Syria as a secondary outsider?

So, Oblabla will be cancelling the Tuesday night speech?

(Science Nerd Alert)

Load of horseshit. Oh, they may allow ‘international teams’ to monitor or take possession of existing sarin stockpiles. We all know the efficacy of UN international teams, you know, where UN ‘Peacekeepers’ get sent in but instead rape the locals (Africa)? This is like sending a team to my house to monitor or take possession of my secret BBQ sauce, as if I couldn’t replace that batch with another in about ten minutes.

Sarin gas is very easy to make. There are only four basic ingredients, and you need only mix them in the correct amounts in the correct order. Making lasagna is more complicated.

I just now looked up the four ingredients on Google, wondering if they’ve been circumscribed since 9/11. I found multiple sellers for all four, no special process, like ordering books from Amazon:

Sodium fluoride 50 cents / lb
Dimethyl methylphosphonate $100 / kilo
Phosphorus dichloride 65 cents / kilo
Isopropyl alcohol $1 / kilo

Every outlet had minimums of 1 kilo, but could handle orders in the metric tons. I could obtain the ingredients and make sarin gas in a couple days with a credit card and a receiving address.

But surely Homeland Security would detect such orders in the US and intervene! I am not convinced of that. Besides, we’re talking Syria, not the US. And don’t call me Shirley.

Here’s an article identifying one source of Syria’s sodium fluoride – the United Kingdom – though it cannot be proved it was used for sarin gas:

OF COURSE Assad and the Russians would love this plan. It’s unenforceable and easily defeated. Assad can cook up batches of sarin quicker than Walt & Jessie can cook up crystal meth. That’s why this plan originates with the Russians. The Russians proposed it, and Kerry seized on it, not the other way around. Putin plays Obama/Kerry like BB King plays a guitar.

Obama/Kerry are focused only on getting out of a self-induced political jam and couldn’t care less about Syrian sarin gas itself. They either know this plan is unworkable or they do not. Either one – duplicity or ignorance – is unforgivable.

    stevewhitemd in reply to Henry Hawkins. | September 9, 2013 at 3:46 pm

    This is a brilliant counter by Vlad. A week? It’ll take a week just to get the U.N. inspectors to agree on airplane flights. It’s a week just to get visas. It’ll be three months to get the inspectors to ‘inspect’ everything and six months minimum before any of the weapons, assuming any are found, to be shipped out or destroyed.

    Assad can do a few easy ‘gives’. Oh, chemical weapons? Here, take this twenty year old mustard gas. That’s all we have. Prove us wrong.

    Assad can play the same game Saddam played with hiding the weapons; if not the weapons themselves then at least the machinery and facilities to make the weapons. Oh that? That’s a pesticide factory for our farmers. Prove us wrong.

    All those ingredients? Those are for pesticides. Lots of pests in Syria, you know. Prove us wrong.

    Brilliant. Kerry is a fool.

This acceptance by Syria underlines Obama’s utter weakness and sheer idiocy, as well as the disconnect between his words and actions. Wasn’t Obama the one who said he was willing to sit down and talk to anybody? Wasn’t he better than the Cowboy because he would? Why didn’t he sit down and talk to Assad about the chemical strike? He, not his SOS, was the one who could turn gobar into sugar just by talking. He was the one who had credibility and legitimacy and every manner of good thing because he’s black, doncherknow, and he’s got a Muslim name and ancestry. Did he ever personally call Assad? Did he do as previous American presidents have done and reach out to the opposite side? George Bush, the Cowboy, did that.

Now, what we have is a dithering weakling whose dither and weakness were bared for the entire world to see and who will have to accept a solution, maybe proffered by Lurch but which only Putin can bring about by applying leverage on his boy Assad. Who comes out looking like Da Man? It’s not Obama.

Who is diminished? Obama. The United States.

“Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.” – Marie Von Ebner-Eschenbach.

At the risk of getting flamed as a troll, I am heartened by this development. I was initially against our involvement in Syria, but as more information started leaking out, I reluctantly came around to support. The only compelling American interest I can see in this whole mess is making sure that the chemical weapons were at least secured and at best destroyed.

To argue over who benefits politically if this deal is brokered seems to me to be simply counting coupe.

The end result is that the Syrians can get back to happily slaughtering each other, and the rest of the world can go back to happily ignoring them.

Yes, chemical weapons are easy to make, but if this deal is brokered and a future attack occurs, Russia won’t have a leg to stand on in further objections to an international use of force to put an end to this entire sorry mess.

Our interests in this are thwarting Islomafacists, the reason for removing Assad is related to his support for these groups. Russia has an interest in keeping their client state in power, but to think that they would allow an Islamic state to form in the vacuum is to forget their experiences in Chechnia, which I am certain Putin has not.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Aonghus. | September 9, 2013 at 4:03 pm

    Who has the greater influence over Syria, Russia or Iran, and do we suppose Iran would mind an Islamic theocracy in Syria?

    Merlin in reply to Aonghus. | September 9, 2013 at 4:42 pm

    Unless verification occurs at the point of a gun it isn’t likely to occur at all and Assad would be a fool to allow such a thing. Without reliable verification you have nothing more than a shell game which puts us no further along three years from now than where we stand today. Regime change in Syria is Obama’s true endgame. The chemical weapons accusations are just the latest failed mechanism.

Apparently, this is all academic:

US official to ‘Post’: Russia proposal to put Syria chemical arms under global control will go ignored

Russia proposes Syria put chemical arms under int’l control to avoid US strike; Damascus “welcomes” proposal, but stops short of saying Assad accepts it; US official: “There’s no mechanism to implement proposal.”

Where the chemical weapons go doesn’t matter, we just need to try and retrieve our wonderful president from the punchbowl. LOL!!

As Rush would say, “wizards of smart”.

Hmmm. Two members of the State Dept were just seen at South Of The Border in SC buying up trunkloads of bottle rockets and Roman candles. Ooooooooo, Assad is gonna pay now!

    Juba Doobai! in reply to Henry Hawkins. | September 9, 2013 at 10:29 pm

    The big question is, are they going to fire the bottle rockets from their butts? Are they going to stick the Roman candles in their butts, light them, and sing a verse of the Star Spangled Banner?

Remember in the 90s when the UN set up a haven for Balkan refugees? The bad guys came with GUNS and the UN said that they could take anyone they wanted. The males were taken into the forest and killed and the UN felt really, really bad.