If #Syria turns over their chemical weapons can we still attack them?

Syria (Photo credit: Yishac – Isaac Alvarez i Brugada)

The government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on Monday said it welcomed a Russian proposal to avert U.S. military strikes by having Damascus turn over control of its chemical weapons to international monitors.

via Syria says it ‘welcomes’ Russia proposal on chemical weapons – The Washington Post.

This is a very fast moving development. It started this morning when John Kerry mentioned it but was later deflated to learn he was only being rhetorical.

Russia stepped in and said this is a good idea.

Sect. Clinton with no need to be rhetorical, issued her own statement.

Now, if the regime immediately surrendered its stockpiles to international control as was suggested by Secretary Kerry and the Russians, that would be an important step. But this cannot be another excuse for delay or obstruction. And Russia has to support the international community’s efforts sincerely, or be held to account.

Syria, for their part, seems to be okay with this. Maybe that’s because they didn’t use them?

Anyway, the rebels (according to a news source I’m not sure is completely trustworthy) are accused of planning to use their own chemical weapons. Yes, they do have chemical weapons.

Say… who are the rebels? Yeah, some of them are Al Qaeda and they are threatening to murder Christians who do not convert.

Don’t know what will happen, but I don’t know of many Americans who want to find themselves supporting Al Qaeda again (like we did in Afghanistan against the Russians).


Enhanced by Zemanta

You Might Also Like

4 Replies to “If #Syria turns over their chemical weapons can we still attack them?”

  1. http://mobile.defensenews.com/article/309090021

    So, can’t strike chemical weapons and storage sites, because it might risk release of the very same chemicals we want to get rid of…

    Can’t strike command and control sites, because the regime will lose control of their weapons, perhaps to the rebels.

    Can’t hit the generals that order an attack, because they’d be hidding under their families bed, kids in tow.

    Do we want to strike the buck private’s barracks, who followed orders?

    Good solution, let the Soviet navy base in Tartus collect the weapons. Let them destroy them. You may not trust the Russians, but trusting a smart bomb to hit an unknown target in a civilian population makes it a dumb bomb. Cruise or otherwise.

  2. Sure the United States can attack using the same logic that parents often use when Little Johnny surrenders his Daisy Red Rider air rifle and promises to never shoot his sister with it again. The problem is, much like Britain before it, the United States thinks of itself as the world’s parent.

    1. A little like placing cherry bombs randomly in little Johnny’s room, in order to make him give up the use of his BB gun. If anything, it will just piss him off more.

Leave a Reply, Please!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.