Skip to comments.Ultimately, We Wonít Even Take Assadís Cheerios Spoon
Posted on 09/10/2013 9:38:51 AM PDT by smoothsailing
September 10, 2013
Greg Corombos and I just taped our daily Three Martini Lunch podcast. Our format is to select one good, one bad, and one crazy news story each day. Today, the proposed deal to avoid military action in Syria qualifies as all three.
The development is good if you opposed the United States beginning a war in Syria and you think that Syrian dictator Bashar Assad is unlikely to use his chemical weapons in the near future or at least as long as there are international inspectors in his country. (Then again, United Nations inspectors were in Syria when the regime used chemical weapons September 21.) If you thought President Obama didnt really want to fight this war or that we would only launch an unbelievably small effort, largely symbolic, that would only leave the U.S. looking weaker this course appears to avoid that bad scenario.
The development is bad if you believe that a dictator must be punished for using chemical weapons. Assads only punishment will be giving up his remaining stockpiles presuming, of course, that the U.N. can find, track, and inventory those stockpiles in a country that is gripped by civil war. With the Wests disinterest in intervention now so obvious to the world, Assads odds of remaining in power are improving. Thats bad news for the Syrian rebels and while they have many in their ranks who are no friend to America, the non-radical elements must feel betrayed by the United States now. Once again, the United States appears to be an unreliable ally, and a distinctly unmenacing enemy.
Its bad for the Syrian people, because Assad now can fight with impunity, as long as he doesnt use chemical weapons.
The development is crazy, because it appears that John Kerry just gave Assad and his friends the Russians an escape hatch by speaking off the cuff. This is why John Kerry would have made a bad president and is a bad Secretary of State his inclination to say whatever he thinks will be most persuasive to whoever in front of him at that moment. When Kerry needs to make an impassioned case for punishing Assad, he can do so with great passion and emotion, and he compares Assad to Hitler. When Kerry needs to reassure a nervous ally, he emphasizes that the attack will be unbelievably small. When he thinks he needs to appear reasonable and not too eager for war, he tosses out a scenario that puts the entire U.S. war effort on hold.
The Russians now appear to be altering the plan, as long as its never written down with any specific requirements or consequences spelled out:
Russia is not keen at this stage for a binding U.N. Security Council resolution that would provide a framework to control Syrias chemical weapons stocks, Frances foreign minister said after talks with his Russian counterpart on Tuesday.
As I understood, the Russians at this stage were not necessarily enthusiastic, and Im using euphemism, to put all that into the framework of a U.N. binding resolution, Laurent Fabius told French lawmakers after a telephone conversation with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
So if theres no binding resolution well, then, its not really a resolution, now is it?
Better Assad/Putin than Al Qaeda/Muslim Brotherhood.
I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it further.
That's far less scary than hussein's more flexiblity.
Assad is such a bad ass, he eats his Cheerios with a fork.