Follow by Email

Saturday, September 14, 2013

New York Times, "U.S. and Russia Reach Deal to Secure Syria’s Chemical Arms": An Agreement Not to Agree

Let's have a quick look together at the beginning of a New York Times article entitled "U.S. and Russia Reach Deal to Secure Syria’s Chemical Arms" ( by Michael Gordon:

  • "The United States and Russia have reached an agreement that calls for Syria’s arsenal of chemical weapons to be removed or destroyed by the middle of 2014, Secretary of State John Kerry said on Saturday." Oh really? Bashar al-Assad is going to give up his chemical weapons arsenal, which, together with his air force, props up his murderous regime? Why not call for implementation by the middle of 2024? In any event, it's not going to happen.

  • "Under a 'framework' agreement, international inspectors must be on the ground in Syria by November, Mr. Kerry said, speaking at a news conference with the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey V. Lavrov."  Perhaps you know of volunteers with a knowledge of chemical weapons, who are willing to fly into Syria and be shot at by both government and rebel forces? Count me out, Chemo-sabe!

  • "An immediate test of the viability of the accord will come within a week when the Syrian government is to provide a “comprehensive listing” of its chemical stockpile." And we can all trust Assad, who has been scattering his chemical weapons arsenal around Syria over the past week, to keep his word.

  • "'The real final responsibility here is Syrian,' a senior administration official said of the deal." What could be better? Final responsibility belongs to Assad! Or in other words, the fox will be responsible for guarding the hen house.

  • "Security will be a major worry for the inspectors who are tasked with implementing the agreement; no precedent exists for inspection, removal and destruction of a large chemical weapons stockpile during a raging civil war." A "major worry" for the inspectors? No sh*t, Sherlock.

  • "'This is very, very difficult, very, very difficult,' an American official said of the agreement. 'But it is doable.'" What is the name of this anonymous American official, who has just volunteered to be the first chemical weapons inspector on the ground in Syria?

  • "If Mr. Assad fails to comply with the agreement, the issue will be referred to the United Nations Security Council. Mr. Kerry said that any violations would then be taken up under Chapter 7 of the United Nations Charter, which authorizes punitive action." This is one of those rare instances where the next sentence of the article provides the response: "But Mr. Lavrov made clear that Russia, which wields a veto in the Security Council, had not withdrawn its objections to the use of force."

Do Obama and Kerry truly believe they can sell this steaming horse apple to the American public? Stay tuned . . .

1 comment:

  1. "Do Obama and Kerry truly believe they can sell this steaming horse apple to the American public?"
    The short answer is, no. But when you have the entire main stream media behind your agenda, no matter what it is, it's certainly worth trying.

    That's why this week’s covers of Time Magazine tells us everything we need to know about the pitiful state of affairs.
    Unfortunately, if you live in the US you'll be told that there are more pressing issues than Syria's chemical weapons...for example, paying college athletes.