William Broad and David Sanger, "Chemical Disarmament Won’t Be Easy": Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!

In a New York Times article entitled "Chemical Disarmament Won’t Be Easy" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/24/science/decades-of-disarmament.html?_r=0), William Broad and David Sanger write:

"Four miles from the White House, Army specialists are digging very cautiously into an empty lot where a brick house once stood in one of the district’s toniest neighborhoods, on the edge of the American University campus.

A giant tent covers the site, alarms ready to sound if deadly poisons should leak. After decades of work, decontamination of the old burial ground for World War I chemical munitions is expected to be finished by late next year.

Next year, meanwhile, is also the deadline for Syria to eliminate its entire chemical arsenal, from one end of the country to another, under the American-Russian plan announced 10 days ago.

The disparity between the Syrian rush and the American slog underscores the difficulties facing that plan, even if Syria cooperates."

"Won't be easy"? In fact, elimination of Assad's entire chemical arsenal sometime next year even under optimum conditions (i.e. no civil war), maximum cooperation from both Assad and Putin, and no budgetary limitations is . . . impossible.

Meanwhile, as reported by William Bigelow of Breitbart (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/09/22/Crowley-Obama-s-Foreign-Policy-Either-Brilliant-Strategy-or-Sheer-Luck) two days ago:

"With the Middle East in flames and Vladimir Putin of Russia openly mocking Barack Obama, the host of CNN’s State of the Union can only see the President's foreign policy as a success.

Introducing the subjects she would cover, Candy Crowley asked rhetorically, 'And on the eve of the UN General Assembly, a look at the legacy of Barack Obama’s foreign policy: brilliant strategy or sheer luck?'

Later, Crowley asked, 'A couple of weeks ago, the U.S. seemed on the brink of a military strike against Syria. Now in a turn of events, there’s a chance of diplomatic breakthroughs with not only Syria but Iran. Does the president deserve credit or was he in the right place at the right time?'"

"Brilliant strategy or sheer luck"? Yeah, right.

This is the same Candy Crowley who recently asked House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (see: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/09/15/Candy-Crowley-Who-Cares-if-Putin-Gained-From-Syrian-Deal):

"If it has a chance to get rid of chemical weapons, do we really care if Russian got the diplomatic edge?"

Answer to Crowley, CNN's chief Obama apologist: It has no chance.