Syria: Yes, President Obama, You Were Duped by Assad, Khamenei and Putin

You will recall how during his State of the Union address several weeks ago, Obama claimed that he had achieved a remarkable foreign policy success involving the destruction of this arsenal:

"American diplomacy, backed by the threat of force, is why Syria’s chemical weapons are being eliminated, and we will continue to work with the international community to usher in the future the Syrian people deserve – a future free of dictatorship, terror and fear."

Obama, of course, was lying. As reported by Reuters in an article entitled "U.S. accuses Syria of stalling on chemical arms handover" by Lesley Wroughton and Matt Spetalnick(http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/30/us-syria-crisis-chemical-idUSBREA0S19720140130):

"The United States on Thursday accused Syria of dragging its feet on giving up its chemical arms, putting at risk a deal to remove such weapons of mass destruction from the country as it splits apart in a chaotic civil war.

President Barack Obama this week touted the chemical weapons agreement as one of the few U.S. diplomatic achievements on Syria, but the State Department said just 4 percent of Syria's deadliest chemical agents has been shipped out of the country for destruction at sea.

The United States has few good choices to force President Bashar al-Assad to comply."

In fact, Assad (John Kerry's "dear friend") has been moving his chemical weapons stockpiles to "Alawite enclaves on the western coast of Syria" (see: http://www.jpost.com/Home/Assad-armed-to-the-teeth-stockpiling-weapons-of-mass-destruction-340081).

Is Assad prepared to negotiate with the rebels? No way. "Negotiations" in Geneva are hopelessly deadlocked, and as reported by CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/syria-peace-talks-in-geneva-end-in-failure/):

"In the meantime, a spike in fighting between the Syrian government and opposition forces has sent the country's death toll soaring.

Opposition activists say the rate of killing has increased in the three weeks since talks began -- averaging a record of more than 230 a day -- as both sides have sought to shore up their bargaining positions by gaining territory."

President Obama? It's taken him long enough, but he is beginning to wise up to the fact that he was duped. As now reported by The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/15/world/middleeast/kerry-says-obama-wants-new-options-for-syria-strife.html?hp&_r=1):

"Secretary of State John Kerry said on Friday that President Obama had asked aides to develop new policy options to deal with the deteriorating situation in Syria.

. . . .

Mr. Kerry’s comments reflect increased concern within the American government and nongovernmental organizations over the escalating humanitarian crisis in Syria. They also reflect frustration that President Bashar al-Assad of Syria appears to have little interest in negotiating the establishment of a transitional government in which he would not play a role."

A humanitarian crisis? Oh, I suppose the Times is referring to the fact that people are dying of hunger and attempting to live off leaves and grass in Homs (see: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/10/world/middleeast/in-homs-syria-still-no-relief-from-a-siege.html?action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&region=Footer&module=TopNews&pgtype=article).

Well, take your time in making that decision, Mr. President. The catastrophe in Syria has already waited several years for for your compassionate intervention, e.g., enforcement of a no-fly zone, and it can certainly wait a little longer.