FWIS3

geonuc wrote:

Swift wrote:

Parrothead wrote:Where is wikileaks now, it would be interesting to have diplomatic cables between Russia, Iran and Syria, suddenly pop up in the press, especially if it turns out Assad's regime is behind the use of chemical weapons.

wikileaks isn't interested in justice, or fair reporting, or even The Truth. They are interested in embarrassing the Western nations, particularly the US and the UK. They could care less how many innocent Syrians are killed by the Syrian government. Now, if they show the US somehow killed them, that would get their attention.

IMO

I hadn't considered that. Whatever one may think of Wikileaks an Assange, I was under the impression that there wasn't a bias against western powers. That would be the first time in the history of the universe were that to be so, but it shows my ignorance of the organization (wikileaks, that is).

Not that I'm a wikileaks expert, but I don't recall them leaking anything about, for example, Russia or China or any of the Middle East countries. Their entire focus seems have been on Western powers and in a few cases, Western companies.

Part of that might be fear. For all his bellyaching, Assange at worst is going to get a fair trail for his sexual crimes (I don't recall if it was technically rape). Manning is the one that is doing the time.

I'm feel pretty confident that if Ivan Manning had leaked similar documents from the Russian government to Assange, that neither Manning nor Assange would currently be breathing.

Swift wrote:

geonuc wrote:

Swift wrote:

Parrothead wrote:Where is wikileaks now, it would be interesting to have diplomatic cables between Russia, Iran and Syria, suddenly pop up in the press, especially if it turns out Assad's regime is behind the use of chemical weapons.

wikileaks isn't interested in justice, or fair reporting, or even The Truth. They are interested in embarrassing the Western nations, particularly the US and the UK. They could care less how many innocent Syrians are killed by the Syrian government. Now, if they show the US somehow killed them, that would get their attention.

IMO

I hadn't considered that. Whatever one may think of Wikileaks an Assange, I was under the impression that there wasn't a bias against western powers. That would be the first time in the history of the universe were that to be so, but it shows my ignorance of the organization (wikileaks, that is).

Not that I'm a wikileaks expert, but I don't recall them leaking anything about, for example, Russia or China or any of the Middle East countries. Their entire focus seems have been on Western powers and in a few cases, Western companies.

Part of that might be fear. For all his bellyaching, Assange at worst is going to get a fair trail for his sexual crimes (I don't recall if it was technically rape). Manning is the one that is doing the time.

I'm feel pretty confident that if Ivan Manning had leaked similar documents from the Russian government to Assange, that neither Manning nor Assange would currently be breathing.

There is a tendency to revile the devil one knows especially in those countries where jack booted thugs do not routinely break down your door and whisk you away. There seems to be a small percentage of people in western countries who take a special delight in telling the world how terrible their own country is.

Unfortunately, they often are associated with liberal or progressive ways of thinking thereby giving right minded liberals and progressives a bad name.

So things seem to be moving along. Syria proposing to hand over it's stockpile of chemical weapons to UN inspectors for destruction. Proposal is from Syria via Russia, so skepticism is warranted. Obama to take to the airwaves this evening.

From Radio Free Europe website: http://www.rferl.org/content/syria-chemical-russia-practical/25101800.html

BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24038120

Mr Kerry said that if the UN were used as the vehicle for pursuing the Russian plan, it must not become a debating society.

But French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said he had spoken on Tuesday to Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov, who told him that Moscow was not in favour of a binding resolution.

So it's moving, but not.

Apparently it's gaining traction:

Syria crisis: Russia 'hands chemical arms plan to US'

Good thing to see the Russkies trying to control their rabid dog.

Well I always like happy endings...

Oh, there won't be a happy ending.

While I support Putin's suggestion, make no mistake about this; if Assad's still in control when the dust settles, the Russians will *happily* take his money and re-arm him.

Very good point.

Yosh wrote:Oh, there won't be a happy ending.

While I support Putin's suggestion, make no mistake about this; if Assad's still in control when the dust settles, the Russians will *happily* take his money and re-arm him.

Yes, but they will re-arm him with nice conventional weapons. That way he can kill thousands of people without international sanctions occurring. And then all the nice people can sleep at night knowing they did something by gawd. <insert sarcasm emoticon>

I just couldn't get past the hypocracy of Putin's op-ed in the NYT. He's calling to let the UN Sec. Council do it's job of preserving law and order. Yet, it's Russia and China that block any meaningful and proposals with teeth, sanctions, etc., get passed by the SC. I understand, they want to protect their interests in Syria, especially the base at Tartus. If the US hadn't threatened the missle strikes, would they even be talking. Suddenly Syria admits to having chemical weapons, they said they didn't have. Putin still saying that it was rebels that fired the weapons. If so, shouldn't he be concerned about the security Assad's regime had over stockpiles? As pointed out on a talk show last night, who actually wrote the op-ed, seeing as Putin doesn't speak english.

I'll give the piece some credit, painting Obama to be like Dubya, building coalitions (or trying to) outside the UN. It hit many "talking points", questioning the term "american exceptionalism". It is meant to cause more questioning amongst the american public, but it could also turn against Russia. They propose to destroy the chemical weapons, but there were reports of them backing away from SC resolutions with teeth when it comes to verification.

He calls for diplomacy and dialogue, not use of force. Uhm, like the diplomacy and dialogue that is used with opposition to his rule in Russia. The diplomacy and dialogue Russia uses with it's neighbouring states, when they want to improve ties with Europe/The West. Don't join the EU, see we'll slap border slowdowns on all your goods, as they enter our territory or just ban them, however if you join our economic partnership, all this will go away. Trust us, we won't unilaterally change the terms of the agreement at a later date, to our advantage.

ETA: An analysis of Putin's op-ed:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24063187

Oh yeah, he mentions the growing friendship between him and Obama, I guess he just ignores the Snowden matter.

Pooty just wanted to bask in the light of his diplomatic coup

I think the Russkie foreign minister is enjoying this, too.

US and Russia agree to plan on Syria's chemical weapons. Next, can Russia pressure Assad to comply?

http://www.rferl.org/content/syria-us-russia-talks/25104730.html

Kerry said the two sides have agreed that if Damascus fails to comply, they will seek a UN Security Council resolution that could authorize military action. He said that the framework agreed on September 14 "can provide greater protection and security to the world."

Kerry added that Damascus must hand over all its chemical weapons. ... The agreement stipulates that the arms inspectors must be on the ground no later than November. Kerry said their goal is to complete the destruction or removal of the Syrian chemical weapons stockpile by mid-2014. ...

I wouldn't be surprised if there are loopholes that will be exploited, by Russia and Syria, at a later date. Call it a hunch.

Assad is now saying that he will hand over his chemical weapons if the US stops arming the rebels. Like we didn't see that coming.

AAAAAAAAAND we're back to square one.

Quelle surprise.

Apparently, they've reached an agreement no mention of Assad's condition.

Lavrov comments that agreement makes no mention of UN Chapter VII resolution.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24113553

But Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said any calls for swift UN action against Mr Assad showed a "lack of understanding" of the chemical weapons deal reached with Syria.

Mr Lavrov said: "Yes, our American colleagues would very much like there to be a Chapter VII resolution. But the final declaration, the final document that we approved and which has the guiding principles for how we proceed and for our mutual obligations, makes no mention of it."

Sigma_Orionis wrote:Apparently, they've reached an agreement no mention of Assad's condition.

Assad will fall into line.... He want Russia's money and backing in the civil war he's fighting.....

Uhm, pot, kettle, black:

Lavrov makes accusations against US over Syria UN Resolution:

http://www.rferl.org/content/russia-lavrov-us-syria-/25113907.html

Russia warns Kyiv about signing deals with the EU:

http://www.rferl.org/content/ukraine-russia-eu-deals-customs-union-/25113593.html

Isn't diplomacy a wonderful thing!

To come back to Syria, this comic is amazingly effective at showing people what's going on.

Geez I'm depressed now.

I gave a couple of months ago to the UN High Commission on Refugees for their emergency Syrian fund. I really feel sorry for countries like Jordon, that are struggling under the flow of refugees.

Rommie wrote:To come back to Syria, this comic is amazingly effective at showing people what's going on.

Geez I'm depressed now.

That is depressing. The whole area is depressing.

I'm waiting for Jordan to turn into another failed country where Islamists take power.