State Department: Kerry Statement On Syria Turning Over Chemical Weapons Simply Rhetorical

[Purveyor]

Source: REUTERS

Reuters | Posted: 09/09/2013

LONDON, Sept 9 (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry was making a rhetorical comment when he said on Monday that Syria's President Bashar al-Assad would not hand over his country's chemical weapons.

Kerry told a news briefing on Monday that Assad could avoid a military strike by turning over all his chemical weapons within a week but added that Assad was not about to do that.

"Secretary Kerry was making a rhetorical argument about the impossibility and unlikelihood of Assad turning over chemical weapons he has denied he used," a U.S. State Department spokeswoman said in an emailed statement.

"His (Kerry's) point was that this brutal dictator with a history of playing fast and loose with the facts cannot be trusted to turn over chemical weapons, otherwise he would have done so long ago. That's why the world faces this moment."

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/09/state-department-kerry-syria_n_3893213.html

---

So this isn't about Assads possession of chemical weapons afterall, eh?

[Autumn]

1. So it looks like Obama isn't working behind the scenes to play

zillion dimensional chess on Putin?

[sharp_stick]

5. Shit that didn't take long

it's a fucking reflex isn't it? Kind of like

[GeorgeGist]

2. Well it's a bit embarrassing ...

Sixteen years after ratifying a treaty banning chemical weapons, the U.S. has destroyed 90 percent of its stockpile of poison gas. But the remaining 3,100 tons, stored in Colorado and Kentucky, represent one of the largest chemical arsenals in the world. Federal officials say it will take another 10 years to destroy it all.


Read more: Anniston Star - Toxic paradox America still has one of the world s biggest chemical weapons stockpiles Why?

http://annistonstar.com/view/full_story/23562017/article-Toxic-paradox--America-still-has-one-of-the-world-s-biggest-chemical-weapons-stockpiles--Why-

[Cryptoad]

7. Maybe you should

ask the GOP why they have sequestered the funds that are building the plants to destroy the weapons....

[George II]

3. "So this isn't about Assads possession of chemical weapons afterall, eh?"

Well, if you'd been paying attention to what Obama, Kerry, et. al. have been saying all along the military strike would be because he USED chemical weapons, not merely possessed them.

[jakeXT]

6. A warning to Assad that he would be punished for any further use of chemical weapons

Again and again, Kerry insisted that such a strike was intended only as a warning to Assad that he would be punished for any further use of chemical weapons and was not meant to tip the balance of the civil war to the rebels and drive Assad from office.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/05/20345685-kerry-says-failing-to-strike-nsyria-will-feed-rebel-extremism?lite

[DeltaLitProf]

16. Wouldn't removing his weapons be a pretty good punishment?

[George II]

18. Do we know that removing his weapons wasn't a back-room objective?

[karynnj]

4. They are wrong to walk back the Secretary's statement

Kerry's point seemed pretty obvious - it is about chemical weapons. I hope that Kerry restates this - or better yet that Obama does.

[John2]

8. This is not about

chemical weapons. It is a pretext to disarm the Syrian Army even more. It is still a game of bluff. Stand your ground applies here. Syria has enough Chemical weapons to do some serious damage to Israel. I wouldn't give up that capability period. Let them attack and quit wasting breath. That should be his response, from his military chief.

[cthulu2016]

9. You are misreading the story (I made the same error)

when he said on Monday that Syria's President Bashar al-Assad would not hand over his country's chemical weapons

The roll-back is on Kerry's prediction that Assad wouldn't take the offer, not on the offer itself

[another_liberal]

10. Yeah, it was just rhetorical.

Let's hear some more about Munich and Herr Hitler, Secretary Kerry.

[florida08]

11. No it wasn't

Kerry stated it has been regime change. WMD was the excuse. This puts a sticky wicket into the mix now. The position he will use them again has lost it's punch.

[florida08]

12. Link

http://www.wtsp.com/news/national/article/332189/81/Kerry-Syria-chemical-weapon-use-undeniable

[beachmom]

13. Yes, it is about chemical weapons.

I mean not everything is a conspiracy theory, folks. This thing has been going on a long time, but the Obama Administration never said we were going to get involved until Assad used chemical weapons. Here is the history of chemical weapons:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/07/world/middleeast/a-weapon-seen-as-too-horrible-even-in-war.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Gaffe or not, there might be a peaceful settlement to this problem:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/world/middleeast/kerry-says-syria-should-hand-over-all-chemical-arms.html?pagewanted=all

[beachmom]

14. Ha: take a look --

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/09/09/kerry-gaffes-the-russians-blink-ctd/

https://twitter.com/AP/status/377119888500076544

BREAKING: State Dept: US to take "hard look" at Russian proposal for Syria to turn over chemical weapons.

[JEB]

15. Well lets bomb the fuck out of Syria anyway.

Our benevolent rulers the Saudis want it. AIPAC wants it. Raytheon wants it. And it would be a slap on the face of that meanie Putin who took in our reviled whistleblower, Snowden. Iran can suck it, those wimps still don't have any nukes. Blood of innocent children is so invigorating.

[cash__whatiwant]

17. I hope they really look into this.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

19. JK GUYZ UR GETTIN BOMBED!!

...


Masters of diplomacy.

[PaulKersey]

20. SO is this about chemical weapons or regime change?

Looks like the administration is itching for a fight.

[blkmusclmachine]

21. WAR WAR WAR

Why, DC's already brought in the champagne, caviar, and fresh-cut long-stem roses for the 9/11 (ahem) vote.