Massive use of chemical weapons in Syria, 1,429 killed including 426 children

[Admiral Yi]

What threats has Syria made?

Attack Israel, attack Jordan, attack Turkey.  Their Iranian sponsor has threatened terrorist attacks.

[DGuller]

Syrians don't get bombed.  I'd say that's face saving.

Backing down from a threat is the very definition of losing face.

I disagree strongly.  The point of threats is to get something, not to give an early warning to what you're going to do.  Back down from a threat and getting nothing in return is losing face;  your bluff has been called.  Backing down from a threat as part of a negotiation is a sign of success.

[Eddie Teach]

What threats has Syria made?

Attack Israel, attack Jordan, attack Turkey.  Their Iranian sponsor has threatened terrorist attacks.

Assad doesn't even control Syria completely, he's in no position to start foreign adventures.

[Admiral Yi]

I disagree strongly.  The point of threats is to get something, not to give an early warning to what you're going to do.  Back down from a threat and getting nothing in return is losing face;  your bluff has been called.  Backing down from a threat as part of a negotiation is a sign of success.

Maybe I'm not being clear.  Syria loses face, not the US.  The US now has more face than we know what to do with.

[DGuller]

I disagree strongly.  The point of threats is to get something, not to give an early warning to what you're going to do.  Back down from a threat and getting nothing in return is losing face;  your bluff has been called.  Backing down from a threat as part of a negotiation is a sign of success.

Maybe I'm not being clear.  Syria loses face, not the US.  The US now has more face than we know what to do with.

Oh, I see.  Yes, we've got us some good face.

[Ed Anger]

Dirk Benedict approves of more face.

[KRonn]

Seems like a way for everyone involved to save face.

Don't see how Syria or Russia save.  It's a complete fold.

I think so far Putin has played his hand pretty well, nothing certain but stands to make gains. Russia gets to save its Syrian ally, which even though Pres. Obama wasn't talking about taking him down, the US proposal had amendments by some Senators about destabilizing Assad. After Libya Russia probably didn't want to take the chance that the US might get a bit more adventuresome in Syria as well. Russia doesn't want that of course. Then Syria getting rid of its chemical weapons will be a long, slow process and I'd say not likely to be fully complied with anyway.

Maybe the most significant is that Russia would seem to be positioning itself as an ally of Iran and Syria, possibly pulling Iraq in a bit depending on how Iraqi politics go in the future. Seems Iraq is getting closer to Iran. So Russia will have a more solid presence in the Mid East, with some major ME nations.

All the while it remains to be seen how the US fares in the region. Seems a problematic position now with what's going on with Libya and perhaps with Eqypt since the US isn't so well liked now by the pro or anti-Morsi sides.  Hard to say how Iraq will wind up either.

[Admiral Yi]

I think Poutine completely blew it.  US public opinion running strongly against, Congressional vote unknown, and even if a strike were to transpire it would be a token, one time deal.

[DGuller]

I think Poutine completely blew it.  US public opinion running strongly against, Congressional vote unknown, and even if a strike were to transpire it would be a token, one time deal.

I don't think Putin did blow it.  I think Obama and Putin have planned this out.  Obama was afraid of Congress turning him down, but Putin's position isn't that secure either.  He knows that if things escalate, he will look impotent, because at the end of the day, without nuclear weapons, Russia is still just a bug and US is the windshield.

[Admiral Yi]

*If* things escalate.  Let's say even money on the strike.  I figure the chances of the placement of US foot wear given a strike are somewhere around 1/100.  Those are good odds for the bad guys.

[KRonn]

I think Poutine completely blew it.  US public opinion running strongly against, Congressional vote unknown, and even if a strike were to transpire it would be a token, one time deal.

That's the way I saw it too, to some extent, but trying to see what was in it for Russia. At the least they can take pressure off Assad by the proposal to remove chem weapons. That blunts a lot of the current animosity and buys Assad time to continue the war against the Rebels. And I really doubt that Assad will give all of it up, but this might still take a lot of the attention off of the overall war.
Russia gains by being a stronger player in the region, and would seem to gain some status in the Mid East.

[DGuller]

*If* things escalate.  Let's say even money on the strike.  I figure the chances of the placement of US foot wear given a strike are somewhere around 1/100.  Those are good odds for the bad guys.

I think that with all the tough talk of the last couple of weeks, the potential for the shit to hit the fan was pretty high.

[KRonn]

And to think, all this from an offhand remark, a gaf, spoken by Sec State Kerry! US State Dept quickly said that Kerry was just making a rhetorical statement but immediately the Russians jumped at the opening he made.

As for that, why didn't the President or someone on the staff or Sec State Kerry come up with this idea a few weeks ago, as a diplomatic settlement over the use of the weapons, instead of an attack?

[Jacob]

The US now has more face than we know what to do with.

Sometimes you have a great way with words

[crazy canuck]

And to think, all this from an offhand remark, a gaf, spoken by Sec State Kerry! US State Dept quickly said that Kerry was just making a rhetorical statement but immediately the Russians jumped at the opening he made.

As for that, why didn't the President or someone on the staff or Sec State Kerry come up with this idea a few weeks ago, as a diplomatic settlement over the use of the weapons, instead of an attack?

Russia, as Syria's closest ally, could suggest this idea as a way of averting the potential attack.  Without the potential attack this doesnt work very well.  Imagine how much more this would have been watered down if this was the opening position of the US.