Skip to main content

View Diary: Operation Accidental Diplomacy (88 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Meh, I have no desire to play this game with you (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PSzymeczek

    again.

    Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell. --Edward Abbey

    by greenbastard on Fri Sep 13, 2013 at 07:41:39 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Lol to meh. Any poses left in your arsenal? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      reginahny, Radiowalla, Tony Situ

      BTW, none of this changes the reality that the diplomatic solution was being pursued long before Kerry's press conference.

      Art is the handmaid of human good.

      by joe from Lowell on Fri Sep 13, 2013 at 07:44:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  nor does it chance the fact that the President (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Choco8, mickT

        was selling war.

        again, just for fun, your fact that discussions were going on is only proof of that discussions were going on.

        What you have repeatedly tried to claim, that your facts do not support, nor do I see anywhere else, is that, this is what they meant to do all along. They were only selling war as part of this brilliant plan for this super-secret diplomatic move.

        It's ridiculous. And I don't think you'll change your mind.

        If you can provide some sort of evidence, like I said last time, that supports your claim, bring it on. I'm open. I'll admit I'm wrong.

        But all you've proven is that they talked about it. Not any kind of plan, or agreement was reached, or that shows this was the plan all along.

        The President was selling a war, that no one was buying.

        So yes, at first I laughed when I saw you pushing this narrative again. Then when it seemed you wanted

        Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell. --Edward Abbey

        by greenbastard on Fri Sep 13, 2013 at 07:51:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think you have me mixed up with someone else. (8+ / 0-)

          I've never claimed that the threat of force was a ruse. Of course he was selling war. He was doing both.

          The threat of force needn't be a ruse in order to help along a diplomatic outcome. In fact, the more credible the threat, the more effective it is as a motivator for the other side to cut a deal.

          The idea that the only two options here are "gaffe" and "this was the plan all along" is all yours. It has nothing to do with me, and it certainly has nothing to do with an administration and foreign policy apparatus that can walk and chew gum at the same time.

          Art is the handmaid of human good.

          by joe from Lowell on Fri Sep 13, 2013 at 07:57:29 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I don't think (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          greenbell, aliasalias

          that the threats of war were manipulations for this diplomatic angle. I think the diplomatic angle has been - is being - set up for the purpose of selling war. Now, Obama gets to set terms that the US administration will insist are more than fair, but are yet impossible for Syria to meet, even if willing. When that happens - when Syria can't organize and produce all its chemical weapons on the demanded timeframe, the American public and Congress will not be resistant to war anymore. I think this is just a tactic to give us all time and reason to get on board with bombing Syria.

          I have no evidence of this. Only time will tell if my intuition is correct.

          •  That's kind of what I was thinking (0+ / 0-)

            ...and Kerry is already acting like the drunk cowboy shooting at the Assad's feet:

            "Dance Faster!"

          •  Not only do you provde no evidence, you don't even (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Radiowalla, joe from Lowell

            bother to provide a motive for your theory?

            So what's the motive?  War just for war's sake?  What can you point to in the President's history that indicates that he would be for war just for the sake of it, or just for the glory of it, or just for the fun of it, or whatever?

            IMO, he would only be for a war if there was a legit reason.  If there's a way to get the CW without war, such that merely the threat of war is enough to get things moving, then he'd do that.  

            You say he's putting forth impossible demands as pretext for war, but you fail to say what the motive is.

        •  It's in Kerry's remark. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          joe from Lowell

          Kerry finished his offhand remark by saying they won't do it and it's impossible.  I don't think that was just cynicism.  It seems far more likely that he was echoing Russian cynicism in order to challenge that cynicism.  The media took up this challenge and Russia had no choice but to respond with a favorable attempt to agree.  Now Putin is trying to backwalk that attempt but I don't think it'll work.  If war breaks out it'll be Putin's fault.

          "When you think about the money spent/on defense by the government/& the weapons of destruction we've built/we're so sure that we need/then you think of the millions that money could feed/How long?" J Browne

          by rainmanjr on Fri Sep 13, 2013 at 01:36:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Paneta said that "it absolutely (0+ / 0-)

          was the threat of the attack that caused Putin to act."

          He said they have been talking with the Russians for almost 30 months to get them to intervene, at least to allow the UN to start sanctions.

          They were only selling war as part of this brilliant plan for this super-secret diplomatic move.
          That's your strawman. The President was making it absolutely clear that he was planning a limited attack with no boots on the ground. That's not war. And he was not trying to sell it. He was planning to do it if Putin/Assad didn't do what he, Obama had demanded.

          Kerry's "slip" contained a deadline.

          No agreement had been reached. Obama didn't want an agreement. He wanted action.

          Now comes the push to move the action along.

          I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

          by samddobermann on Sat Sep 14, 2013 at 07:39:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site