Gary Jones provided the backfill in an article @thedailyjournal.com, as follows: “For years, people have blamed President George W. Bush for inventing reasons to invade Iraq. Even though the rest of the world saw Saddam Hussein actually use weapons of mass destruction (chemical weapons) on his own people, the isolationists in this country didn’t want to get involved. These people are obviously the children and grandchildren of those who wanted us to stay out of WWII and allow Hitler to take over all of Europe. There was no place for them then, and there is no place for them now.
“People with half a brain knew that Iraq didn’t want to let their weapons be destroyed. That is why they removed them prior to our invasion. We didn’t find them because they hid them in Syria. Our government knew that. And it did nothing about it.
“I do blame Bush for not acting on this during the last part of his presidency. But I blame President Barack Obama more for keeping his head in the sand for eight years. Not only did he do nothing about that problem, he sat back and allowed the unrest in the Middle East to escalate to where it is today.”
Details regarding the issue are found in Wikipedia, explaining that in 2002: “Rumors have abounded of possible transportation of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to foreign countries, namely Syria, Lebanon and Iran, in the weeks before Operation Iraqi Freedom began. John Bolton told the House Committee on Foreign Affairs that these reports give "cause for concern."
“Former Iraqi general Georges Sada claimed that in late 2002, Saddam had ordered all of his stockpiles to be moved to Syria. He appeared on Fox News' Hannity & Colmes in January 2006 to discuss his book, Saddam's Secrets: How an Iraqi General Defied and Survived Saddam Hussein. Anticipating the arrival of weapon inspectors on November 1, Sada said Saddam took advantage of the June 4 Zeyzoun Dam disaster in Syria by forming an "air bridge", loading them onto cargo aircraft and flying them out of the country.
“They were moved by air and by ground, 56 sorties by jumbo, 747, and 27 were moved, after they were converted to cargo aircraft, they were moved to Syria.”While the historical picture becomes far clearer due to Syria’s current application of chemical weaponry, the Obama administration was again found to be both ineffectual and dishonest about what actually transpired when it was involved.
Bernini Chakraborty reported @FoxNews.com yesterday that: “During an interview this past January with National Public Radio, former National Security Adviser Rice touted the “success” in Syria, in striking a deal with Russia's help that resulted in the prior administration dropping the threat of military action.
“We were able to find a solution that didn’t necessitate the use of force that actually removed the chemical weapons that were known from Syria, in a way that the use of force would never have accomplished,” she boasted. “We were able to get the Syrian government to voluntarily and verifiably give up its chemical weapons stockpile.”
While Rice continually disseminates comments later proven untrue, she “isn’t the only Obama-era official who made self-congratulatory statements about removing chemical weapons from Syria."
“In July 2014, then-Secretary of State John Kerry went on NBC’s “Meet the Press” to discuss the September 2013 deal that resulted in Russia agreeing to help confiscate and then destroy Syria’s stockpile.
“We struck a deal where we got 100 percent of the chemical weapons out,” Kerry claimed.
“At the time, the fact-checking website PolitiFact found Kerry’s comments to be “mostly true.”
However, given new evidence that Assad had recently used chemical weapons against his own people, PolitiFact was forced to revisit and revise its assessment of Kerry’s claims.
“We don’t know key details about the reported chemical attack in Syria on April 4, 2017, but it raises two clear possibilities: Either Syria never fully complied with its 2013 promise to reveal all of its chemical weapons; or it did, but then converted otherwise non-lethal chemicals to military uses.
“One way or another, subsequent events have proved Kerry wrong,” the site ruled.
While factions of all types adjust to the swift reaction shown by Trump to a situation he believed required military intervention, he applied tact and diplomacy to another world power, China, over the past two days.
A story by Reuters reporters Brenda Goh and Michael Martina posted @yahoo.com presents the reaction of one of China’s leading news outlets, as follows:
“Chinese state media on Saturday cheered the meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping as one that showed the world that confrontation between the two powers was not inevitable.
“China Daily said both parties appeared "equally enthusiastic about the constructive relationship they have promised to cultivate."
"This may sound surreal to those preoccupied with an 'inescapable' conflict scenario between what they see as rising and incumbent powers," the newspaper wrote in an editorial.
"But that Beijing and Washington have so far managed to do well in preventing conflicts shows confrontation is not inevitable."
State-run Chinese tabloid Global Times said the meeting "served as an indicator that the China-U.S. relationship is still very much on course since the Trump administration took office in January", and it was likely the two nations would develop a more "pragmatic relationship".
"It seems that both countries have understood the importance of how essential a smooth transition needs to be, and not just for the two countries involved here, but really for the entire world over," it said.
A positive reaction was also displayed in “a front-page commentary in the overseas edition of the ruling Communist Party's official People's Daily which said the meeting established the tone for the development of U.S.-China relations.”
And, while only mentioned in passing, the articles authors note that “Trump pressed Xi to do more to curb North Korea's nuclear program,” which means he’s opened the door to seeking their cooperation in dealing with the unpredictable Kim Jong-un and his nuclear weaponry. Another diplomatic positive.
As for an overall reaction to the value of the meeting, reader Joel posted the following:
“This is YUGE because the Chinese Media is state run, so had protocol gone awry or things not proceeded as they did, we'd know about it. The Chinese culture is largely based on the concept of 'face' and it applies on multiple levels - community view & individual view. If you are unfamiliar with how it works read this....and it will be clear that Trump can work with Xi and BOTH parties can win. In fact, he just did EXACTLY that.”
Joel included a link to an interesting essay on Chinese culture as it relates to face: https://chinaculturecorner.com/2013/10/10/face-in-chinese-business/
And, apparently the new POTUS and his people handled themselves quite well in that department too.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
No comments:
Post a Comment