When powerful sovereign countries work cooperatively to resolve pertinent issues around the world, the result is diplomacy at its best - this is what is happening regarding the issue of Syria. Finally, the U.S. and Russia have agreed on a viable solution, and other sovereign nations are now backing this diplomatic solution. This solution to the use of chemical weapons in Syria is innovative and progressive; this solution provides relief from unnecessary war. The "citizens of the world" welcomes this resolution, and continue to hope that our world leaders will resort to collaborative thought (diplomacy) to resolve other pressing issues!
Per the Japan Times, "The prospect of a U.S. military strike on Syria has dimmed following President Barack Obama’s embrace of an international initiative to take control of Syria’s chemical-weapons stockpile. The eleventh-hour U-turn on the push for military action has come against a backdrop of intensifying diplomatic pressure from the international community to avoid escalation of the violence in Syria."
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2013/09/13/commentary/the-u-s-with-iran-in-syria/#.UjMuqX8pjZY
According to AL JAZEERA, "US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov have agreed to meet later this month to try to set a date for a long-delayed peace conference for Syria. The two politicians said on Friday that the successful resumption of peace talks depended on the outcome of the ongoing US-Russian talks aimed at securing Syria's chemical weapons cache. Kerry and Lavrov met UN-Arab League envoy Lakhdar Brahimi in Geneva to discuss the potential progress of talks, leaving their teams of chemical weapons experts to thrash out a deal over the Syrian disarmament. . . The secretary of state said the meeting was likely to take place around September 28 to coincide with the annual UN General Assembly in New York."
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/09/2013912221224752819.html
BBC News reports, "US Secretary of State John Kerry has described as "constructive" talks with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov on securing Syria's chemical weapons. . . the two powers will work over the next few weeks to try to revive the wider peace talks to end Syria's civil war . . . Russian President Vladimir Putin called Damascus's decision to join the Chemical Weapons Convention "an important step towards the resolution of the Syrian crisis" and said it showed the "serious intention" of President Bashar al-Assad "to follow this path" . . . both the US and Russia were "deeply committed to a negotiated solution" to the conflict in Syria . . . the US and Russia have sent large teams to Geneva that include weapons experts as well as diplomats. . . if the talks are successful, the US hopes the disarmament process will be agreed in a UN Security Council resolution."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24075787
Reuters acknowledges, "Russia and the United States agreed a new push to negotiate an end to Syria's civil war as they discussed a plan to destroy President Bashar al-Assad's chemical weapons in order to avert U.S. air strikes. . . China too, hailed Assad's decision, as did Iran, Assad's key ally in a regional confrontation with sectarian overtones between Shi'ite Tehran and Sunni Muslim Arab states. . . Lavrov said Moscow assumed no U.S. attack would be necessary now, though U.S. officials say only the threat of force has prompted Assad to comply and Kerry said that Washington could yet act if it was not satisfied. He (Kerry) said any arms agreement must be comprehensive, verifiable, credible and implemented in a "timely" way. Experts say removing Syria's hundreds of tons of chemical weapons, scattered in secret installations, would pose huge technical problems at the best of times, let alone in the middle of a civil war or with authorities which do not fully cooperate."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/13/us-syria-crisis-idUSBRE98A15720130913?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews
With all the technological advancements apparent in our world today, the powers-that-be should be able to overcome any technical issues related to the removal of Syria's chemical weapons. Will powerful sovereign nations meet this dire challenge?
What's the probability that Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak’s news story was on-point? As an accomplished news reporter, why didn't the major news media at least discuss her reporting results of the issue at-hand? Could it be that those in power wanted to escalate war with Syria? Will the major news media in the U.S. and Europe now attempt to ascertain the whole truth - especially since former hostages are providing information about activities of their captors?
I'm a little more at ease knowing that the bombing of Syria by U.S. forces is NOT imminent, as long as diplomacy is embraced fervently by those in power. Successful diplomatic relations in Syria will set a precedent for powerful sovereign nations to follow in the midst of future preemptive war scenarios. There are calamitous events taking place within global communities (especially in the Middle East), wherein the great powers of the world may need to take decisive actions - let's hope that those first actions are diplomatic - actions that will circumvent war.
Per the Japan Times, "The prospect of a U.S. military strike on Syria has dimmed following President Barack Obama’s embrace of an international initiative to take control of Syria’s chemical-weapons stockpile. The eleventh-hour U-turn on the push for military action has come against a backdrop of intensifying diplomatic pressure from the international community to avoid escalation of the violence in Syria."
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2013/09/13/commentary/the-u-s-with-iran-in-syria/#.UjMuqX8pjZY
According to AL JAZEERA, "US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov have agreed to meet later this month to try to set a date for a long-delayed peace conference for Syria. The two politicians said on Friday that the successful resumption of peace talks depended on the outcome of the ongoing US-Russian talks aimed at securing Syria's chemical weapons cache. Kerry and Lavrov met UN-Arab League envoy Lakhdar Brahimi in Geneva to discuss the potential progress of talks, leaving their teams of chemical weapons experts to thrash out a deal over the Syrian disarmament. . . The secretary of state said the meeting was likely to take place around September 28 to coincide with the annual UN General Assembly in New York."
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/09/2013912221224752819.html
BBC News reports, "US Secretary of State John Kerry has described as "constructive" talks with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov on securing Syria's chemical weapons. . . the two powers will work over the next few weeks to try to revive the wider peace talks to end Syria's civil war . . . Russian President Vladimir Putin called Damascus's decision to join the Chemical Weapons Convention "an important step towards the resolution of the Syrian crisis" and said it showed the "serious intention" of President Bashar al-Assad "to follow this path" . . . both the US and Russia were "deeply committed to a negotiated solution" to the conflict in Syria . . . the US and Russia have sent large teams to Geneva that include weapons experts as well as diplomats. . . if the talks are successful, the US hopes the disarmament process will be agreed in a UN Security Council resolution."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24075787
Reuters acknowledges, "Russia and the United States agreed a new push to negotiate an end to Syria's civil war as they discussed a plan to destroy President Bashar al-Assad's chemical weapons in order to avert U.S. air strikes. . . China too, hailed Assad's decision, as did Iran, Assad's key ally in a regional confrontation with sectarian overtones between Shi'ite Tehran and Sunni Muslim Arab states. . . Lavrov said Moscow assumed no U.S. attack would be necessary now, though U.S. officials say only the threat of force has prompted Assad to comply and Kerry said that Washington could yet act if it was not satisfied. He (Kerry) said any arms agreement must be comprehensive, verifiable, credible and implemented in a "timely" way. Experts say removing Syria's hundreds of tons of chemical weapons, scattered in secret installations, would pose huge technical problems at the best of times, let alone in the middle of a civil war or with authorities which do not fully cooperate."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/13/us-syria-crisis-idUSBRE98A15720130913?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews
With all the technological advancements apparent in our world today, the powers-that-be should be able to overcome any technical issues related to the removal of Syria's chemical weapons. Will powerful sovereign nations meet this dire challenge?
RT states, "A phone conversation between the opposition fighters may prove that it
was opposition who used gas on civilians in Syria – that’s according to
Belgian teacher Pierre Piccinin da Prata, who had been held hostage by
rebels for months. . . Either rebels are responsible for the chemical attack, or Assad’s forces lost their minds’ - French ex-hostage. . . The Italian government announced on Sunday that they had been
freed after Rome intensified negotiations with the rebels for the
release of the prisoners ahead of an anticipated US strike on
Syria. The former hostages told a number of European media outlets that
they overheard an English-language Skype conversation between
their captors and other men which suggested it was rebel forces,
not the government, that used chemical weapons on Syria’s
civilian population in an August 21 attack near Damascus. Pierre
Piccinin da Prata answered RT's questions about his experience."
http://rt.com/op-edge/syria-chemical-attack-assad-hostage-822/
http://rt.com/op-edge/syria-chemical-attack-assad-hostage-822/
What's the probability that Associated Press correspondent Dale Gavlak’s news story was on-point? As an accomplished news reporter, why didn't the major news media at least discuss her reporting results of the issue at-hand? Could it be that those in power wanted to escalate war with Syria? Will the major news media in the U.S. and Europe now attempt to ascertain the whole truth - especially since former hostages are providing information about activities of their captors?
- Truth: People in Syria were attacked with chemical weapons.
- Question: Who was actually responsible for the chemical weapons attack?
I'm a little more at ease knowing that the bombing of Syria by U.S. forces is NOT imminent, as long as diplomacy is embraced fervently by those in power. Successful diplomatic relations in Syria will set a precedent for powerful sovereign nations to follow in the midst of future preemptive war scenarios. There are calamitous events taking place within global communities (especially in the Middle East), wherein the great powers of the world may need to take decisive actions - let's hope that those first actions are diplomatic - actions that will circumvent war.
With positive and encouraging thoughts,
I'm immensely enjoying bites of chocolate!
I'm immensely enjoying bites of chocolate!