Japan Today

U.S., Russia agree on Syria weapons; Obama says force still option


The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2013.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

The Rebels can't delay the inevitable now. = They are done.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

US are the bad guy here, if the Syrian want to kill each other , just let them do it.

Do look at the video US has planned this way back before the Syrian start fighting.


-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Well, a wider conflict in the Middle East has been averted for now. This would not have happened if Mitt the Moronic Mormon had been elected. It is a huge coup for dictator Putin. When you consider the U.S. also promised to give up all chemical weapons 20 years ago, but still has not, don't hold your breath.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

"force still option"

Just not a likely option. Good luck to the non-al-Qaida affiliated rebels.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Putin 1

obama 0


-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Putin punked Obama on the international stage. He showed Obama to be a head-in-the-sand leader who's inept in all apsects of leadership.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

A Plan to Eliminate Syria’s Chemical Weapons


Congratulations to all of us in possible WORLD PEACE. We are just beginning and many tough roads ahead. We can do this.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

It offers Obama a way out and Putin to maintain Russia's interest in the region. The devil is in the detail including auditing all chemical stockpile sites and the process of eliminating thereof that Russia still nagging about. Also to trust Putin and Russia who protect Assad in all turns, is another matter. Regardless, to the drumbeat of "world peace" folks, the civil war and suffering will continue in Syria after this look warm ban aid applied. Syria is bound to be Iran's Vietnam in days to come. Peace can be achieved when all parties involved decide so, however; for M.E. is such a long shot.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

A good initial positive outcome from this meeting and negotiation. Now it's time for both sides to keep their hashed rhetoric to themselves. Further threats and counter threats will do no good to further conclude a positive outcome.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

the US and Russia should stay out of this. Both nations have serious domestic problems. That is what they should focus on.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Not just the USA and Russia but both Iran and Saudi Arabia are making these proxy wars because one side is Sunni and the other is Shiites. These so called religious wars were around for the last few centuries, my guess they will be at each others THROATS for so many years, who are we to stop them from killing each other off?? If the Iranians and Arabs are happy blowing each other up, should we stop them??? They have to learn to stop hating each other and to learn that PEACE and respect are also VERY possible!! Japan and the USA were MORTAL ENEMIES in WW2, but now the USA and Japan LOVE and respect each other!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )


Compromise can save lives. Wars don't. Not sure where you are finding the humour.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I feel sorry for the Syrian people.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

but now the USA and Japan LOVE and respect each other!!

Do not be so utterly naive.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

slumdogSep. 15, 2013 - 06:51PM JST


Compromise can save lives. Wars don't. Not sure where you are finding the humour.

Well, a 70% of population is interested in Miley Cyrus news, not Syrian CW and the M.E. conflicts. So they have nothing good to say except exposing themselves on global website how stupid they are. Shooganaii.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So, what did we learn today?

The force and the threat of force is an important tool in diplomacy. This truism offends to the pacifist left. "War is never the answer." Riiiiiigggght.

The Obama Administration has played it cards perfectly. This truth offends Republicans. "Obama is a failure."


0 ( +1 / -1 )

Obama is just a rubber stamp for the status quo.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Obama is so desperate due to the US corporations' pressure that he is now as dangerous as a monkey with a gun. Yesterday Obama said "This is not the Cold War, this is not a contest between the United States and Russia." C'mon! Not even Obama's mom can believe that. It is a confrontation between US and Russia. In front of the cameras, Obama and Putin use humanitarian reasoning for their stance on Syria. The true reasons are gas, military presence in the Mediterranean and global position. They don't care Syrian people. US needs to test weapons and Russia needs more time to fit his armed forces, at least 5 or 7 more years and US knows that.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

RomeoRIISep. 15, 2013 - 12:32PM JST

Putin punked Obama on the international stage. He showed Obama to be a head-in-the-sand leader who's inept in all apsects of leadership.

I am sending my great respect for all parties Syria/Russia/US for this outcome. The right wingers criticize Obama's inaction in the past two weeks, I have a different view. As a legal negotiator, you are required to use every option until the last minutes in negotiation. You do everything during mediation, even a few seconds. prior to court hearings.

The history has already shown how Bush's Doctrine has failed for Iraq ,Afghanistan strategies. Here is a clear vision of Bush Doctrine; PREAMPTIVE ATTACKS AND GIVING ULTIMATUM.

And what did we learn from Bush Doctrine? Nothing but casualties. We are all sick of war. Before going into war, we have to negotiate every options and VERIFY the intel sources. I believe Obama did just fine.

The security environment confronting the United States today is radically different from what we have faced before. Yet the first duty of the United States Government remains what it always has been: to protect the American people and American interests. It is an enduring American principle that this duty obligates the government to anticipate and counter threats, using all elements of national power, before the threats can do grave damage. The greater the threat, the greater is the risk of inaction – and the more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy’s attack. There are few greater threats than a terrorist attack with WMD.

To forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, act preemptively in exercising our inherent right of self-defense. The United States will not resort to force in all cases to preempt emerging threats. Our preference is that nonmilitary actions succeed. And no country should ever use preemption as a pretext for aggression.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

An acquaintance of mine had an interesting conspiracy-like take on this: maybe this was the plan all along. Some back room strategy worked out between Russia and the USA.

In order for Syria to cave, Russia was required as carrot provider, since they're chummy with Syria, and the credible threat of military action from the USA was the stick, because they're so likely to actually do something along those lines.

Yeah, it seems a stretch to me too, but it's an interesting thought... Public iciness between Putin and Obama can have distinct tactical and strategic benefits, if the two are secretly in cahoots.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why is the US complaining about the chemicals in Syria when the Chemicals that were used against Iran were furnished to IRAQ by the US. I agree chemicals should not be used against humans no matter whereabouts they may be. Now, the FM of Russia in speaking with Sec of State Kerry came up with the idea that violence should not be used and they appeared to agree at least while the two were together. Then I noticed where Kerry went to Israel and standing next to Netanyahu stating force can be used if all isn't settled then Kerry with a huge smile with Netanyahu at his side as the two walked away. This appears to me that based on Kerry's remarks, the US will do anything to protect Israel and believes this may scare Iran into thinking force may be used against them. Only 30% of Americans polled agreed that Syria should be bombed!!

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

AdamwestiSep. 16, 2013 - 01:22PM JST

Why is the US complaining about the chemicals in Syria when the Chemicals that were used against Iran were furnished to IRAQ by the US

Not clear what you have said listed above. Would you please elaborate it further? Thanks.

0 ( +0 / -0 )


They didn't just give him the chemical weapons they openly admit helping Iraq use them effectively.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites