Maybe, but you'd think the people in the very top positions would know what they were doing. Obama's been president for almost five years now. How are his blunderings over the last few weeks even possible, given that experience? John Kerry's been involved deeply in foreign policy for decades, how can he let himself slip up like this?

Remarkable.

I think the onion headline caught the theme of this the best:

Guy who lost to George W. Bush to solve Syrian Situation

Seriously guys? You never said anything stupid in a diplomacy game you wish you could resend?

We've all said stupid shit in Diplomacy games. The difference is that we're fighting for points which have no value and no meaning beyond our relatively limited community. The stupidity of the diplomats in DC will result in very real changes to the geopolitical landscape of the real world.

Obama and his minions created this diplomatic shitstorm and now the Russians are going to clean up after us. I would respect Putin, but frankly Obama is making things way too easy for him.

It's horribly, hilariously ironic that Kerry fought so hard against the Vietnam and Iraq wars, only to stand on his hypocritical soapbox and preach about how we should attack Syria. Seriously? SERIOUSLY?! Hell, Vietnam was less of a clusterfuck than a Syrian war would have been.

/<end rant>

@doom, I think you just helped make the point. If the actual professional diplomats can't be expected to choose their words more carefully than a bunch of people playing an online game trying to refight WW1, probably while drunk or stoned half the time, then we're fucked.

Wait, so John Kerry's mistake might end up meaning that the USA doesn't intervene in Syria? Then I hope that he never does anything right again, because that's great news.

It would only be "an unbelievably small action". Not really an intervention. Not even a metaphorical "slap on the wrist" ... More like a flick of the ear lobe. Or a tugging of the hair.

Or a wedgy

Yeah, mendax. It is good we're not going in to Syria (assuming this deal even happens, and assuming it's actually followed honestly by Assad, both big assumptions). But it's a good thing that's happened for the worst reasons. Because of the ham-fisted way this has all been handled America is now weaker in the world than it was just a few months ago. Our president is a laughing stock, our credibility with our allies is shot.

This is a debacle for the United States. We can only possibly recover with a new president, Democrat or Republican. Unfortunately that's still over three years away.

I don't think anyone would be disappointed if Assad turned these things over.

The concern most people have is that Assad will agree to turn them over, push to extend said timetable, negotiate how the same will be confirmed, battle over the technical language, claim some records have been lost, and ultimately not in fact turn anything over, and in the meantime will continue assaulting his own people and attempting to relocate his weapons infrastructure to places they're unlikely to be effectively attacked, such as proximate to hospitals and schools, or in the middle of civilian neighborhoods.

In short, they're concerned this is just a delay tactic.

I have serious doubts that Assad ordered the use of those weapons in the first place.

It is very funny how people from USA talk about their nation. I quote Invictus: "America is now weaker in the world", "This is a debacle for the US"
Is it really that important to rule over the entire world? What would happen if the USA didn't have the power to do whatever they wanted?
(Sorry for the almost off-topic)

Re: Alex ...

1. No.
2. We would be sad.

It's a lot easier not having power. I dare day Luxembourg's foreign minister has a fun and stress free existence. The trouble is that when someone stops having power you often find someone else taking over, and if that someone else is a tad less responsible than the US then the powerless start to have less fun.

@ Gunfighter

Does it matter if Assad ordered their use on that specific occasion? He ordered their manufacture, kept them stockpiled, and put in place those commanders who used them. That is more than enough personal guilt. Personally, however, I feel the pattern of multiple small scale chemical weapon attacks followed by a one off larger scale usage looks very much like an officially sanctioned programme to test the international community's will.

I think we're seeing President Obama writing the obituary of his own administration. I've never seen anything quite like it.

In 2008, when Obama first came to power, it was already clear to all of those who are sensitive to thee things from his choice of inauguration artists: he would not be the president of the US, he would be the colored president of the US. History would not be given a new direction, it had to be compensated for.

A strategic error of the first order and by making it, he provided a colossal blow to the colored community of the US. All he ever had to do was stand there, and be the colored president. The power of that symbol was self-explanatory and his references to it only tarnished the symbol's strength. It's like a concert piano player who just made an incredibly strong performance with a piece by Mozart who stands up, waits for the audience to stop applauding and then says "yeah, I just did a pretty strong performance of a Mozart piece." People all leave the theatre with this slightly bitter taste in their mouth. The true artists knows that he/she is the man/woman, but that he/she can never materialize it. It has to speak for itself; crucially so. A true politician has similar sensitivities in the political arena. The current divisions we see in America are largely due to a President who thought he symbolized the resolution of these divisions, but exacerbated them.

His foreign policy is equally void of fine tuned strategy. Him and Kerry making the crucial mistakes of the last days now means that Russia is sweeping in as peacemaker. Russia. Let's all reflect for a second on how clumsily incompetent an American President has to be for a guy like Vladimir Putin to be able to step in and take the role of peacemaker. Dwarf nation Russia, bully of the east, is now dictating the terms of peace.

I'm sorry, Americans on this forum, but your president deeply, deeply disgraced your nation. I know how much goodness and hope he represented to guys like obiwan and 2WL, but he's a community organizer, not a statesman.

The coming days, the coming hours even may mark a crucial point in history. The role of America in the world is being determined as we speak.

I think this conversation brings to question the merits of democracy. Is it a good thing if our esteemed elected officials are selected on the grounds of good campaigning? We Americans all love our dear ole Barrack, but we have to recognize that he is not the 'best person' for the job. He's the just the most successful campaigner. The 'best person,' who might actually handle situations of national importance well, is frolicking somewhere in obscurity, unnoticed because of lack of luck or electability. Even our appointed positions are selected on the grounds of 'knowing the right people' or 'looking the best' rather than 'most likely to actually preform the best.' I wonder where America would be if we found a way to discover this untapped talent and actually used them in essential positions... Democracy is great and all, but it certainly hasn't done especially well these past few weeks.

Redhouse, you are spot on.

Yes he is.

He really is. Apart from using "colored" so much. You sound like my grandpa.

Maybe now finally, finally people will see what some of us have always seen about this man. He's a small politician who excels at small issues. Gay marriage? He's got it in the bag. Bubblegum campaign talk about jobs? No one's better. But when it comes to the real issues facing the country (our strategic position in the world, our unsustainable deficit, the health of the economy) he offers quick-fix, spin-laden solutions which do nothing to make things better in the long or even medium term.

What we've witnessed in the past few weeks was the end de facto end of the Obama presidency. He's not only wrecked his own administration, he's diminished the office itself.

The Syrian crisis will rumble on through the fall and winter at least, an ulcer on his agenda. Before you know it it's primary season for the 2014 midterms, and the day after that election the primary season for president in 2016 more or less starts. Unless there's a remarkable turnaround he very well could be a lame duck from here on out. That's a shame even if you oppose him politically, as I do. The country needs leadership more than anything right now, and unfortunately our president seems wholly incapable of demonstrating any.

@redhouse, I'm an American and I am thoroughly impressed at how well you hit that nail on the head. Don't be sorry for any of it. You're just speaking the truth. Most deserving +1 I've given in a while.

The unity of the American people over the past few weeks has been very refreshing. Liberals, conservatives, greens, libertarians, we all stand together against this proposed war.

Also, Obama's cult of personality is beginning to dissolve. Even hardcore liberals are having a very hard time arguing that this whole situation is not gross incompetence on Obama's part. For fuck's sake, the *Russians* showed more diplomatic finesse and poise. Not to take anything away from Putin's brilliant WWIII-averting moves, but come on. Since when has America shown less skill in diplomacy than the Russians?

Love him or hate him, we can all agree that Obama messed this one up. There are parts of Obama I can respect. He is probably one of the best campaigners since the Greeks/Romans invented republicanism. As Invictus (maybe?) pointed out on this thread or another thread (unconfirmed; too lazy to look) Obama can get stuff done on small issues.

When it comes to big issues, Obama is either an empty suit, a criminal, or grossly incompetent. He couldn't lead his way out of a Ziplock bag if you gave him a machete and a blowtorch.

I predict an Obama resignation. I don't think he can handle people not worshiping him. He is clearly in way over his head, but that won't be the reason he resigns, it'll be because of the criticism over his incompetence.

In his resignation speech, I also predict he will do 2 things: blame Bush one more time, and tell the country that we just weren't ready for a black president after all.

I know you're joking, but I don't think that'll ever happen. Even if he faces months and months like these last few weeks. And what a bow to his legacy! Resigning in disgrace like Nixon would be one thing, resigning because you just can't cut it as a leader is something else entirely. No chance at all it'll happen, or even should happen, however.

But in this bizarro world I hope it happens sooner rather than later. Even the possibility of ten years of President Biden is too much to contemplate.

Obama is much more egotistical than Nixon was, as strange as that sounds. He won't resign. We've got a few years of him left.

I agree with Invictus and bo_sox. His ego won't let him resign. He'll make a few more pathetic attempts to save his legacy. He's written off the rest of his term by now; he's more concerned with the future history books at this point.

There's nothing I said to agree with. It's just a thought experiment. I don't think Obama would or should resign over the Syria crisis.