Roger Sanchez Posted September 1, 2013 Posted September 1, 2013 ma znam, no ovo je percepcija u americkim medijima, da je Asad sada dobio slobodno polje rada. to ukazuje da je Obamina odluka primljena kao znak slabosti.Mah...Još su uvijek primed™ 4 war. Nakon par dana business as usuala u Siriji i onda veselog iščekivanja televizičnog spektakla kongresnog čerupanja i zauzimanja pozicija, dobit će memo™ da je ovo bio potez pun državničke mudrosti. MMNj.
Prospero Posted September 1, 2013 Posted September 1, 2013 How Labour derailed the PM's Syria planOpposition's insistence on 'evidence then decision' led to Commons defeat. James Cusick reports from behind closed doorsJames Cusick Sunday 01 September 2013 The call was unexpected. The only thing David Cameron had been struggling with in Cornwall was sunburn – and the indignity of pulling on his beach shorts under a towel. But the 45-minute conversation with Barack Obama last Saturday put paid to the holiday mood.The US President is said to have described his revulsion at the chemical weapons attack in eastern Damascus, and outlined the action the United States intended to take. Mr Cameron was given an assurance that US intelligence was solid and was told that the White House had already given up on the UN Security Council.Mr Obama's military timetable will soon become clear enough. But the sequence of events following the call shows Mr Cameron believed he could deliver UK support.The Foreign Secretary, William Hague, was contacted immediately after the President hung up. Mr Hague's office secured him a slot on the BBC Today programme on Monday morning, to begin preparing the public for the likelihood of military action. While he did not mention the recall of Parliament, by this stage the Speaker, John Bercow, had already been contacted about the possibility of bringing back the MPs.On Tuesday morning the shadow Foreign Secretary, Douglas Alexander, used the Today programme to warn against the will of Parliament being ignored. Then at 12.36pm came confirmation – in the form of a tweet from Mr Cameron's personal account – that Britain was planning Syria action: "Speaker agrees my request to recall Parliament on Thurs. There'll be a clear Govt motion & vote on UK response to chemical weapons attacks."Early on Tuesday afternoon, No 10 called the Opposition leader's office. A meeting was set up for 3pm. Ed Miliband and Mr Alexander joined Mr Cameron, Nick Clegg and Mr Hague in Downing Street. There, Mr Miliband and Mr Alexander had a list of questions about US evidence of the attack and the legal authority for action – and concerns about escalation. The exchanges were described as "robust", with Labour sources claiming Mr Cameron was "frankly dismissive" about the role of the UN, but saying there "can be a UN moment in New York". The meeting lasted 45 minutes, and closed on the understanding that the parties would talk again.By this stage both Mr Miliband and Mr Cameron were feeling the growing concern of their MPs that the Commons wasn't going to roll over in a repeat performance of the Iraq debate in 2003.Mr Miliband made two calls to No 10 on Tuesday night. The first focused on the UN weapons inspectors and why Parliament needed evidence first. The second, on the Security Council. Mr Cameron listened, but said little.Another tweet from Mr Cameron at 10.05am on Wednesday morning explained the silence – the PM had submitted a draft resolution to the Security Council, seeking backing for "all necessary measures to protect civilians" in Syria.Among Labour's leaders, there was puzzlement: why was No 10 doing this ahead of the inspectors' report? One of the government tweets mentioned "Security Council involvement" – something Mr Cameron had not given priority to the night before.On Wednesday afternoon, the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, pleaded for time. UN inspectors would take four days to report. Added time for analysis might also be required.Another meeting was set up, with the same cast-list as before. Early on in the meeting, Mr Cameron presented Mr Miliband with his draft motion for the Commons debate on Thursday. There was no parliamentary subtlety in it, no assurances of a second Commons vote. Labour sources say Mr Cameron offered no hint of any evidence from Washington, asking only if Labour would support him.Mr Miliband said there needed to be more than "a UN moment" and that Labour was concerned international law needed to be upheld. If the ghost of Iraq 2003 had been hanging around, this was the moment the Labour leader decided to banish it.Mr Miliband and Mr Alexander left Downing Street in Mr Miliband's car. The mood was one of unease. Neither was convinced by what Mr Cameron was saying. A rapid survey of the Shadow Cabinet's views was taken and it was agreed Labour would table its own amendment.It was drawn up quickly between 4pm and 5pm and it demanded the UN be given the time it needed and that when the evidence became clear, the Commons would have a second vote. The phrase "evidence then decision" was offered to journalists in a briefing.At 5pm Mr Miliband called Mr Cameron and offered detail on the amendment that challenged the Government. Their exchange was described as heated and uncomfortable. Mr Cameron accused Labour of "letting down America" – an indication that Downing Street had been working to Mr Obama's timetable, not Westminster's. He also accused Mr Miliband of "siding with Lavrov", the Russian Foreign Minister.Within two hours of the call, at 7.05pm, the Government published a revised motion for a subsequent vote in the Commons on Thursday.According to Conservative sources, the coalition Whips had already warned there could be difficulties. They were right.Leaders flex muscles with reshufflesDavid Cameron and Ed Miliband are preparing to reshuffle their top teams this month as both leaders attempt to reassert their authority over their parties.Although Justine Greening, the International Development Secretary and one of four women in the cabinet, missed the Syria vote, No 10 has insisted that the PM accepted she had made a mistake. However, she could be moved sideways. But Education minister Liz Truss could join the Cabinet.Labour's Rachel Reeves, Luciana Berger and Liz Kendall are also tipped for promotion. Mr Miliband's stance on Syria angered Blairite MPs, while he urgently needs to quell debate about his leadership.Jane Merrick51st state
Prospero Posted September 1, 2013 Posted September 1, 2013 baš to :lol:elem:i još 1 tidbit: After Syria statement, Obama golfsBy REID J. EPSTEIN | 8/31/13 3:28 PM EDTRight after shipping responsibility for authorizing an attack on Syria, President Barack Obama returned to his comfort zone: The golf course.Obama’s motorcade left the White House at 2:30 p.m., about 30 minutes after completing his statement.Obama and Vice President Joe Biden are playing at Fort Belvoir, Va., along with White House trip director Marvin Nicholson and Walter Nicholson, according to the White House.bole ga đoka, mada meni je ovo u suštini simpa. ukapirao je da se malo preigrao sa postavljanjem crvenih linija, potrudio se da izgleda medijski jako, više preko proxyja (kerry, power...) nego lično i sada vraća autoritet kongresu što je ogromno odstupanje od prakse zadnjih decenija. plus, nikada nije delovalo da iskreno želi da se krlja po bliskom istoku.
Agni Posted September 1, 2013 Posted September 1, 2013 (edited) ... i evo dolazimo do teske artiljerije iz kabineta Baraka Obame. Samo zato sto sam osnovano primetio da se demokratija ne uteruje tomahawcima, ispalo je da tvrdim kako pobunjenike treba ubijati.Ima li jos neka bezvezarija da se spocita? Cekam.Pricali smo o pobuni protiv Gadafija. Ti si u tom kontekstu pomenuo da pojedini narodi kulturoloski nisu spremni za demokratiju. Iz toga "ispada" da su Libijci pogresili sto su se pobunili. Edited September 1, 2013 by Radagast
wall Posted September 1, 2013 Posted September 1, 2013 Pricali smo o pobuni protiv Gadafija. Ti si u tom kontekstu pomenuo da pojedini narodi kulturoloski nisu spremni za demokratiju. Iz toga "ispada" da su Libijci pogresili sto su se pobunili.Koju demokratiju? Tipa Saudi Arabija ili USA?
Agni Posted September 1, 2013 Posted September 1, 2013 Koju demokratiju? Tipa Saudi Arabija ili USA?Ne razumem.
Čutura Posted September 1, 2013 Posted September 1, 2013 Klasično uterivanje kurca republikancima...ako glasaju za intervenciju onda neće moći da je kritikuju ili osporavaju a ako pak ne glasaju izbiće im argument da je mlitav lider i neodlučan (rokaće Asada i bez njih ja sam siguran u to). Znači, win-win situacija za Obamu, domestic policy
Tutankamon Posted September 1, 2013 Posted September 1, 2013 Ne razumem.Ti si zatucani i zaslepljeni liberal koji bi da širi američku demokratiju pa makar i pod bombama (najbolje ovako, što je sigurno sigurno je) ne vodeći računa šta se i kako dešava sa tim narodom (najbolje da se porokaju jedno 10-15 godina nakon uvođenja u taj svet demokratije kako bi svetski hegemon lakše s njima vladao i manipulisao) a on je obični zabrinuti građanin kome je sve jasno, pročitao je jedno dva-tri bloga koji mu sve objašnjavaju, ono jes da je dotičnu zemlju do skora jedva nalazio na mapi i da će nakon što ih demokratizuju naglo da mu splasne interesovanje (prati on svetskog hegemona, njega on interesuje)...normalno, ne podržava surovog diktatora ali...
wall Posted September 1, 2013 Posted September 1, 2013 Ti si zatucani i zaslepljeni liberal koji bi da širi američku demokratiju pa makar i pod bombama (najbolje ovako, što je sigurno sigurno je) ne vodeći računa šta se i kako dešava sa tim narodom (najbolje da se porokaju jedno 10-15 godina nakon uvođenja u taj svet demokratije kako bi svetski hegemon lakše s njima vladao i manipulisao) a on je obični zabrinuti građanin kome je sve jasno, pročitao je jedno dva-tri bloga koji mu sve objašnjavaju, ono jes da je dotičnu zemlju do skora jedva nalazio na mapi i da će nakon što ih demokratizuju naglo da mu splasne interesovanje (prati on svetskog hegemona, njega on interesuje)...normalno, ne podržava surovog diktatora ali...Dobro.
Tutankamon Posted September 1, 2013 Posted September 1, 2013 Dobro me podseti, lakonski odgovara kada se nađe u škripcu i bez argumenata
Bane5 Posted September 1, 2013 Posted September 1, 2013 (edited) Kerry dobio nove dokaze:via WP: Secretary of State John F. Kerry said Sunday that fresh laboratory tests show that Sarin nerve gas was used in an Aug. 21 attack in Syria that killed more than 1,400 people, the first time that U.S. officials have pinpointed what kind of chemical weapon was used.In an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Kerry said blood and hair samples from emergency workers in east Damascus had tested positive for Sarin, a highly toxic nerve agent. He said that U.S. officials learned of the lab results in the past 24 hours, citing the evidence as yet another reason for Congress to pass President Obama’s request to authorize the use of military force against the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.“So this case is building and this case will build,” Kerry said, according to a transcript of his remarks provided by NBC. “I don’t believe that my former colleagues in the United States Senate and the House will turn their backs on all of our interests, on the credibility of our country, on the norm with respect to the enforcement of the prohibition against the use of chemical weapons.” Edited September 1, 2013 by Bane5
wall Posted September 1, 2013 Posted September 1, 2013 (edited) ^^Vidi ovako.O Radagastu ne mislim ništa od toga što si ti naveo.Ničim izazvana analiza mog poznavanje Sirije i brige za njegove žitelje je jadan pokušaj bezobrazluka.Dakle, diši duboko desetak sekundi, uzmi propisanu terapiju ili jednostavno nađi drugog za svađu i vređanje. Edited September 1, 2013 by wall
Recommended Posts