Global media spotlighting America as the hub for destroying Syrian chemical weapons!

The Washington Times is highlighting how Joe Biden mentioned the US might get involved in the plan to destroy Syrian chemical weapons at sea, which has scientists freaking out.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...syrias/?page=1 (pg. 1)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...syrias/?page=2 (pg. 2)

Chemical weapon experts are slamming the Department of Defense's plan to dispose of Syria's chemical arsenal at sea (...)

"There's no precedent here. We're all just guessing and making estimates," says Raymond Zilinskas, director of the Biological Weapons Convention Secretariat. (...) "For instance, you don't even know if the sarin is pure. Iraqi sarin was pretty nasty stuff—it had tons of impurities, and we have no idea if it'll even work for hydrolysis." (...)

"Not a single country wants these chemical weapons being hauled through their territory," Zilinskas noted.

On Tuesday, Joe Biden said his administration is considering joining the effort to destroy the Syrian chemical stockpile—but only if the public is on board.

"The chemicals and how they react are well-understood," a high-ranking Department of Defense official stated. "The Department of Defense has decades of experience handling chemical weapons through various demilitarization programs."

“Absolutely nothing is going to be dumped into the ocean,” the official added.

The Washington Times singled out this guy's statement. Which basically means every single one of those Mediterranean leaders are playing it smart and staying out of trouble—and there are a whole bunch of them. They leave it to their offices and experts to make sure the people proposing this actually know what they're doing.

But then this genius decides to take the lead and goes on record saying that on this matter the citizens will decide—as if the public has any clue what they're talking about or the capacity to understand it. People can decide about this? Please. It’s something they can't possibly make an informed choice on because it requires massive technical expertise. So, naturally, they can either stay quiet or just talk nonsense... whatever they do, the idiot gets to walk away with "glory" and look like some international hero. I wonder if any world leader won't be able to keep a straight face when they see this clown.

Who normally would jump into a high-risk, high-tech operation like this and start blathering to the press, giving general consent and willingness before even knowing the details? What, did he read it in the paper and then decide while sitting on the toilet that it sounded like a good idea? Calling it a "humanitarian act"! How stupid do you have to be to not keep your mouth shut when nobody asked you anything and all your neighbors are staying silent while waiting for the actual experts to weigh in?

It's just twisted—this mind that, after a referendum, now wants to force citizens to perform a "humanitarian act" by destroying someone else's lethal chemical waste right in their own backyard.

Destroying chemical weapons involves electrolysis, which needs water. Probably a lot of it. Maybe way more than a single ship could carry in its tanks. What do we actually know? We can choose to believe, or not believe, unnamed Department of Defense officials claiming "nothing will be dumped into the ocean."

I honestly feel like this entire discussion deserves a spot on the front page.

I realize the moderators usually prefer to steer clear of threads that are just based on news articles, but I don't think we should look at this as merely a news story; rather, we should view it as the President's direct call for a public dialogue. Wouldn't it be quite disrespectful to simply ignore a request like that from the President?

Joe Biden called for a "public debate" over the possible reloading project.

http://www.apnews.com/article/2013/...9B90SP20131210
http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ction-21164628

P.S.
If you look back at how that "public" debate regarding the Constitution went down, it seems like the conversation about this has already kicked off behind closed doors, and it's just that nobody—aside from maybe the Associated Press—bothered to let us know, wouldn't you say?

It’s a security nightmare and potentially devastating for the environment, but—money is on the table. Then there's the matter of international standing and whether or not we should even be participating in this rare high-level agreement between the USA and Russia...

One has to weigh the options. ☕

northernsailor8 said:It’s a security nightmare and potentially devastating for the environment, but—money is on the table. Then there's the matter of international standing and whether or not we should even be participating in this rare high-level agreement between the USA and Russia...

One has to weigh the options. ☕

Yeah. There's zero cash involved. 😉Joe Biden basically just asked people to do the "humane thing."

I guess if we had just handled this behind closed doors, the money would’ve rolled in and our reputation wouldn't have taken such a hit. I mean, what are those intelligence agencies even for if not for stuff like this? For once, I actually agree with the idea that the public and the media don't necessarily need to be privy to everything.

northernsailor8 said:It’s a security nightmare and potentially devastating for the environment, but—money is on the table. Then there's the matter of international standing and whether or not we should even be participating in this rare high-level agreement between the USA and Russia...

One has to weigh the options. ☕

The risk is actually minimal if we play our cards right and negotiate for what truly benefits us here. I honestly don't get why this was ever leaked to the press—as if anyone in America actually gives a damn about which specific route chemical weapons take to get around. Who even blew the whistle on this? Don't tell me it was Joe Biden himself.

I suppose I should start by saying that sometimes, the simplest things really do carry the most weight. It’s like when you’re driving down a quiet stretch of highway in Nebraska—just you, the road, and that steady hum of the engine—and suddenly you realize how much mental space you were wasting on things that don't actually matter. It reminds me a bit of that old saying about not sweating the small stuff, though even that feels a little too cliché, doesn't it? I was thinking about this earlier while sipping my coffee. You know how some people just dive headfirst into a situation without a second thought? It’s like watching someone try to jump onto a moving treadmill without checking the speed first. A bit chaotic, if you ask me. Anyway, I was reading a thread where crimsonbadger58 mentioned something similar, and it got me thinking about how we all process information differently. Some of us like to map out every single turn before we leave the driveway, while others just grab the keys and go. There's no right way, I guess, but there's certainly a lot to be said for a little bit of preparation. Just a thought. Happy Tuesday, everyone! As if I haven't heard this one before... turns out, [crimsonbadger58] says:
Yeah. There's just no love to be found.. 😉 The President just put out a call for everyone to step up and do the "humane thing." It’s one of those moments where you really have to stop and think about what that actually looks like in practice, you know? Like when you see someone struggling with their groceries in a supermarket parking lot in Chicago or seeing a neighbor deal with a sudden setback—it’s about that small, quiet impulse to help because it’s simply the right way to be. It feels like a gentle nudge toward empathy, almost like a reminder to keep our heads above water together. Just a little bit of kindness goes a long way in keeping things steady.

It feels a little silly, doesn't it? I mean, suggesting we’re actually going to walk away with something like $4,520,600.23 just for handling the transshipment... it sounds a bit much, right? It's like expecting a windfall from a scratch-off ticket when you really just expected to break even. Just seems a tad unrealistic to throw around numbers that specific without a lot more backing.

So, according to the global news cycle, we’re basically the place where Syrians are stashing all their chemical weapons...

If people start flocking here because they heard they were filming Game of Thrones, you really think they won't hear about this stuff too?

And now the same crowd that was claiming the "gay population won't stay away because of the referendum" is suddenly trying to convince us everything is fine, even though the whole Syria situation is massive headline news.

Just another fail for the Government, but hey, who's counting... ☕

Joe Biden was strangely casual when he stood before those reporters and dropped hints about the transfer of chemical weapons from Syria within American waters.
What was he thinking, making such an announcement so informally?
He was clearly trying to dodge a formal press release to avoid sparking a massive national environmental panic...
By keeping it low-key, he sidestepped any heavy political accountability. He wanted the news out there, but he wanted to wait for the feedback loop before actually deciding what to do based on his advisors' input.

Am I in favor of the transfer?
Sure, but where exactly it happens... that's the real question...

northerncyclist2 said:I guess if we had just handled this behind closed doors, the money would’ve rolled in and our reputation wouldn't have taken such a hit. I mean, what are those intelligence agencies even for if not for stuff like this? For once, I actually agree with the idea that the public and the media don't necessarily need to be privy to everything.

It seems like you might have cut off your thought there, or perhaps you were just testing the waters before diving into something more substantial? I find myself sitting here wondering what you intended to say, or if there was a specific point you were building toward that simply didn't make it onto the screen. Is there a particular topic on your mind, or were you just offering a quick greeting to see if anyone was listening? I’m always happy to listen, though, provided there's a bit more substance to chew on. What's on your mind? I’m still sitting here thinking about how much things have changed lately, and I can't help but wonder if anyone else feels that same sense of quiet contemplation when they look back at where we were just a few years ago? It seems like every time I sit down to process everything, my mind starts wandering through these long, winding paths of "what ifs" and "could have beens," almost like a slow-moving river that refuses to stay within its banks. Does anyone else find themselves getting lost in those little details, those tiny moments that seemed insignificant at the time but now feel like the very foundation of everything we know today? I mean, is it possible that we’re all just collectively trying to make sense of a world that moves far too fast for any of us to truly catch our breath? I mean, look, we were operating under a veil of secrecy, weren't we? It was all kept strictly behind closed doors for a reason, but I suppose some people just can't help themselves from being a little bit foolish sometimes. Reuters So, I’m seeing reports that the President is calling us all together for a public forum, which really makes you wonder about the direction things are heading, doesn't it? It feels like one of those moments where the administration wants to open up the floor, though I can't help but sit here and ponder whether these kinds of town halls actually lead to meaningful change or if they're just a way to let everyone vent before things continue on their current path. Is it an invitation to truly be heard, or just a formal procedure to check a box? I'll be interested to see how it unfolds.

I can't say I've seen any sort of official call for a public forum from the President, not in any of my feeds or news alerts, for that matter. Is it possible it just slipped through the cracks, or am I simply looking in all the wrong places? I wonder if we ever truly stop to consider how much our surroundings shape the very way we perceive the world around us, or if we just drift through life assuming our perspective is the only one that exists? It feels like we often get caught up in the immediate noise of things, don't we, and lose sight of the larger patterns unfolding right in front of our eyes? I was thinking about this earlier today while watching the traffic move through downtown Chicago, and it struck me how much we rely on these invisible structures to keep everything moving, yet we rarely acknowledge them until something breaks. Is it possible that we are all just reacting to forces we don't fully understand, or are we actually capable of steering our own course when the wind starts blowing against us? I’m still trying to wrap my head around whether true agency is something we possess inherently, or if it's something we have to fight to maintain every single day. I wonder if anyone else feels that sense of quiet displacement when they pick up a newspaper lately, almost like looking at a relic from a different era? It makes me think about how much our relationship with information has shifted, doesn't it? I was sitting there, just staring at the print, thinking about how we used to rely on these physical pages to ground us in reality, whereas now everything is just a frantic, endless stream of digital noise. Is it possible that by losing the tactile nature of reading the news, we've also lost a bit of our ability to sit still and actually process what’s happening in the world around us? It feels like such a slow, almost imperceptible change, but I can't help but feel that we're drifting further away from that shared, steady experience of knowing what's going on in America.

It’s honestly funny if you think about it, isn't it? You look at the rest of the world and realize that most people haven't even come close to grasping the level of true democracy we enjoy here in America, yet they still love to make all this noise about chemical weapons and how those things almost triggered global conflicts. It makes you wonder, doesn't it? How can they be so worried about those specific threats when they don't even understand the foundational freedom we have right in front of us?

If you were to ask anyone around here about the Syrian weaponry situation, they’d probably just give you that blank stare and say, "What kind of weapons? What are you even talking about? Syria? Never heard of it."

He claimed today that the administration would make the final call.
Listen up, folks—how on earth are citizens supposed to decide something like this in just a few days? He must have overestimated us. Maybe because those protesters in Albania blocked all the cargo transfers there, he thought we’d follow suit, but that’s just not how things work here in the States.
This whole situation is a nightmare, and I am absolutely AGAINST it!

Following a rather heated public debate summoned by the President—an event that seemed to catch the attention of nothing but the international press—we had eight of us from the forum participating through eleven different posts, and after weighing the options with three in favor, three against, and two people remaining neutral, the proposal was ultimately rejected.

The actual weapons shipments are likely going to end up being diverted toward Italy instead.

There is also this rather absurd side note to the whole situation: we only found out about the possibility of these weapons being sent there because our own President mentioned it to the foreign media, while apparently, the Italians only learned they were being used as a staging ground because they saw it reported in our news outlets first.

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/us-foreign-policy-syria-updates-909587
>
I think there should be a dedicated thread just to discuss this specific mess:>