For Syria to turn over weapons to the international community seemed an unlikely idea.
As previously reported by The Inquisitr , some of Syria’s chemical weapons are thought to have come from Iraq .
The US intel report on Syria’s chemical weapons seemed pretty certain they existed yet at the same time the case against the Assad regime was not considered a “slam dunk.” US intelligence could not confirm the storage locations of the chemical weapons nor could they prove that Assad had specifically ordered they be used.
Then there were reports that Syrian rebels used chemical weapons . Other reports claimed that even if the Assad regime used chemical weapons the military did so without authorization. In a recent interview Assad claimed he knew nothing about the chemical weapons attacks .
Then Russian Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov suggested he could convince Syria to turn over its chemical weapons. John Kerry gave a week for Syria to turn over its weapons but ultimately he was dismissive, saying, “Sure, he could turn over every bit of his weapons to the international community within the next week, without delay. But [Assad] isn’t about to.”
But then Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem accepted the proposal for Syria to turn over its chemical weapons. In short the United Nations, England, and France all said the idea was worth considering.
The Obama administration is cautiously accepting the proposal as well, but says Syria turning over weapons must happen without “delay or obstruction.” 61 percent of Americans oppose a military strike against Syria, with only 26 percent supporting Obama’s military plans.
If Syria turns over weapons should the United States no longer involve itself in the Syrian civil war?
