Senators claim promise to give up chemical weapons should encourage Congress to authorize attack on Syria

Paul Joseph Watson
September 10, 2013

Image: Wikimedia Commons

Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham have seized upon a potential path to peace – Syria giving up its chemical weapons – and managed to turn it into an avenue for war.

Reacting to Russia’s proposal to put Syria’s chemical weapons under international control and then have them destroyed, Graham and McCain swiftly cited the development as an incentive for Congress to authorize air strikes.

“Today’s development should make Members of Congress more willing to vote yes,” McCain and Graham said in a joint statement. “This will give the President additional leverage to press Russia and Syria to make good on their proposal to take the weapons of mass destruction out of Assad’s hands.”

The move represents a last ditch gambit to secure congressional authorization for what amounts to open ended war, a green light that otherwise looks doomed, with the latest whip count showing that less than 10% of the House supports Obama’s resolution for a strike on Syria.

McCain and Graham are hoping to pull off a repeat of what happened before the invasion of Iraq, where Saddam Hussein was told to hand over his non-existent weapons of mass destruction or face war, a condition he could never hope to fulfil.

Although Syria almost certainly possesses chemical weapons, delays in destroying them could be cited as evidence that Assad is not complying, greasing the skids for an attack. It’s a long shot but it may be the only one left in light of massive public opposition to the whole debacle.

McCain and Graham’s call for the United States to destroy its 3,000 plus tons of chemical weapons, in addition to Israel’s secret stockpiles, is notable by its absence.

While many praised Vladimir Putin for his geopolitical cunning in seizing upon Secretary of State John Kerry’s apparently off script comments about Assad giving up his chemical weapons in order to checkmate the US, others fear that disarming Syria of its WMD could merely be a prelude to an attack.

Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was only invaded when it became obvious that he had no weapons of mass destruction.

Similarly, Colonel Gaddafi agreed to give up his WMD in December 2003, only to see his regime toppled by US-backed rebels eight years later, a repeat of which the White House is pursuing in Syria.

Facebook @
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @


Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for and Prison He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

The Reopen America Back to School Special is now live! Save up to 60% on our most popular items!

Related Articles