I'm starting to think that nuance thing is over-rated:
Washington threatened on Wednesday to increase support for Syria's rebels if President Bashar al-Assad refuses to discuss a political end to a civil war that is spreading across borders. ...
The U.S.-Russian proposal for a peace conference has raised suspicion among Arab countries that Washington is watering down support for Assad's opponents, who had long refused to negotiate unless Assad is excluded from any future settlement.
I don't know why we have the basic inability to understand what our enemies understand--that negotiating is a complement to fighting and not an alternative. We think talks should include a halt to fighting. Our enemies always seem to understand that talking is just another means of getting to the end--victory.
That's our problem. We aren't focused on victory, and talking becomes the objective rather than just another means to the objective of victory. That's always been our weakness and it is always the reason I worry when we send in the diplomats.
And John Kerry makes me worry more than usual.
I don't rule out talking as a way to resolve this crisis depending on what our objectives are. But I insist that we view the ultimate removal of Assad and his Baath Party as the ultimate objective regardless of what we decide to pursue in the short term.
