Sharing The Presidents’ Messages On September 11, 2013, exactly twelve years after the calamitous events of 9/11, 2001, which changed world politics forever, President Obama of the USA addressed the nation about the problems caused by the use of chemical weapons in the Syrian conflict. At the end of his speech, he asked the recipients of his message to share it with others, “to make sure they know where I stand, and how they can stay up to date on this situation.” Well, we are only too happy to put ourselves to the President’s service and share his message with our readers. Few other publications reach as many people in as many nations as The Christian Herald. These are momentous times in the history of this unhappy world. World commentators try to make sense of world developments from a human perspective; we look at them from a spiritual perspective, making sense not only in what they mean in the short term, but where they take the world in terms of biblical prophecies. Our record over the two decades, since we’ve been doing this work, is unequalled by any publication. It took us that long to make an impact on the world, but now the momentum take us forward in ways that a few years ago we could only dream of. The sad thing is that the world is not going in the direction wanted by our heavenly Father. He wants to save all human beings, but unfortunately not all humans want to be saved. Mat 18:11 For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost. Mat 18:12 "What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep, and one of them goes astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine and go to the mountains to seek the one that is straying? Mat 18:13 And if he should find it, assuredly, I say to you, he rejoices more over that sheep than over the ninety-nine that did not go astray. Mat 18:14 Even so it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish. With every passing day, the world inches closer to a catastrophe from which few people will survive. The conflict in the Middle East is merely a stage in that direction. It is in this light that one must view the following statements from President Obama and President Putin of Russia. Good evening -- I just addressed the nation about the use of chemical weapons in Syria. Over the past two years, what began as a series of peaceful protests against the repressive regime of Bashar al-Assad has turned into a brutal civil war in Syria. Over 100,000 people have been killed. In that time, we have worked with friends and allies to provide humanitarian support for the Syrian people, to help the moderate opposition within Syria, and to shape a political settlement. But we have resisted calls for military action because we cannot resolve someone else's civil war through force. The situation profoundly changed in the early hours of August 21, when more than 1,000 Syrians – including hundreds of children – were killed by chemical weapons launched by the Assad government. What happened to those people – to those children – is not only a violation of international law – it's also a danger to our security. Here's why: If we fail to act, the Assad regime will see no reason to stop using chemical weapons. As the ban against these deadly weapons erodes, other tyrants and authoritarian regimes will have no reason to think The Christian Herald No 29 Page 1 twice about acquiring poison gases and using them. Over time, our troops could face the prospect of chemical warfare on the battlefield. It could be easier for terrorist organizations to obtain these weapons and use them to attack civilians. If fighting spills beyond Syria's borders, these weapons could threaten our allies in the region. So after careful deliberation, I determined that it is in the national security interests of the United States to respond to the Assad regime's use of chemical weapons through a targeted military strike. The purpose of this strike would be to deter Assad from using chemical weapons, to degrade his regime's ability to use them, and make clear to the world that we will not tolerate their use. Though I possess the authority to order these strikes, in the absence of a direct threat to our security I believe that Congress should consider my decision to act. Our democracy is stronger when the President acts with the support of Congress – and when Americans stand together as one people. Over the last few days, as this debate unfolds, we've already begun to see signs that the credible threat of U.S. military action may produce a diplomatic breakthrough. The Russian government has indicated a willingness to join with the international community in pushing Assad to give up his chemical weapons and the Assad regime has now admitted that it has these weapons, and even said they'd join the Chemical Weapons Convention, which prohibits their use. It's too early to tell whether this offer will succeed, and any agreement must verify that the Assad regime keeps its commitments. But this initiative has the potential to remove the threat of chemical weapons without the use of force. That's why I've asked the leaders of Congress to postpone a vote to authorize the use of force while we pursue this diplomatic path. I'm sending Secretary of State John Kerry to meet his Russian counterpart on Thursday, and I will continue my own discussions with President Putin. At the same time, we'll work with two of our closest allies – France and the United Kingdom – to put forward a resolution at the U.N. Security Council requiring Assad to give up his chemical weapons, and to ultimately destroy them under international control. Meanwhile, I've ordered our military to maintain their current posture to keep the pressure on Assad, and to be in a position to respond if diplomacy fails. And tonight, I give thanks again to our military and their families for their incredible strength and sacrifices. As we continue this debate – in Washington, and across the country – I need your help to make sure that everyone understands the factors at play. Please share this message with others to make sure they know where I stand, and how they can stay up to date on this situation. Anyone can find the latest information about the situation in Syria, including video of tonight's address, here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/foreign-policy/syria Thank you, President Barack Obama President Obama acknowledged the diplomatic role played by Russia’s President Putin in his decision to postpone his planed strike against Syria. A couple of days earlier, world media outlets sung odes to President Putin for his efforts to solve the Syrian crisis diplomatically. He won plaudits for convincing President Assad of Syria to give up his stockpile of chemical weapons. President Putin, however, seems to have a different agenda, and seeing a weakness in America’ position, he showed the world a different face just a couple of days later. Putin to Offer Iran S-300s, Another Reactor Emboldened by US weakness? Russian president to make the offer at a meeting with Iranian President Hassan. Russian President Vladimir Putin will offer to supply Iran with S-300 air defense missile systems, and to build a second reactor at the Bushehr nuclear plant, Russia's Kommersant business daily reported Wednesday. Citing a source close to the Kremlin, the publication reported that Putin will renew an offer to supply Iran with five S-300 ground-to-air missile systems when he meets Iranian President Hassan Rowhani on Friday, at a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization that is to be held in Kyrgyzstan. Russia signed a contract in 2007 to supply Iran with five S-300 advanced missile batteries, which can be used against aircraft or guided missiles, at a cost of $800 million. In 2010, Russia's then-president Dmitry Medvedev cancelled the deal, after the US and Israel applied strong pressure on him. The US and Israel worry that the S-300 would make Iran less vulnerable to attack by either one of them, and motivate Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. The source told Kommersant that The Christian Herald No 29 Page 2 Russia's offer was conditional on Iran's withdrawing a $4 billion lawsuit that it has filed at an international court in Geneva against Russia's arms export agency, for balking on the original S-300 deal. Kommersant wrote that Putin would offer to Iran a modified export version of the S-300 systems called S-300VM Antey-2500. The source also said that Putin was ready to sign a deal with Iran on building a second reactor for the Bushehr nuclear plant, adding that the deal was not "particularly profitable from an economic point of view, but was rather political." The reports of the impending deal with Iran, if true, appear to jibe with recent analyses that said that Putin has been emboldened by US President Barack Obama's weak and vacillating policies regarding the Middle East. (Rowhani, IsraelNationalNews.com, Sept. 11, 2013) Isn’t this remarkable? Without wasting too much time, “emboldened by President Obama's weak and vacillating policies regarding the Middle East”, President Putin showed the world that his interests do not quite match those of the western powers.