Who knew? “Syria’s plan to give up its chemical weapons could make things worse, not better.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin Russian President Vladimir Putin and President Obama during the G20 summit. (Guneev Sergey/Getty Images)

Understatement. “Veteran Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward criticized President Barack  Obama for having ‘no plan’ and an ‘ad hoc’ response to Syria.”

Res ipsa loquitur (the thing speaks for itself). “Putin: No Syria deal unless US renounces air strikes on Assad.”

Really? “There are two clear winners in this slow-motion train wreck, and they are not Obama or Kerry. They are Assad and Putin. Both wanted, for their own reasons, to avert a military strike, and a military strike was averted. Putin insisted on a diplomatic solution while doing everything to make a diplomatic solution impossible, and now he gets his phony, unenforceable diplomatic solution. Assad wanted to go on killing his opposition, and he will continue to do so. Obama, on the other hand, found himself constantly check-mated, either by his own hand, or, this time, by Kerry’s.”  When you lose the New Republic . . .

You don’t say. “The Syrian political opposition is dead set against the brand-new Obama-administration policy to pursue a new diplomatic negotiation with Russia in an effort to avoid a military strike on Syria, saying the delay and possible cancellation of Obama’s strike would only embolden Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.” We have become the world’s most unreliable ally.

Rhetorical? “Lawrence O’Donnell to Anthony Weiner: ‘What is wrong with you?’ ”

This is news? (At the New York Times, maybe). “Crackdown on Bloggers Is Mounted by China”