Syria moving checmical weapons
#1
Posted 15 July 2012 - 08:10 AM
Awesome. So now we can talk about Syria's WMD program. Good tie in with 1988 and the Kurds getting gassed (but no mention of the many Kurds dying at the hands of Turkey's cross border operations).
Thin you've seen this before? You are right. Billary doing her best attack dog stance trying to convince the rest of the world that she is correct.
Andrew Tabler
"It's not like Iraq where you had to guess at it, We know where they are."
Yeah they 'knew' last time as well.
Ohhh largest stockpiles in the world. Hmmm .....
'Fool me once ......'
ohm on soundcloud.com
#2
Posted 15 July 2012 - 08:48 AM
Edited by Charles Anthony, 17 July 2012 - 12:22 PM.
removed entire Opening Post quoted in reply
#4
Posted 15 July 2012 - 10:12 AM
I realize that, at the same time I realize that he is trying to make a comparison between Iraq 2003 and Syria 2012 where non exists.The US might be informing the world it sees chemical/bio weapons being moved and prapeared for use but it does not signify that they intent to do something about it.I believe GH doubts Syria has chemical/bio weapons.
#5
Posted 15 July 2012 - 10:15 AM
I realize that, at the same time I realize that he is trying to make a comparison between Iraq 2003 and Syria 2012 where non exists.The US might be informing the world it sees chemical/bio weapons being moved and prapeared for use but it does not signify that they intent to do something about it.
Assad would be insane to use his nerve or mustard gas. The real worry is it falling into the 'wrong hands'...yes, they're all wrong hands. But, you know what I mean.
Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
---Cletus
#6
Posted 15 July 2012 - 10:21 AM
Assad would be insane to use his nerve or mustard gas. The real worry is it falling into the 'wrong hands'...yes, they're all wrong hands. But, you know what I mean.
There's "terrorizing" with the weapons ("Hey, suckers, you know we got 'em, and you know we'll use 'em if we have to")--
That is to say, normal and typical Statecraft.
And then there's "TERRORIZING" with the weapons ("Close your eyes, suckers, here they come!")--which is objectively worse.
--Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
#7
Posted 15 July 2012 - 10:29 AM
Absolutely.
There's "terrorizing" with the weapons ("Hey, suckers, you know we got 'em, and you know we'll use 'em if we have to")--
That is to say, normal and typical Statecraft.
And then there's "TERRORIZING" with the weapons ("Close your eyes, suckers, here they come!")--which is objectively worse.
Yes. Syria is thought to be one of the few countries having VX which is the deadliest nerve agent on the planet. An area denial weapon like mustard 'gas' with numerous unique properties which make clean-up nearly impossible. The amount needed to kill (painfully) is in the microgram range. Britain traded it to the USA for the H-Bomb. The US/Britain have since destroyed their stockpiles. Russia...we're not sure.
Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
---Cletus
#8
Posted 15 July 2012 - 11:07 AM
-Barry Goldwater-
Some people regard private enterprise as a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look on it as a cow they can milk. Not enough people see it as a healthy horse, pulling a sturdy wagon.
-Winston Churchill-
Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
-Ronald Reagan-
#9
Posted 15 July 2012 - 11:31 AM
Geez…..I thought everyone already knew that Saddam’s WMDs ended up in Syria………I highly doubt Assad would use chemical weapons on his own population………..To add, the tin hatters have got it all wrong, the United States/the West won’t intervene if it looks like Assad’s stockpiles could be compromised, but fearing said weapons could be obtained by Hamas/Hezbollah/PLO etc, I’ve no doubt the IDF would play the part of the Adjustment Bureau to Syrian WMD programs for a second time.
I believe most of the Israel = Bad crowd around here has stated that no WMDs or their precursors ended up moving from Iraq to Syria. That GH doubts Syria's own chemical weapons program...a "known" as Rumsfeld would say...pretty much tells you what you need to know about that.
Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
---Cletus
#10
Posted 15 July 2012 - 11:55 AM
Geez…..I thought everyone already knew that Saddam’s WMDs ended up in Syria………I
It's a good scapegoat since there were no WMDs found in Iraq. Also Syria has been in the sites for some time. So to say that the weapons went to Iraq provides a nice easy context to start the drums of an invasion by NATO into Syria.
highly doubt Assad would use chemical weapons on his own population……….
Even if they did have it, I agree on this.
To add, the tin hatters have got it all wrong, the United States/the West won’t intervene if it looks like Assad’s stockpiles could be compromised,
No, they won't get invaded because Syria has a couple really big friends supporting it. Which would mean a larger war at play here. NATO cannot get into this one without taking a few hits on the chin as well.
but fearing said weapons could be obtained by Hamas/Hezbollah/PLO etc, I’ve no doubt the IDF would play the part of the Adjustment Bureau to Syrian WMD programs for a second time.
An attack by Israel would also be quite the bad move. The attack on the Syrian plant is an act of war when you take the technical look at it.
Edited by GostHacked, 15 July 2012 - 11:56 AM.
ohm on soundcloud.com
#11
Posted 15 July 2012 - 12:10 PM
It's a good scapegoat since there were no WMDs found in Iraq. Also Syria has been in the sites for some time. So to say that the weapons went to Iraq provides a nice easy context to start the drums of an invasion by NATO into Syria.
Of course there were no WMDs found in Iraq, they were sent to Syria before the war
No, they won't get invaded because Syria has a couple really big friends supporting it. Which would mean a larger war at play here. NATO cannot get into this one without taking a few hits on the chin as well.
Libya also had real big friends………..
An attack by Israel would also be quite the bad move. The attack on the Syrian plant is an act of war when you take the technical look at it.
And yet, they leveled the joint........And Syria's (and her big friends) response?
-Barry Goldwater-
Some people regard private enterprise as a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look on it as a cow they can milk. Not enough people see it as a healthy horse, pulling a sturdy wagon.
-Winston Churchill-
Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
-Ronald Reagan-
#13
Posted 15 July 2012 - 01:49 PM
Once again, I highly doubt the US is getting ready or even interested in a war/invasion of Syria and to me this is just a way for the US to inform the world and try to get Russia to agree to stronger action by the UN rather than a NATO strike.It's a good scapegoat since there were no WMDs found in Iraq. Also Syria has been in the sites for some time. So to say that the weapons went to Iraq provides a nice easy context to start the drums of an invasion by NATO into Syria.
Syria's "really big friends" have interests, and those interests are tied to finances, I doubt that Russia or China will go to war over Syria, they might huff and puff all they want but Syria is worth a war with the west.No, they won't get invaded because Syria has a couple really big friends supporting it. Which would mean a larger war at play here. NATO cannot get into this one without taking a few hits on the chin as well.
I'm pretty sure the Syrian military won't use them against Israel, but one of the organizations who want Israel wiped off the map getting their hands on said weapons will force them to Act.An attack by Israel would also be quite the bad move.
What is Syria going to do? When push comes to shove Israel and Turkey are the two nations that could and likely would be the once to suffer if Chemical/Biological weapons are used by the Syrian Military or given out to different groups and I think that if NATO does not do anything, Israel and Turkey might have to go out on their own to protect themselves.The attack on the Syrian plant is an act of war when you take the technical look at it.
#14
Posted 15 July 2012 - 04:50 PM
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free and civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as their religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."
Thomas Jefferson










