Another Middle East Crisis, Syrian Special "WMD"

[myreality]

The guy is not going to have a country to rule after all is said and done.

[Indalecia]

Well if he can't have it, no one can.

[Ashmada]

The guy is not going to have a country to rule after all is said and done.

He no curr. All he wants is to:
1) survive (he won't if he surrenders; he's already gone way too far for it to end any other way than Kaddafi)
2) keep up the luxurious lifestyle.

If he has to slaughter half the country for that, he will.

[Correction]

Morsy got a CNN interview.

Egyptian revolutionaries toppled longtime strongman Hosni Mubarak in early 2011, and Morsy has said Egypt will work for Arab and international support to replace al-Assad. Asked whether he thought the Syrian leader should be tried before the International Criminal Court for war crimes, Morsy said, "It is not I who want this, but the Syrian people who want this."

"This phase is the phase of the people," Morsy said. "Similar to what the Egyptian people wanted, the Syrian people want it. And we support the Syrian people, and they're going to win, and they have the will to win."

Not a huge shock considering his rise to power was fueled by a revolution, if more peacefully. It's also Egypt flexing its influence again since it is a historical rival to Iran's influence in the mideast.

[archibaldcrane]

disregard that, i suck cocks

[Ashmada]

Morsy got a CNN interview.



Not a huge shock considering his rise to power was fueled by a revolution, if more peacefully. It's also Egypt flexing its influence again since it is a historical rival to Iran's influence in the mideast.

Not at all a shock: "the Syrian people wants this" reads differently depending on how naïve you are/aren't:
Naïve version: "the Syrian people wants freedom from Assad's tyrany/slaughter"
Morsi's actual belief: "the Syrian people wants an islamist state"

Just like in his country, if the revolutionaries succeed, their achievement will be hijacked by islamists.

[Correction]

It's more plausible that Morsy wants a regime in Syria that's hostile to Iran. It's bound to be a non-secular state no matter what happens.

[Cail]

LONDON (Reuters) - Israeli forces have attacked a target on the Syrian-Lebanese border overnight, a Western diplomat and three regional security sources said on Wednesday, at a time of growing concern in the Jewish state over the fate of Syrian chemical and conventional weapons.

The sources, who declined to be named because of the sensitivity of the issue, had no further information about what might have been hit or where precisely the attack happened.

The Lebanese army reported a heavy presence of Israeli jets over its territory throughout the night.

"There was definitely a hit in the border area," one security source said. A Western diplomat in the region who asked about the strike said "something has happened", without elaborating.

An activist in Syria who works with a network of opposition groups around the country said that she had heard of a strike in southern Syria from her colleagues but could not confirm.

Israel's Vice Premier Silvan Shalom said on Sunday that any sign that Syria's grip on its chemical weapons was slipping, as President Bashar al-Assad fights rebels trying to overthrow him, could trigger Israeli intervention.

Israeli sources said on Tuesday that Syria's advanced conventional weapons would represent as much of a threat to Israel as its chemical arms should they fall into the hands of Syrian rebel forces or Hezbollah guerrillas based in Lebanon.

Israel has sent its national security adviser, Yaakov Amidror, to Russia and its military intelligence chief Major-General Aviv Kochavi to the United States for consultations, Israeli media said.

In Jerusalem, the Israeli military declined any comment.

"We do not comment on reports of this kind," an Israeli Defense Force spokeswoman said.

Vice Premier Silvan Shalom, on Israel Radio, was asked if there was unusual activity on the northern front.

"The entire world has said more than once that it takes developments in Syria very seriously, developments which can be in negative directions. And therefore the world, led by President Obama who has said this more than once, is taking all possibilities into account and of course any development which is a development in a negative direction would be something that needs stopping and prevention."

.

[Ragnus]

Man, the world usually pins the "They do anything they want then tell us to go fuck ourselves when we ask about it" tag on the US. Gonna be pissed if Israel drags us into something big because they bit off way more than they can chew.

[archibaldcrane]

We need way more information before even beginning to speculate on what happened there.

[Waraji]

We need way more information before even beginning to speculate on what happened there.

I'm sure House Republicans wouldn't agree with you.

[archibaldcrane]

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/01/30/wo...ike/?hpt=hp_t3

(CNN) -- Israeli fighter jets attacked a convoy along the Lebanese-Syrian border overnight, a senior U.S. official said Wednesday, as tensions mounted over the potential fallout from Syria's protracted civil war.

The Israelis struck the convoy in Syria because it was carrying SA-17 missile parts and equipment that could have been used to strike Israel, another source told CNN.

The senior official said the United States does not believe the airstrike was linked to growing concerns about Syria's chemical weapons.
"It was unrelated to chemical weapons, we see no nexus," the official said Wednesday. The strike is thought to have hit a "target of opportunity."
"Whether it was an attack against a supply convoy or a terrorist leader, it's not particularly surprising," senior Brookings fellow Michael O'Hanlon said. "At first glance, it likely won't be seen as a large escalation. Though there's still a possibility for retaliation."

The move comes just days after Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev made headlines when he said Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's hold on power was "slipping away."

Russia, considered an influential power broker in the nearly 2-year-old conflict, has criticized Western powers, including the United States, that have recognized the opposition as Syria's rightful leadership.

There have been concerns about the security of Syria's chemical weapons arsenal, as well as the security of its larger conventional weapons.
Last month, NATO said Syria's government is "approaching collapse" and urged al-Assad to stop fighting and accommodate a political transfer of power.
The United States has provided more than $200 million in humanitarian aid and other funding to the Syrian opposition. Tuesday, President Barack Obama approved another $155 million in aid.

The United States has pressed the Syrian opposition to establish a leadership structure, amid a conflict that has already claimed the lives of about 60,000 people, according to United Nations estimates.

But Washington has been hesitant to get too involved in the region. Obama told CBS's "60 Minutes" that "we want to make sure that not only does it (U.S. involvement) enhance U.S. security, but also that it is doing right by the people of Syria and neighbors like Israel that are going to be profoundly affected by it."

Target of opportunity. Hmmm.

[ronin sparthos]

If Assad is really on the ropes he wouldnt have the resources to retaliate and if the weapons were being used by rebels/terrorists then the assumption it would be used against Israel would be backed by more than just speculation. Intelligence data we arent privy to.

I mean, Israel is paranoid as fuck but even they need a reason for blowing up some rocket parts. I wouldnt worry about us getting dragged into Syria, thats what Iran is for.

[archibaldcrane]

I don't think a "Syrian operation" would be much more involved than our Egypt operation - the difference is just that we have less interest in Syria. The problem is the rebels are getting support quite literally from Al Queda islamists, and the new regime is unlikely to be friendly to the US (which is completely unsurprising given that they are getting slaughtered in the streets and we are sitting on our hands).

[ronin sparthos]

Thats if a new regime even coalesces after Assad is toppled. Egypt was in a better position coming out of its revolution and now it seems that the potential for civil war may have merely been delayed and Syria is going to be in ruins after the dust settles. Im sure everyone is doing the calculations on the odds of a failed state popping up, destabilizing the region.

[myreality]

http://rt.com/usa/mccain-graham-syria-war-555/



This seems familiar.....

Syrian government and the opposition accuse each other of using chemical weapons. The US considers this a “red line” – and two US senators are now urging Washington to declare war in response to alleged use of the weapons.

As the Assad government and the opposition throw out accusations over the use of chemical weapons and the US is assessing the situation, two US senators are urging the president to go to war. Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) released a statement on Wednesday, urging President Obama to ‘take immediate action’ and consider deploying troops.

"President Obama has said that the use of weapons of mass destruction by Bashar Assad is a 'red line' for him that 'will have consequences,'" the statement reads. "If today's reports are substantiated, the President's red line has been crossed, and we would urge him to take immediate action to impose the consequences he has promised."

At a minimum, the senators want the US to provide arms to rebels, establish safe zones to protect civilians, and launch targeted strikes against the Assad regime’s aircraft and SCUD missile batteries. And Graham said that he would even urge the president to declare war, if that is what it would take to stop chemical weapons from being used.

"I don't care what it takes," Graham told Foreign Policy’s The Cable. "If the choice is to send in troops to secure the weapons sites versus allowing chemical weapons to get in the hands of some of the most violent people in the world, I vote to cut this off before it becomes a problem."

US President Barack Obama has previously warned Syria that if chemical weapons were to be used in the conflict, the US would step in. But doing so would likely cost the US billions of dollars at a time when over a decade of foreign involvement has drained the economy. With a population three times the size of Libya, Syria would be a massive and unwelcome undertaking for the US and almost certainly lead to further bloodshed. But the president previously pledged to take action if Syria were to use chemical weapons – a pledge that is now causing a dilemma.

“The use of chemical weapons is and would be totally unacceptable,” Obama said in a December speech at the National Defense University. He also said that he wants to clarify to “Assad and those under his command” that if they “make the tragic mistake of using those weapons,” there would be consequences.

Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had also issued a similar warning, claiming that the use of chemical weapons in Syria would be “a red line for the United States”.

The US military estimates that it would take 75,000 US ground troops to secure all of Syria’s chemical weapons facilities, since the country has one of the largest chemical weapons programs in the world. Syria has about 50 storage and production facilities, many of which are in populated areas. If the US were to seriously consider trying to control all of the facilities, the military would have to deploy tens of thousands of troops, sending the country into yet another large-scale war.

“The idea that Syria was anyone’s to win or lose, or that the United States could significantly shape the outcome there, is typical of the arrogant paternalism and flawed analysis that have gotten this country into heaps of trouble in the Middle East over the years,” Washington Post columnist Aaron David Miller wrote in January.

While President Obama failed to elaborate on the “consequences” he promised Syria if chemical weapons were used in its conflict, the US senators’ encouragement of war is alarming.

To ease the panic, US ambassador to Syria on Wednesday told lawmakers at the House of Representatives that there has been no evidence to back up the chemical weapons claim. But he reiterated that Syria’s government would face “consequences” if it did indeed use such weapons. Israel already alleges that the chemical weapons were used, and the Syrian state-run SANA news agency said that “a missile containing a chemical substance” was fired at a village by “terrorists”, killing 31 people.

[Outlaw]

If we go to war in Syria I think that could be the tipping point.. Where Americans will get feed up with getting involved in Middle East conflicts. I know a lot of people say they already are but I think it will be a reaction on a bigger scale. You could see large protests going on across the country, backlash against Obama from his own supporters, etc.

One issue that would be brought up immediately is the sequestration. They say they have to make cuts cause they don't have the money.. but we can go to war and spend billions injecting ourselves into a conflict that doesn't involve us.

[Outlaw]

Provide arms to the rebels and send over military trainers to help drill their troops.

And years later the rebels become a terrorist organization and use the same weapons and training against us.

This is why I'm in favor of not being involved in the middle east at all.

[myreality]

I can definitely see the propaganda starting. Also if Assad indeed used chemical weapons because he felt suicidal for a second then we are obligated to go sweep in. It is going to suck.

[Outlaw]

(Reuters) - Syrian opposition campaigners said on Monday Syrian forces fired what they said were chemical weapons from multiple rocket launchers at rebels surrounding an army base in the town of Adra on the outskirts of Damascus, killing two fighters and wounding 23.

"Doctors are describing the chemical weapon used as phosphorus that hits the nervous system and causes imbalance and loss of consciousness. The two fighters were very close to where the rockets exploded and they died swiftly. The rest are being treated with Atropine," said Mohammad al-Doumani, an activist in the nearby town of Douma, where the wounded were transported.

There was no independent confirmation of the attack, which follows the death of 26 people in a rocket attack near the city of Aleppo last week. The authorities and rebels accused each other of firing a missile carrying chemicals there.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...0CG12L20130324

So how long now till we go in to "confirm" these reports?