Where are the WMD's? Er.. in Syria of course!

Sleipnir

You'd think the Bush administration would have more sense than to use the WMD's line again.
I wonder how far down the 'Axis on Evil/Invasion" list Syria is ?



Syrian President Bashar Assad has challenged the basis of US sanctions against his country imposed by the Bush administration earlier this week. The US Government said it was introducing the sanctions because Syria allegedly possessed weapons of mass destruction and had allowed militants to cross its border to resist the US occupation of Iraq. President Assad denied the charges today and challenged the US provide evidence to support its allegations. The sanctions ban all US imports to Syria except food and medicine and also forbid direct flights between the two countries. The US also demanded that Syria expel Palestinian militants based on its territory, but Assad refused to do so today. The Syrian Government regards Palestinian militants as legitimate opponents of Israel's illegal occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Wrestlemania

Syria in my eyes is a terrorist state and helps back the likes of Hizbollah and Ammal.

It also has the biggest stock pile of Chemical and Biological Weapons and developing (apparently) a Nuclear Weapon programme to counter the Israeli Samson Option.

To be honest maybe the Coaltion Invaded the wrong country, Syria have been for years throwing there weight around and Housed a considerable amount on Nazi war criminals, which the also used in 1948 to help wipe out the fledgling Israeli state aswell as quite a lot of Friendly Arabs who happened to be in the New State.

And they still have 30,000 Troops + in Beruit and the the Bekka Valley and being very oppresive to the Lebanesse government in more ways the one.

So in a nutshell, I reckon they do have the WMD's.

Washout

So in a nutshell, I reckon they do have the WMD's. [/B]

I ownder if a similar feeling was felt about iraq. at the time of the pre invasion of iraq i kind of too felt that Iraq had WMD but still thought the invasion was unjustified without the backing of the UN.

I am even more convinced that Syria has such weapons but the Us govt has to be alot more careful than they had been with Iraq.

I dont think the US will do anything until after the Presidential election there.

Wrestlemania

Geographically it is a ba5tard to invaded and very close to the Israeli and Lebanesse frontier which could cause a serious destablisation of the region.

Sleipnir

Well, I can't see how they could invade Syria without really scaring the Arab world in general. It really would look like America was trying to take the entire region by subterfuge i.e.
It would be great for them to have control of both Iraq and Syria.
They would have friends all around them, Jordan to the south, Turkey to the north, Saudi to the south and only the nasty Iran to deal with to the west.

Of course, oil is again nothing to do with it seeing as Syria has 2.4 bbl reserves and crude accounts for 70% of their exports. Not to the U.S. though!

Amazing that the war in the Congo has resulted in the deaths of about 3 million people (although only 10% directly by conflict) and yet the brave Americans aren't storming their way in to bring peace & prosperity.

Wrestlemania

Oil equals more than life mostly everywhere these days

kahlua

I doubt the Americans are gonna invade anywhere else considering the backlash they got for Iraq.

mr_angry

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
So in a nutshell, I reckon they do have the WMD's.

It'd be nice to see some (proper) evidence though, wouldn't it?

Wrestlemania

True and I agree..

But it is confirm that they have a huge chem/bio weapons stockpile.

Only time will tell.

Lemming

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
But it is confirm that they have a huge chem/bio weapons stockpile.

Confirmed according to whom?

This is where the problem now lies. The US has _UTTERLY_ destroyed any credibility and intregrity it may ever have had on the world stage (and even on it's own domestic stage to an extent) and it will find any attempts to do similar in future all the harder as fewer and fewer countries will be willing to lend their support.

Wrestlemania

http://www.state.gov/t/us/rm/24135.htm

http://cns.miis.edu/research/wmdme/syria.htm


FYI

Sleipnir

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
http://www.state.gov/t/us/rm/24135.htm

http://cns.miis.edu/research/wmdme/syria.htm


FYI

The state department released exactly the same sort of 'proof' as a reason to invade Iraq.
That proved that you can't take what the U.S. administration says as proof!

sovtek

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
Syria in my eyes is a terrorist state and helps back the likes of Hizbollah and Ammal.

Then I guess America is too if you consider the following...

It also has the biggest stock pile of Chemical and Biological Weapons and developing (apparently) a Nuclear Weapon programme to counter the Israeli Samson Option.

Syria have been for years throwing there weight around and Housed a considerable amount on Nazi war criminals,

which the also used in 1948 to help wipe out the fledgling Israeli state aswell as quite a lot of Friendly Arabs who happened to be in the New State.

And they still have 30,000 Troops + in Beruit and the the Bekka Valley and being very oppresive to the Lebanesse government in more ways the one.

...as justification for invasion.
Just replace America with Syria and you've just about got the same argument.
Nevermind that the fledgling Israeli state set out to take over the surrounding countries mentioned land in 1948.

Wrestlemania

This is off topic, Israel was setup by the UN, when independance was gained they were then to fight a war against surrounding arab countries hell bent on wiping them out.

They were not the agressors and there local arab neighbours believed in there state aswell but the likes of Syria, Jordan,leabnon and egypt wanted to wipe out a tiny state.

No wonder they take no sh1t of anyone.. Imagine that happened to Ireland back then.

The lands they took were from the agressor and they were quite happy with their state until the evil Muchta and Nazi backed arab forces wanted to annihilate them and this is fact, in all history books.

America has it's issues but are no way a terrorist state.I don't agree with a lot of there policies but they are more democratic and civilised compared to Syria.

America has it's issues but are no way a terrorist state.I don't agree with a lot of there policies but they are more democratic and civilised compared to Syria.

What defines a terrorist state? The ignoring of International Laws? The bringing of war against others? In what way has the US not performed similiar acts to these Terrorist states. Theres only two main differences between the US and a Terrorist state. 1) Its a western Nation, so of course its civilised. 2) Its the worlds only true superpower. If any other nation on this planet had acted in a similiar fashion, it would be targeted, sanctioned, and probably invaded.

The US are Exempt, because no nation has the military or economic capacity to keep them in line.

Syria, is just another stepping stone, for the new Western Imperialism.

vorbis

Syria, is just another stepping stone, for the new Western Imperialism.

yawn.
I think the sanctions are for more likely to be because of alleged support for Iraqi insurgents than the wmd issue. Personally, I believe that groups like Al Qaeda and insurgents need some place to strike from. Theres also the issue of the groups seemingly never running out of ammo. Someones got to backing them.

chewy

hmm syria is now helping iraqi inusrgents when about two /three months ago syria was helping iraqi terrorists and former batthist so which is it?

Wrestlemania

They are all the same anti-colation forces for a PC term

The Corinthian

Syria may well have some ‘WMD’. So what? It’s actually allowed to according to international arms agreements.

With regards to the support of terrorism charge, however, this is probably quite well founded. Damascus has long been at best turning a blind eye to militant Palestinian groups in its territories. This laissez faire approach towards militant Arab groups has probably also been adopted with regard to Iraqi insurgent groups.

This would be a more probable reason for the present US moves against Syria. That and it bolsters Israel - given Syria is now the only potential external threat on her borders - is another.

It’s unlikely that the US will invade or even carry out military strikes on Syria for the foreseeable future, however. She’s overstretched in an increasingly unpopular conflict in Iraq and a campaign in Afghanistan, increasingly reminiscent of the Soviet experience. Nonetheless, Syria is now officially a pariah state and so US foreign policy towards her is unlikely to change regardless of who wins in Novembers US presidential election.

sceptre

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
This is off topic, Israel was setup by the UN

(Just to head the inevitable shout of at the pass...), unlike some people I don't have a problem with the continued existence of Israel. I'm not accusing /anyone/ here but I'd rather not to have to run through the difference between "Israel" and "Jewish" again. I think we could all do without that

Israel wasn't set up by the UN. It declared its independence unilaterally on May 14, 1948. The closest the UN had come to setting up the state of Israel was the resolution of November 29, 1947 calling for such a state to be set up and asking the inhabitants of the territory to get off their asses and do something about it. Obviously there was quite a bit of discussion on the borders that would exist and how to accommodate the two groups that had settled there, leading to the abandoned partition plans of 1947. And of course there was the 1917 mandate.

Not set up by the UN though.

You're right on one thing though - it's a little off-topic. I'm not going to deal with the agressor thing as that's totally off-topic.

Wrestlemania

True and Well Said.

I think the sanctions are for more likely to be because of alleged support for Iraqi insurgents than the wmd issue. Personally, I believe that groups like Al Qaeda and insurgents need some place to strike from. Theres also the issue of the groups seemingly never running out of ammo. Someones got to backing them.

I dunno whether Syria is officially helping these insurgents. Sure, there is a desire to fight against the occupation, but whether the Syrian Government is actually supplying insurgents with training/weapons, I doubt it.

Thing is, despite the lack of major wealth for the general populase in Arab countries, all it takes is a number of influential/rich business men to support such operations. Also to note that with any occupied country there would have been plenty of small arms placed away for the chance that the country was occupied and the occupiers needed to be resisted.

Perhaps i'm being too naive but I doubt Syria has the balls to back Insurgents against the Coalition especially with the US acting like a bull in a china shop. No. I'm sure theres groups of sympathic people in Syria and other arab countries, that are helping out, but I don't see any real evidence that Syria is acting against the US as a Nation.

Edit. Also to note that Syria and its allies might be more capable of resisting an allied attack than Iraq did alone. Syria has closer ties to the other Arab Nations, and their armies while not top-notch are quite decent. Political strutting is what i expect to see for a few months.

Wrestlemania

The Iraqi army never handed in there guns just brought them home, same with RPG's Mortars, SA-7 etc etc and Plenty of Plastic Explosive.

In reference to wealth in the Arab world there is plenty in about 20% of the entire population.

I would say Syria would or could be supplying weapons via lebanon and possibly training fighters there. That is a theory I have, Since the IRA were also trained in Lebanon aswell.

Victor

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/syria/index.html

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
It also has the biggest stock pile of Chemical ....Weapons

.... on the Middle East - but only one of something like 41 around the world.

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
and developing (apparently) a Nuclear Weapon programme to counter the Israeli Samson Option.

Apparently not.

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
To be honest maybe the Coaltion Invaded the wrong country, Syria have been for years throwing there weight around

Really? Other than being part of the coalition that freed Kuwait in 1991, who have they attacked recently?

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
and Housed a considerable amount on Nazi war criminals,

Linkies?

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
And they still have 30,000 Troops + in Beruit and the the Bekka Valley and being very oppresive to the Lebanesse government in more ways the one.

... for example?

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
So in a nutshell, I reckon they do have the WMD's.

Of course they do, who doesn't? Importantly it hasn't or isn't using them.

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
http://cns.miis.edu/research/wmdme/syria.htm

Whoot! 5-year old source.

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
I would say Syria would or could be supplying weapons

Why would the supply weapons when vast quantites were cached around Iraq before the war?

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
via lebanon

But Lebanon and Iraq don't have a mutual border.

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
possibly training fighters there.

So it's not Al Qaeda / Special Republican Guard / M14 / Fedayeen Saddam / local hotheads / criminals .....

Wrestlemania

Victor for you information there is 30,000 troops from syria in leabnon in beruit and bekka...look on the net if your so concerned.

And as for Nazi's have another good look plenty of nazi's were hunted down and killed by nazi hunters in damascus..

These are facts and not idealistic or left wing fables they are pure facts.

There was no syrian troops in desert storm they proved safe passage for downed pilots and escaped members of SAS patrols.

Aparently yes to nuclear weapon research, if you love the net have a look.

Lebanon is another massive training area and out of reach of american and coaltion forces

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
Aparently yes to nuclear weapon research, if you love the net have a look.

Actually when a claim is challenged the onus is generally upon the claimant to back up his / her claim rather than those challenging. Otherwise, anything you may say can be treated as fantasy, fabrication or simple wishful thinking.

Big Ears

The thing is though none of us sitting at home/work thousans of mile away from syria and Lebbanon ( well most of us anyway ) have no clue whats actually going on , infact I doubt any western countries have a clue what exactly goes on there .

Victor

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
Victor for you information there is 30,000 troops from syria in leabnon in beruit and bekka...look on the net if your so concerned.

Did I dispute this? I was wondering how Syria was "being very oppresive to the Lebanesse government in more ways the one." (Please note the Syrian presence in Lebanon is sanctioned by the Arab League.

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
And as for Nazi's have another good look plenty of nazi's were hunted down and killed by nazi hunters in damascus..

A google throws up "After WW2 Alois Brunner found gainful employment courtesy of the CIA and later he escaped to Syria where he became a government adviser." http://www.deathcamps.info/Nazis/page_9.htm

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
These are facts and not idealistic or left wing fables they are pure facts.

Are you sure name calling will get you anywahere?

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
There was no syrian troops in desert storm they proved safe passage for downed pilots and escaped members of SAS patrols.

They needed "17,000 troops, 300 T-62 tanks" to do this? Where do you think the Syrian 9th division was during the war?

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
Aparently yes to nuclear weapon research, if you love the net have a look.

Well reaserch indicates not a lot of progress on thier behalf.

Originally posted by Wrestlemania
Lebanon is another massive training area and out of reach of american and coaltion forces

But why would they want to go their. There is no evidence at all to suggest Lebanon is being used as a supply route for weapons of a training ground for people fighting in Iraq.

<edited by bonkey to fix URL tag>

Moriarty

Originally posted by Sleipnir
Of course, oil is again nothing to do with it seeing as Syria has 2.4 bbl reserves and crude accounts for 70% of their exports. Not to the U.S. though!

I've been thinking about this recently but it's still a rather fuzzy idea, so bear with me. I'm throwing some questions and ideas out to see what others think.

What's so inherently wrong about the US invading countries for 'regime change' to secure oil supplies for the world market? It was an excuse often bandied about for Iraq, and it's brought up again and again when talking about different trouble spots around the world - their stocks (or lack there of) of oil.

Before you rush to that reply button with a colourful reply, pause for a moment. Oil really is the backbone of the western world. We get large amounts of our electricity from it. It almost universally powers all transport over land, sea and air. It provides us with plastics aswell as a whole raft of other materials that the modern world simply can't work without for a moment. I'm sure I'm forgetting other very important uses for it.

Now, if we accept that oil is probably the most important raw material that the western world is based upon, why is it so wrong to secure these supplies, to remove control of these supplies from generally bad regiemes that don't have their own populaces best intrests at heart? From regiemes that could quite concievably withold supply completely if they thought it necessary.

It seems to me that this is a massive blind spot to the large majority of people. They equate oil reserves to gold or diamond reserves, when they have a vastly different and more important significance.

From regiemes that could quite concievably withold supply completely if they thought it necessary.

Thats the thing though. Its their oil. Its not a shared resource that everyone has a right to. The Oil lies within their borders, and if they decide not to sell, they have that right.

The other aspect is that if this resource is so valuable why does the US consume so much of it in a wasteful manner? Oil shouldn't be a reason to go to War. At least not an acceptable one.

Wrestlemania

Lebanon is mostly likely a training ground for terrorist as was Libya.

I have heard unconfirmed reports from Leabnesse Friends living in Dublin that Hizbollah are actively training "Iraqi's" and Foriegn Fighters and sending them then through Syria Enroute.

Hizbollah are both backed by the Iranians and Syrians.

In regard to Syrian influence being oppresive in more ways than one in Lebanon, they have there finger in every pot so to speak and the Lebanesse have being trying to get them out for years to rule there country by themselves.

I have heard many a person from beruit sick to the hilt with the syrians, they are kind of an invader in a manner of speaking aswell. As they still hold a lot of the major posts in government and are still the dominant military and secret police.

As with the Nazi's a film based on Fact called "The Exodus",with Paul Newman..Wouldc explain a lot in regard to this.

Regarding the Syrian Troops I stand corrected!