HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Syria loads chemical weap...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 07:03 PM

Syria loads chemical weapons into bombs; military awaits Assad's order

Source: NBC News

The Syrian military is prepared to use chemical weapons against its own people and is awaiting final orders from President Bashar Assad, U.S. officials told NBC News on Wednesday.

The military has loaded the precursor chemicals for sarin, a deadly nerve gas, into aerial bombs that could be dropped onto the Syrian people from dozens of fighter-bombers, the officials said.

...

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

Read more: http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/05/15706380-syria-loads-chemical-weapons-into-bombs-military-awaits-assads-order?lite



NO TO U.S./NATO INTERVENTION!

42 replies, 5034 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 42 replies Author Time Post
Reply Syria loads chemical weapons into bombs; military awaits Assad's order (Original post)
David__77 Dec 2012 OP
Blunt477 Dec 2012 #1
Jon Ace Dec 2012 #2
David__77 Dec 2012 #4
Puregonzo1188 Dec 2012 #14
ButterflyBlood Dec 2012 #20
riderinthestorm Dec 2012 #21
leveymg Dec 2012 #30
John2 Dec 2012 #34
Posteritatis Dec 2012 #3
delrem Dec 2012 #5
Alamuti Lotus Dec 2012 #6
leftyohiolib Dec 2012 #7
Purveyor Dec 2012 #9
Comrade_McKenzie Dec 2012 #8
madokie Dec 2012 #10
Hugabear Dec 2012 #11
Kurska Dec 2012 #12
Puregonzo1188 Dec 2012 #13
NickB79 Dec 2012 #15
DRoseDARs Dec 2012 #16
David__77 Dec 2012 #19
DRoseDARs Dec 2012 #22
David__77 Dec 2012 #23
DRoseDARs Dec 2012 #24
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #26
David__77 Dec 2012 #28
John2 Dec 2012 #35
Robeysays Dec 2012 #32
David__77 Dec 2012 #41
Phoonzang Dec 2012 #25
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #27
ForgoTheConsequence Dec 2012 #29
Posteritatis Dec 2012 #36
ForgoTheConsequence Dec 2012 #39
David__77 Dec 2012 #42
Robeysays Dec 2012 #33
John2 Dec 2012 #37
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #40
JPK Dec 2012 #17
David__77 Dec 2012 #18
Dokkie Dec 2012 #31
John2 Dec 2012 #38

Response to David__77 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 07:04 PM

1. Don't Flinch. We'll Make You Famous

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 07:08 PM

2. Assad's back is or almost is against the wall.

Sadly, it looks more possible that it might come to military intervention. Not good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jon Ace (Reply #2)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 07:10 PM

4. There is and will be no reason for the US or NATO to intervene.

That would absolutely be a criminal mistake. As it is, the US, NATO, Gulf meddling in Syria has cost many lives and served to fan the flames of international terror.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Reply #4)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 09:07 PM

14. BUT WE'LL BE GREETED AS LIBERATORS!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puregonzo1188 (Reply #14)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:03 PM

20. There are better ways to do military invention that can result in a positive reception

Like note this pic from Libya:

And of course US casualties in Libya: 0. Any likely intervention here would be in the same way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ButterflyBlood (Reply #20)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:12 PM

21. What???!!

You really think the US was NOT involved in Libya's regime change??? Really!!

That said, you really don't think ANY Americans have died in that process??? Really!!! (You can't think of ANY American deaths in Libya recently?)

Beyond that, have you made NO connections between a massive secret CIA station in Libya, poised on the Syrian border, that held prisoners, that was being targeted by Libyan "revolutionaries" (sic), where the AMERICAN Ambassador was holding meetings of SOME sort...

... and yet you still believe that there's nothing to see here?

We just don't know of the involvements by the US and other foreign intermediaries. But I assure you, our bloody hands are all over it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:21 AM

30. The targets are the outside powers leading the intervention.

The obvious targets for Syria fighter bombers are bases in Turkey from which most of the attacks on Syria have been coordinated and launched.

?1351016633

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 05:52 AM

34. It is

 

no different than using a nuclear bomb. The results are the same in my opinion. And I do think the CIA is involved in overthrowing Governments. If the Assad regime is going to die either way, he'll probably pull the trigger, which want be good for anyone. That could have lasting effects in the region. Assad claims, that he expects to die. He could go down in flames.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 07:09 PM

3. All Syria's got to do is, well, not do that.

Though I'm darkly curious as to how many DUers would respond to Assad actually using such weapons with anything other than unconditional condemnation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 07:23 PM

5. Here we go again.

"But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

Meanwhile, one of today's headlines from the NYT is
"U.S.-Approved Arms for Libya Rebels Fell Into Jihadisí Hands"
Doh. How could anyone have foreseen it?

And in newly "free" Aleppo (Syria):
"the provisional Military and Civil Councils of Aleppo have explained the situation to the inhabitants of Aleppo, and have decreed that women are now forbidden to drive"
http://www.globalresearch.ca/syria-the-liberated-zone-of-aleppo-religious-dictatorship-supported-by-france/5313355

Are we, "the west" under our current leadership, total idiots????
It sure as hell seems so.
And we have no effing excuse whatsoever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 07:27 PM

6. "U.S. officials said"...nice when these things discredit themselves

 

the "revolutionaries" bombed a school in Damascus today, I notice that didn't get "U.S. officials'" attention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 07:46 PM

7. are they seeking yellow cake from niger? aluminum tubes?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftyohiolib (Reply #7)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:23 PM

9. 'Follow the Yellowcake Road'... Oh the memories. :(

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 07:51 PM

8. Time for Assad to become a crater. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:35 PM

10. What would keep one of these pilots from turning around and dropping one on assad sorry ass

I don't think he'll do it but one never knows what a mad man will do when cornered. Well we do know they will do strange things, whatever it takes, so at this point he is a dangerous man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:38 PM

11. Are they 45 minutes from being ready?

Sounds like we've been down this road before.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 09:05 PM

12. Desperate men do desperate things, Kissinger was right in one thing you always give your enemies an

escape route. We've failed to do that with Assad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 09:06 PM

13. Middle Eastern nation with chemical weapons...we must invade...why does this seem so familiar?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 09:10 PM

15. The comparisons to Iraq in this thread are laughable

The fact is that Syria is confirmed by numerous non-political organizations around the world to have a substantial chemical weapon program and stockpile. Hell, Syria practically admitted to such just this year: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/24/world/middleeast/chemical-weapons-wont-be-used-in-rebellion-syria-says.html

The comparisons here to Iraq before the 2003 US invasion miss the mark because pretty much every international weapons watchdog group correctly pointed out that those weapons were destroyed by international weapons inspectors during the 1990's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #15)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 09:34 PM

16. "Any intervention is BAD intervention!" is the robotic motto, w/o an ounce of subtlety or nuance.

Looks good on a bumper sticker, makes for terrible philosophical discussion on justifiable intervention and rendering Humanitarian aid in internal conflicts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DRoseDARs (Reply #16)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:01 PM

19. If I supported "R2P," I'd say to intervene to smash the insurgents, not the government.

Ask the unveiled women of Latakia if they want to be "saved" by al-Nusra terrorists...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Reply #19)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:12 PM

22. Notice, the President has said we'd intervene to secure the weapons, not secure Assad's ouster.

It is an internal conflict, we need to stay out of it I agree (and try to keep others out as well: Turkey has shown great restraint, Iran needs to continue having its "supplies" to Syria blocked) but we need to keep Assad's WMDs out as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DRoseDARs (Reply #22)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:20 PM

23. Of course intervention would be for "regime change."

I do not think that Turkey hosting and arming terrorists and insurgents is an example of "restraint" with its neighbor country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Reply #23)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:26 PM

24. The only sources of this "Turkey hosting and arming terrorists and insurgents" are ones that are

questionable at best. That Infowars is the first hit is telling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Reply #19)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:17 PM

26. Yes, your rooting interests are well known. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #26)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:30 PM

28. I'm not advocating intervention, unlike some people.

I'm not advocating the US to intervene and ship arms to the Syrian government. There are those, however, who advocate arming the insurgents. I would oppose either type of intervention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Reply #28)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 06:00 AM

35. I agree with

 

you there. I don't think the insurgents are any better than the Syrian Government. Most of them are Sunni Muslims. So the notion, they will create a Democracy and protect Israel would be flawed U.S. thinking. How do they know Iran and other extremists would not just fill in the void after Assad is eliminated? At least Israel could negotiate with Assad, but whatever comes next, may not negotiate at all with Israel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Reply #19)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:28 AM

32. ignorance is bliss.

 

you have no idea what you are talking about.

I for one stand with freedom fighters of all religions and colors. Whether in 1776 or 2012.

Freedom is freedom, and if they want a Muslim common law. then so be it, but freedom is freedom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robeysays (Reply #32)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 05:10 PM

41. Pol Pot said he was a freedom fighter.

He waged an insurgency, just as are the Syrian and foreign insurgents in Syria.

I don't see how the Syrian insurgency is in any way better than the Khmer Rouge.

I have total grasp of what I'm saying. I have political criteria for whether or not to "stand with" insurgents. That said, I would never advocate the US intervening to support an insurgency.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #15)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:37 PM

25. This place is ridiculous sometimes

Yes it's all a BIIIGGG conspiracy to attack Syria, because there's we'll gain from that. When Syria does use chemical weapons it'll somehow be a US conspiracy too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Phoonzang (Reply #25)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:19 PM

27. Some on the hard left (mostly Stalinists) will support any anti-American dictator.

The Assad Defense League around here was the same crowd that had a big sad because Gaddhafi lost power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #27)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:06 AM

29. Give me a break.

You've watched Red Dawn a few too many times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #29)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 06:08 AM

36. And you weren't here when what geek tragedy mentioned happened. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #36)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:16 AM

39. People say stupid shit on here everyday.

Its not indicative of things as a whole and certainly not a reason to start talking like Glenn Beck "far left" any more scary terms?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #36)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 05:12 PM

42. People were "sad" that the US-led NATO led an aggression against an independent country.

It had nothing to do with Moammar Gaddafi.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #27)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:34 AM

33. yeah. they only noticed when the civilians started shooting back...

 

And some how believe now that they are all just a bunch of terrorist since they came in halfway through what can only be described as a nation wide "Stalingrad" and saw everyone shooting everyone.


Ohmehgurd! look at that! they have long beards(two years of no electricity or running water) and guns! (given to them by deserters for the most part) they must be terrorist!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #27)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 06:09 AM

37. I guess

 

you are right. The same way the U.S. supported Gaddhafi and Assad once. Didn't the Assad Government help us bring down Hussein whom was Sunni? So the Alwaites in the minority helped to bring down Hussein and now the Sunnis are helping to bring down the Alwaites. Now the Government in Iraq is very friendly to Iran and let them use their air space to the U.S. dismay. What is the end game here for the U.S. strategy to create a Democracy for Israel's security? Which Government will we overthrow next? This is nothing more than what I call the strategy of a Blind mouse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to John2 (Reply #37)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 10:19 AM

40. The US never supported Assad--he was always a Soviet affiliate.

Assad managed to avoid the mistake of siding with Saddam in the first Gulf War, but then again so did everyone not named Yasser Arafat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 09:40 PM

17. Why us and NATO.....

Many Arab states in the region, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt even Turkey all have very sophisticated and advanced arms they bought or were given to them by us. Let them put their nice shiny american hardware to work policing their own region. We can supply advice but let them slug it out with Assad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JPK (Reply #17)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:00 PM

18. The US should not give advice and should not indirectly give arms.

That US arms and money are ending up in the hands of radical theocratic terrorists is a sickening use of US citizens' wealth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to David__77 (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:30 AM

31. I just dont understand why

 

Russia and China cant come in and help the Syria govt take care of their terrorist problem. They are losing allies left and right to US supported revolutions. Libya is gone, Sudan is gone and now Syria is about to go. They need to show some support if only to help end the humanitarian crisis in Syria.

I hope its not too late, they better wake up or they will find themselves without an ally.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dokkie (Reply #31)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 06:31 AM

38. Just what

 

make you think Russia and China want have relations with whatever Government replaces Assad? They are playing a game of not interfering, whereas the U.S. is trying to find a way to protect their interests in Israel. Just look at Iraq as an example. That government seems now more favorable to Iran. Russia and China are also friendly and have more relations with Iran than the U.S. I do not agree with this Blind mouse strategy of the U.S. in the Middle East, over throwing different Governments rather than solving the problem legitimately in the Middle East. I don't even trust the new ruling government in Libya or Egypt either. If this is the strategy, then the U.S. just needs to get out of the Middle East instead of meddling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread