Sun Dec 23, 2012, 10:19 AM
UnrepentantLiberal (11,700 posts)
Israel says Syria chemical weapons are secure for now
Source: Reuters
JERUSALEM - Syria's chemical weapons are still secure despite the fact that President Bashar al-Assad has lost control of parts of the country, a senior Israeli defense official said on Sunday. Amos Gilad told Army Radio that the civil war between Assad and opposition forces fighting to topple him had become deadlocked, but that the Syrian leader showed no signs of heeding international calls to step down. "Suppose he (Assad) does leave, there could be chaos ... in the Middle East you never know who will come instead. We need to stay level-headed; the entire world is dealing with this. At the moment, chemical weapons are under control," Gilad said. As Syria's southern neighbor, Israel has been concerned about chemical weapons falling into the hands of Islamist militants or Lebanese Hezbollah fighters, warning it could intervene to stop such developments. Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL5E8NN0QI20121223
|
4 replies, 1069 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
| Author | Time | Post | |
| UnrepentantLiberal | Dec 2012 | OP | |
| ck4829 | Dec 2012 | #1 | |
| UnrepentantLiberal | Dec 2012 | #2 | |
| Igel | Dec 2012 | #3 | |
| Igel | Dec 2012 | #4 |
Response to UnrepentantLiberal (Original post)
Sun Dec 23, 2012, 12:35 PM
ck4829 (15,329 posts)
1. Wait a tic...
|
How are the chemical weapons secure from Hezbollah if the regime that maintains the chemical weapons and Hezbollah are allies?
|
Response to ck4829 (Reply #1)
Sun Dec 23, 2012, 12:51 PM
UnrepentantLiberal (11,700 posts)
2. This is why I don't think Israel ever wanted this to happen.
|
They can't be thrilled with the possibility of having al Qaeda with chemical weapons on their border. Now Israel is no doubt planning an invasion. What a mess.
|
Response to ck4829 (Reply #1)
Sun Dec 23, 2012, 05:01 PM
Igel (17,557 posts)
3. "Allies." Not "overlords."
|
We're allies with Turkey and Cesko. Doesn't mean Erdogan or Klaus can just waltz into the US and carry off a bunch of nuclear weapons.
|
Response to UnrepentantLiberal (Original post)
Sun Dec 23, 2012, 05:07 PM
Igel (17,557 posts)
4. The two dominants strains of reporting this are fascinating.
|
On the one hand, moving them constitutes possible preparations for use. (Of course it does. Then again, preparations don't require moving them, so leaving them in the warehouse could also constitute preparation for use.)
But since it's Assad, those who want him gone at any cost figure that any touching of the weapons must be with ill intent. What other possibility could there possibly be? None, of course. Of course, once he's gone there's the question of who'll get them. We've seen in Libya and Syria that those who take over a military base and claim the spoils aren't always those who actually are progressive in the Western political sense of the word. Those who actually stand the greatest chances of suffering from having them fall into the wrong hands tend to be a little less sensationalistic. Movement can constitute consolidation and securing. Sure, he might use them. But since he hasn't, some of the preparations are "dual use" but others are clearly towards protecting them, well, the "dual use" preparations are also likely to be for the purposes of safeguarding them. The real danger is that the people who are decidedly not "progressive" (again, in the Western political sense of the word) will get them. Then all the decrying of collateral damage as intentional massacre might well be replaced with, well, intentional massacre and claims of "who could have predicted this?" What could possibly go wrong? |

