Syria: Al-Qaeda's battle for control of Assad's chemical weapons plant

[FarCenter]

Set amid the rolling plains outside Aleppo, the town of al-Safira looks just like another vicious battleground in Syria's civil war. On one side are lightly-armed rebels, on the other are government troops, and in between is a hotly-contested no-man's land of bombed-out homes and burned-out military vehicles.

The fight for al-Safira is no ordinary turf war, however, and the prize can be found behind the perimeter walls of the heavily-guarded military base on the edge of town. Inside what looks like a drab industrial estate is one of Syria's main facilities for producing chemical weapons - and among its products is sarin, the lethal nerve gas that the regime is now feared to be deploying in its bid to cling to power.

Last week, Washington said for the first time that it had evidence of Sarin being used in "small" amounts during combat operations in Syria, a move that President Barack Obama has long warned is a "red line" that President Bashar al-Assad must not cross.

But as the West now ponders its response, the fear is not just that President Assad might start using his chemical arsenal in much greater quantities. Of equal concern is the prospect of it falling into even less benign hands - a risk that the stand-off at al Safira illustrates clearly.

For among the rebel lines in al-Safira flutters the black flag of the al-Nusra Brigade, the jihadist group that recently declared its allegiance to al-Qaeda. Known for their fighting prowess honed in Iraq, they are now taking the lead in nearly every frontline in the Syrian war, and earlier this month, pushed to within just over a mile of al-Safira, only to for the Syrian troops to regain the ground last week.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10022753/Syria-Al-Qaedas-battle-for-control-of-Assads-chemical-weapons-plant.html

[TheMightyFavog]

1. Lob a bunch of Tomahawks in there and wipe it off the face of the earth..

See to it that neither side can have access.

[Renew Deal]

2. I agree

Al Queda cannot be permitted to acquire chemical weapons.

[leveymg]

3. And everyone else within ten miles of the place, as well, right?

Exploding Tomahawks don't contain sarin gas, if indeed there is any at that location.

Or, maybe, you would like to parachute in to confirm that information?

Or, maybe, we can finally put pressure on the Saudis and have them call off their dogs of war, the al Nusra Front?

All of the above seem unlikely, don't they?

Maybe, maybe not.

[sabrina 1]

5. So now we have people advocating Genocide on DU!!

Know any Syrians? They ARE human beings, many of them wonderful, kind, compassionate, thoughtful human beings. Most would be appalled if someone suggested hauling WMDs at this country.

WE are helping the Al Queda side of this conflict, just FYI. And in doing so we have helped cause the deaths once again, of untold numbers of innocent human beings.

IF we had not helped Al Queda in Libya and armed them, we and our French, British, Bahrain, Kuwaiti et al allies, they would not be in Syria now.

But if our Government isn't worried about helping them overthrow a government which is none of our business. Did you know that Assad has huge support among his own people, that is why, despite all the help from Western powers, the 'proxy' armies we now use to fight our PNAC wars, can't defeat him.

So why was this ever our business in the first place"

Why was Iraq our business?

Why was Libya our business?

Who elected us to be in charge of the World?

But now that we have helped create yet another monster, the most intelligent thing to do would be to quickly withdraw, provide no more weapons to terrorists, and let the Syrian people sort it out.

Instead we appear to be threatening to join Al Queda in their efforts to overthrow the government.

[Xithras]

8. That would kill untold thousands of civilians.

Your suggestion would create the chemical equivalent of nuclear meltdown as the weapons burst open. The heat of the fires would carry them up into the air, and the wind would do the rest. How many innocent men and women would you kill? How many babies and small children would you consign to a slow suffering death as their diaphragms slowly lost their ability to move? How many more would you consign to permanent neurological damage because they were exposed enough to be impacted, but not enough to die? Will you help the Syrians to deal with the paralyzed and brain damaged civilians who were unlucky enough to be downwind? Or unlucky enough to touch something that was exposed to the gas, during the weeks or months it remains active and the residue remains lethally potent on anything it touched?

The only thing that can neutralize a sarin plant effectively is a nuclear bomb. You have to incinerate it.

So, since you're so willing to consign people to death, how about we just nuke them and be done with it. Who the fuck cares about a bunch of dead Syrian civilians. They're just collateral damage...right?

[Igel]

4. So if you were going to get a bit of sarin-tainted soil ...

This might be a place to start.

Probably easy enough to get into the area and out with a pocketful of the stuff. Makes for a lot of uncertainty in the claims about sarin-gas use.

[sabrina 1]

6. Which is why we should have never interfered in the first place, or in Libya. Now we are planning

to go in and help Al Queda, as we did in Libya.

Too bad our media is so incredibly controlled. We would be far more informed, as other nations are, about what our Government is doing in all these countries and maybe we could stop them.

[HiPointDem]

7. 'civil war' = lol. fought by outside mercenaries and armed by the saudis

and the west.

wmd's anyone?

[sabrina 1]

9. They at least should try something new. After Iraq and Libya few people outside the US are

going to believe the latest 'Mushroom cloud coming our way' routine.