Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

David__77

(23,423 posts)
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:03 PM Dec 2012

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 = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Syria loads chemical weapons into bombs; military awaits Assad's order (Original Post) David__77 Dec 2012 OP
Don't Flinch. We'll Make You Famous Blunt477 Dec 2012 #1
Assad's back is or almost is against the wall. Jon Ace Dec 2012 #2
There is and will be no reason for the US or NATO to intervene. David__77 Dec 2012 #4
BUT WE'LL BE GREETED AS LIBERATORS! Puregonzo1188 Dec 2012 #14
There are better ways to do military invention that can result in a positive reception ButterflyBlood Dec 2012 #20
What???!! riderinthestorm Dec 2012 #21
The targets are the outside powers leading the intervention. leveymg Dec 2012 #30
It is John2 Dec 2012 #34
All Syria's got to do is, well, not do that. Posteritatis Dec 2012 #3
Here we go again. delrem Dec 2012 #5
"U.S. officials said"...nice when these things discredit themselves Alamuti Lotus Dec 2012 #6
are they seeking yellow cake from niger? aluminum tubes? leftyohiolib Dec 2012 #7
'Follow the Yellowcake Road'... Oh the memories. :( Purveyor Dec 2012 #9
Time for Assad to become a crater. nt Comrade_McKenzie Dec 2012 #8
What would keep one of these pilots from turning around and dropping one on assad sorry ass madokie Dec 2012 #10
Are they 45 minutes from being ready? Hugabear Dec 2012 #11
Desperate men do desperate things, Kissinger was right in one thing you always give your enemies an Kurska Dec 2012 #12
Middle Eastern nation with chemical weapons...we must invade...why does this seem so familiar? Puregonzo1188 Dec 2012 #13
The comparisons to Iraq in this thread are laughable NickB79 Dec 2012 #15
"Any intervention is BAD intervention!" is the robotic motto, w/o an ounce of subtlety or nuance. DRoseDARs Dec 2012 #16
If I supported "R2P," I'd say to intervene to smash the insurgents, not the government. David__77 Dec 2012 #19
Notice, the President has said we'd intervene to secure the weapons, not secure Assad's ouster. DRoseDARs Dec 2012 #22
Of course intervention would be for "regime change." David__77 Dec 2012 #23
The only sources of this "Turkey hosting and arming terrorists and insurgents" are ones that are DRoseDARs Dec 2012 #24
Yes, your rooting interests are well known. nt geek tragedy Dec 2012 #26
I'm not advocating intervention, unlike some people. David__77 Dec 2012 #28
I agree with John2 Dec 2012 #35
ignorance is bliss. Robeysays Dec 2012 #32
Pol Pot said he was a freedom fighter. David__77 Dec 2012 #41
This place is ridiculous sometimes Phoonzang Dec 2012 #25
Some on the hard left (mostly Stalinists) will support any anti-American dictator. geek tragedy Dec 2012 #27
Give me a break. ForgoTheConsequence Dec 2012 #29
And you weren't here when what geek tragedy mentioned happened. (nt) Posteritatis Dec 2012 #36
People say stupid shit on here everyday. ForgoTheConsequence Dec 2012 #39
People were "sad" that the US-led NATO led an aggression against an independent country. David__77 Dec 2012 #42
yeah. they only noticed when the civilians started shooting back... Robeysays Dec 2012 #33
I guess John2 Dec 2012 #37
The US never supported Assad--he was always a Soviet affiliate. geek tragedy Dec 2012 #40
Why us and NATO..... JPK Dec 2012 #17
The US should not give advice and should not indirectly give arms. David__77 Dec 2012 #18
I just dont understand why Dokkie Dec 2012 #31
Just what John2 Dec 2012 #38

Jon Ace

(243 posts)
2. Assad's back is or almost is against the wall.
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:08 PM
Dec 2012

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

David__77

(23,423 posts)
4. There is and will be no reason for the US or NATO to intervene.
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:10 PM
Dec 2012

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.

ButterflyBlood

(12,644 posts)
20. There are better ways to do military invention that can result in a positive reception
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:03 PM
Dec 2012

Like note this pic from Libya:

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

 

riderinthestorm

(23,272 posts)
21. What???!!
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:12 PM
Dec 2012

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.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
30. The targets are the outside powers leading the intervention.
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:21 AM
Dec 2012

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

 

John2

(2,730 posts)
34. It is
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 06:52 AM
Dec 2012

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.

Posteritatis

(18,807 posts)
3. All Syria's got to do is, well, not do that.
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:09 PM
Dec 2012

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

delrem

(9,688 posts)
5. Here we go again.
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:23 PM
Dec 2012

"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 Jihadis’ 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.

 

Alamuti Lotus

(3,093 posts)
6. "U.S. officials said"...nice when these things discredit themselves
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 08:27 PM
Dec 2012

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

madokie

(51,076 posts)
10. What would keep one of these pilots from turning around and dropping one on assad sorry ass
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 09:35 PM
Dec 2012

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.

Kurska

(5,739 posts)
12. Desperate men do desperate things, Kissinger was right in one thing you always give your enemies an
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:05 PM
Dec 2012

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

NickB79

(19,253 posts)
15. The comparisons to Iraq in this thread are laughable
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:10 PM
Dec 2012

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.

 

DRoseDARs

(6,810 posts)
16. "Any intervention is BAD intervention!" is the robotic motto, w/o an ounce of subtlety or nuance.
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:34 PM
Dec 2012

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

David__77

(23,423 posts)
19. If I supported "R2P," I'd say to intervene to smash the insurgents, not the government.
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:01 PM
Dec 2012

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

 

DRoseDARs

(6,810 posts)
22. Notice, the President has said we'd intervene to secure the weapons, not secure Assad's ouster.
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:12 PM
Dec 2012

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.

David__77

(23,423 posts)
23. Of course intervention would be for "regime change."
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:20 PM
Dec 2012

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

 

DRoseDARs

(6,810 posts)
24. The only sources of this "Turkey hosting and arming terrorists and insurgents" are ones that are
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:26 PM
Dec 2012

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

David__77

(23,423 posts)
28. I'm not advocating intervention, unlike some people.
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:30 AM
Dec 2012

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.

 

John2

(2,730 posts)
35. I agree with
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 07:00 AM
Dec 2012

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.

 

Robeysays

(673 posts)
32. ignorance is bliss.
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 02:28 AM
Dec 2012

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.

David__77

(23,423 posts)
41. Pol Pot said he was a freedom fighter.
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 06:10 PM
Dec 2012

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.

Phoonzang

(2,899 posts)
25. This place is ridiculous sometimes
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:37 PM
Dec 2012

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.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
27. Some on the hard left (mostly Stalinists) will support any anti-American dictator.
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:19 AM
Dec 2012

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

ForgoTheConsequence

(4,869 posts)
39. People say stupid shit on here everyday.
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:16 AM
Dec 2012

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?

David__77

(23,423 posts)
42. People were "sad" that the US-led NATO led an aggression against an independent country.
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 06:12 PM
Dec 2012

It had nothing to do with Moammar Gaddafi.

 

Robeysays

(673 posts)
33. yeah. they only noticed when the civilians started shooting back...
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 02:34 AM
Dec 2012

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!

 

John2

(2,730 posts)
37. I guess
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 07:09 AM
Dec 2012

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.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
40. The US never supported Assad--he was always a Soviet affiliate.
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:19 AM
Dec 2012

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.

JPK

(653 posts)
17. Why us and NATO.....
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:40 PM
Dec 2012

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.

David__77

(23,423 posts)
18. The US should not give advice and should not indirectly give arms.
Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:00 PM
Dec 2012

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

 

Dokkie

(1,688 posts)
31. I just dont understand why
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:30 AM
Dec 2012

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.



 

John2

(2,730 posts)
38. Just what
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 07:31 AM
Dec 2012

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.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Syria loads chemical weap...