Is Syria next?

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
Syria has one of the largest arsenal of chemical weapons on earth. The regime has several tons of Sarin, Tabun and VX nerve agents as well as mustard gas. They also have SCUD missiles which can deliver a 1000 lb. payload of these deadly agents to any target within a range of approximately 300 miles.

Imagine for a moment what would happen if Al-Queda or some other terrorist organization that is currently fighting in the Syrian civil war got hold of just one of these missiles. If they were able to get it on board an ordinary freight ship without our knowledge, it could simply sail across the Atlantic to within 300 miles of New York City and then be launched. Half a ton of nerve gas detonated over Manhattan could immediately kill tens or even hundreds of thousands of people.

Or...they could launch that missile at Tel Aviv or Haifa. The Israelis would respond by nuking Damascus, and the entire Middle East would become a bloodbath.

Regardless of what happens in Syria, we have to make sure those chemical weapons do not fall into the wrong hands.
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
Question:

If we had the ability to determine with reasonable certainty the exact location where the Syrian regime's chemical weapons are being stored, would be be justified in destroying them with air strikes in order to prevent them from falling into the hands of terrorists?
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
Not to worry....Obama will probably draw another line in the sand that they are forbidden to cross!!

We arent the only ones who are drawing lines in the sand.

Israel is well within range of the Syrian arsenal of SCUD missiles that be fitted with nerve gas warheads.

Assad was smart enough to honor the 40 year old cease-fire between Syria and Israel, knowng full well what Israel's response would be to a chemical weapon attack.

If terrorists ever gained control of those SCUDS, they might not choose to honor that cease-fire. The Israelis know this, and they may very well be making plans to destroy the arsenal themselves if we dont. Unlike us, the Israelis could care less what the rest of the world thinks of them and they have never hesitated to strike pre-emptively if they felt their survival was at stake.
 

roadrunner2012

Four hours in the mod queue for a news link
Troll
Question:

If we had the ability to determine with reasonable certainty the exact location where the Syrian regime's chemical weapons are being stored, would be be justified in destroying them with air strikes in order to prevent them from falling into the hands of terrorists?

Question: Would destroying stockpiles through the use of air strikes release those weapons?
 

roadrunner2012

Four hours in the mod queue for a news link
Troll
I dont know. Obviously it would be immoral of us to destroy the weapons if it resulted in their release upon the Syrian population.

Therein lies the rub. Boots on the ground is the only way to safely destroy the alleged chemical weapons.

Personally, I would really enjoy a decade without us involved in some 'nation building' exercise. Even more so if we would dedicate the money not spent on war to rebuilding our infrastructure.
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
Therein lies the rub. Boots on the ground is the only way to safely destroy the alleged chemical weapons.

Personally, I would really enjoy a decade without us involved in some 'nation building' exercise. Even more so if we would dedicate the money not spent on war to rebuilding our infrastructure.

I dont want to build any nations or be involved in any more wars either.

I also dont want terrorist groups to acquire SCUD missiles armed with Sabin or VX nerve gas warheads.

Perhaps a way exists to motivate Assad into turning the weapons over to a trustworthy 3rd party, like the Russians or the Chinese. We could pretend to be acting as a messenger, and inform him that Israel has warned us that they will nuke the sites themselves if the weapons are not turned over to us or the Russians or Chinese within 12 hours. Even if its a lie, Assad would have no way to know this for certain since he and his regime have no contact with the Israelis and have been mortal enemies to them since 1948. Its the old "good cop-bad cop" routine, with Israel being the "bad cop" that we are trying to restrain from violence.
 

roadrunner2012

Four hours in the mod queue for a news link
Troll
sober,

I truly believe that Syria's capability to launch a chemical SCUD beyond their borders is nil.

They are not a threat to the USA, and I doubt they are a threat to Israel.

If you want to beat the war drums while insisting you aren't, that is your prerogative, but most can see through that.

We are much better off if we use our resources towards health, education, science, and innovation.

Seems to have worked in the past.
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
sober,

I truly believe that Syria's capability to launch a chemical SCUD beyond their borders is nil.

They are not a threat to the USA, and I doubt they are a threat to Israel.

If you want to beat the war drums while insisting you aren't, that is your prerogative, but most can see through that.

We are much better off if we use our resources towards health, education, science, and innovation.

Seems to have worked in the past.

I'm not worried about the Syrians.

I'm worried about who might acquire their arsenal of SCUDS and chemical weapons if the Assad regime is overthrown.

Do some research before you state with any confidence that the Syrian regime lacks the ability to launch SCUDS with chemical warheads beyond its own borders. Even the earliest model SCUDS from the 1960's had a range of 300+miles and were designed to carry a wide variety of warheads icluding nuclear and chemical ones. Syria is one of only 8 nations that is not signatory to the UN convention on chemical weapons, and they have aknowledged having a chemical arsenal.

SCUD missiles are designed to be mobile. They are towed to the launch point and fired from off of the back of an oversized truck. It would actually be quite simple to load one onto a freighter, hundreds of which are in the Atlantic ocean at any given time, and then fire it once a major city on our Eastern seaboard was within range. Pinpoint accuracy is not important when you are releasing chemical weapons over a major city. Chemical weapons have been loaded into artillery shells and missiles since World War One, the technology for doing so is nothing new or remarkable.

I'm not beating a war drum. We have no business invading Syria, we have no business becoming directly involved in its civil war, and we have no business doing anything other than providing humanitarian assistance to its refugees. We also, however, have every right to take measures to prevent the worlds largest arsenal of chemical weapons from falling into the wrong hands.
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
They are saying that some Syrian hackers are responsible for the tweet that caused our stock market to lose billions (for a short time). Cut the money off to the Syrians !! They do stuff like that and we continue to send them money........boy are we ever stupid chumps !!
 

texan

Well-Known Member
Hagel says chemical weapons WERE used..........now what ?????

Is Obama looking for his red magic marker ????
Syria did not get them from Sadam did he? No......... That would vidicate President Bush.
Even though we years ago might have or Russia years ago provided them to Iraq

In 2006, former Iraqi general, Georges Sada, who served under Saddam Hussein before he defected, wrote a
comprehensive book detailing how the Iraqi Revolutionary Guard moved weapons of mass destruction into
Syria, before the US-led action to eliminate Saddam Hussein’s WMD threat, by loading the weapons into
civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.
Where Did Syria’s Chemical Weapons Come From?
Israeli general: Syrian 'regime has used and is using chemical weapons' | World news | guardian.co.uk
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
Syria did not get them from Sadam did he? No......... That would vidicate President Bush.
Even though we years ago might have or Russia years ago provided them to Iraq

In 2006, former Iraqi general, Georges Sada, who served under Saddam Hussein before he defected, wrote a
comprehensive book detailing how the Iraqi Revolutionary Guard moved weapons of mass destruction into
Syria, before the US-led action to eliminate Saddam Hussein’s WMD threat, by loading the weapons into
civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.
Where Did Syria’s Chemical Weapons Come From?
Israeli general: Syrian 'regime has used and is using chemical weapons' | World news | guardian.co.uk

Then why did GW not go into Syria after them?

Besides, "if" this sarin gas used by Syria is from Iraq, does anyone dare question what the shelf life might be of this gas? I mean at the least we are talking right at 10 years old so again, anyone question the shelf life?

If the shelf life has expired, this means the Sarin gas used in not Iraqi. Therefore this Sarin gas either was made outright by Syria or it came from other sources. Who might those other sources be? Who in the region would have access to Sarin gas should they need or want it?
 
Top