Did the Whitehouse help plan the chemical attack
Atlas Shrugs
Yossef Bodansky’s sources reveal that on August 13 and 14, there was a high-level meeting in Turkey that included the al-Qaeda Syrian rebels, along with U.S., Turkish, and Qatari officials, in which the Obama regime planned a bombing campaign after a “war-changing” moment that was set to occur within days. This “war changing” moment, of course turned out to be the gassing of 1429 people, including hundreds of children, to be blamed on Bashar al-Assad. (thanks to John)
-
There is a growing volume of new evidence from numerous sources in the Middle East — mostly affiliated with the Syrian opposition and its sponsors and supporters — which makes a very strong case, based on solid circumstantial evidence, that the August 21, 2013, chemical strike in the Damascus suburbs was indeed a pre-meditated provocation by the Syrian opposition.
The extent of US foreknowledge of this provocation needs further investigation because available data puts the “horror” of the Barack Obama White House in a different and disturbing light.
On August 13-14, 2013, Western-sponsored opposition forces in Turkey started advance preparations for a major and irregular military surge. Initial meetings between senior opposition military commanders and representatives of Qatari, Turkish, and US Intelligence [“Mukhabarat Amriki”] took place at the converted Turkish military garrison in Antakya, Hatay Province, used as the command center and headquarters of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and their foreign sponsors. Very senior opposition commanders who had arrived from Istanbul briefed the regional commanders of an imminent escalation in the fighting due to “a war-changing development” which would, in turn, lead to a US-led bombing of Syria.
The opposition forces had to quickly prepare their forces for exploiting the US-led bombing in order to march on Damascus and topple the Bashar al-Assad Government, the senior commanders explained. The Qatari and Turkish intelligence officials assured the Syrian regional commanders that they would be provided with plenty of weapons for the coming offensive.
Indeed, unprecedented weapons distribution started in all opposition camps in Hatay Province on August 21-23, 2013. In the Reyhanli area alone, opposition forces received well in excess of 400 tons of weapons, mainly anti-aircraft weaponry from shoulder-fired missiles to ammunition for light-guns and machineguns. The weapons were distributed from store-houses controlled by Qatari and Turkish Intelligence under the tight supervision of US Intelligence.
These weapons were loaded on more than 20 trailer-trucks which crossed into northern Syria and distributed the weapons to several depots. Follow-up weapon shipments, also several hundred tons, took place over the weekend of August 24-25, 2013, and included mainly sophisticated anti-tank guided missiles and rockets. Opposition officials in Hatay said that these weapon shipments were “the biggest” they had received “since the beginning of the turmoil more than two years ago”. The deliveries from Hatay went to all the rebel forces operating in the Idlib-to-Aleppo area, including the al-Qaida affiliated jihadists (who constitute the largest rebel forces in the area).
Several senior officials from both the Syrian opposition and sponsoring Arab states stressed that these weapon deliveries were specifically in anticipation for exploiting the impact of imminent bombing of Syria by the US and the Western allies. The latest strategy formulation and coordination meetings took place on August 26, 2013. The political coordination meeting took place in Istanbul and was attended by US Amb. Robert Ford.
More important were the military and operational coordination meetings at the Antakya garrison. Senior Turkish, Qatari, and US Intelligence officials attended in addition to the Syrian senior (opposition) commanders. The Syrians were informed that bombing would start in a few days.
“The opposition was told in clear terms that action to deter further use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime could come as early as in the next few days,” a Syrian participant in the meeting said. Another Syrian participant said that he was convinced US bombing was scheduled to begin on Thursday, August 29, 2013. Several participants — both Syrian and Arab — stressed that the assurances of forthcoming bombing were most explicit even as formally Obama is still undecided.
The descriptions of these meetings raise the question of the extent of foreknowledge of US Intelligence, and therefore, the Obama White House. All the sources consulted — both Syrian and Arab — stressed that officials of the “Mukhabarat Amriki” actively participated in the meetings and briefings in Turkey. Therefore, at the very least, they should have known that the opposition leaders were anticipating “a war-changing development”: that is, a dramatic event which would provoke a US-led military intervention.
The mere fact that weapon storage sites under the tight supervision of US Intelligence were opened up and about a thousand tons of high-quality weapons were distributed to the opposition indicates that US Intelligence anticipated such a provocation and the opportunity for the Syrian opposition to exploit the impact of the ensuing US and allied bombing. Hence, even if the Obama White House did not know in advance of the chemical provocation, they should have concluded, or at the very least suspected, that the chemical attack was most likely the “war-changing development” anticipated by the opposition leaders as provocation of US-led bombing. Under such circumstances, the Obama White House should have refrained from rushing head-on to accuse Assad’s Damascus and threaten retaliation, thus making the Obama White House at the very least complicit after the act.
Meanwhile, additional data from Damascus about the actual chemical attack increases the doubts about Washington’s version of events. Immediately after the attack, three hospitals of Doctors Without Borders (MSF: médecins sans frontières) in the greater Damascus area treated more than 3,600 Syrians affected by the chemical attack, and 355 of them died. MSF performed tests on the vast majority of those treated.
MSF director of operations Bart Janssens summed up the findings: “MSF can neither scientifically confirm the cause of these symptoms nor establish who is responsible for the attack. However, the reported symptoms of the patients, in addition to the epidemiological pattern of the events — characterized by the massive influx of patients in a short period of time, the origin of the patients, and the contamination of medical and first aid workers — strongly indicate mass exposure to a neurotoxic agent.” Simply put, even after testing some 3,600 patients, MSF failed to confirm that sarin was the cause of the injuries. According to MSF, the cause could have been nerve agents like sarin, concentrated riot control gas, or even high-concentration pesticides. Moreover, opposition reports that there was distinct stench during the attack suggest that it could have come from the “kitchen sarin” used by jihadist groups (as distinct from the odorless military-type sarin) or improvised agents like pesticides.
Some of the evidence touted by the Obama White House is questionable at best.
A small incident in Beirut raises big questions. A day after the chemical attack, Lebanese fixers working for the “Mukhabarat Amriki” succeeded to convince a Syrian male who claimed to have been injured in the chemical attack to seek medical aid in Beirut in return for a hefty sum that would effectively settle him for life. The man was put into an ambulance and transferred overnight to the Farhat Hospital in Jib Janine, Beirut. The Obama White House immediately leaked friendly media that “the Lebanese Red Cross announced that test results found traces of sarin gas in his blood.” However, this was news to Lebanese intelligence and Red Cross officials.
According to senior intelligence officials, “Red Cross Operations Director George Kettaneh told [them] that the injured Syrian fled the hospital before doctors were able to test for traces of toxic gas in his blood.” Apparently, the patient declared that he had recovered from his nausea and no longer needed medical treatment. The Lebanese security forces are still searching for the Syrian patient and his honorarium.
On August 24, 2013, Syrian Commando forces acted on intelligence about the possible perpetrators of the chemical attack and raided a cluster of rebel tunnels in the Damascus suburb of Jobar. Canisters of toxic material were hit in the fierce fire-fight as several Syrian soldiers suffered from suffocation and “some of the injured are in a critical condition”.
The Commando eventually seized an opposition warehouse containing barrels full of chemicals required for mixing “kitchen sarin”, laboratory equipment, as well as a large number of protective masks. The Syrian Commando also captured several improvised explosive devices, RPG rounds, and mortar shells. The same day, at least four HizbAllah fighters operating in Damascus near Ghouta were hit by chemical agents at the very same time the Syrian Commando unit was hit while searching a group of rebel tunnels in Jobar. Both the Syrian and the HizbAllah forces were acting on intelligence information about the real perpetrators of the chemical attack. Damascus told Moscow the Syrian troops were hit by some form of a nerve agent and sent samples (blood, tissues, and soil) and captured equipment to Russia.
Several Syrian leaders, many of whom are not Bashar al-Assad supporters and are even his sworn enemies, are now convinced that the Syrian opposition is responsible for the August 21, 2013, chemical attack in the Damascus area in order to provoke the US and the allies into bombing Assad’s Syria. Most explicit and eloquent is Saleh Muslim, the head of the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) which has been fighting the Syrian Government. Muslim doubts Assad would have used chemical weapons when he was winning the civil war.
“The regime in Syria … has chemical weapons, but they wouldn’t use them around Damascus, five km from the [UN] committee which is investigating chemical weapons. Of course they are not so stupid as to do so,” Muslim told Reuters on August 27, 2013. He believes the attack was “aimed at framing Assad and provoking an international reaction”. Muslim is convinced that “some other sides who want to blame the Syrian regime, who want to show them as guilty and then see action” is responsible for the chemical attack. The US was exploiting the attack to further its own anti-Assad policies and should the UN inspectors find evidence that the rebels were behind the attack, then “everybody would forget it”, Muslim shrugged. “Who is the side who would be punished? Are they are going to punish the Emir of Qatar or the King of Saudi Arabia, or Mr Erdo?an of Turkey?”
And there remain the questions: Given the extent of the involvement of the “Mukhabarat Amriki” in opposition activities, how is that US Intelligence did not know in advance about the opposition’s planned use of chemical weapons in Damascus?
It is a colossal failure.
And if they did know and warned the Obama White House, why then the sanctimonious rush to blame the Assad Administration?
Moreover, how can the Obama Administration continue to support and seek to empower the opposition which had just intentionally killed some 1,300 innocent civilians in order to provoke a US military intervention?
Yossef Bodansky, Senior Editor, GIS/Defense & Foreign Affairs
honeybee Said:
Felix simply has to learn to deal with us little people.
comment to Shy Guy #44 in moderation
Shy Guy Said:
I never said America was justified but then America really needs no justification if she chooses to Attack Syria any more than Afghanistan or Libya. There could be or not an internal political price but Obama is not running for president in 2016 and he already has his Nobel. He could justify an attack based on humanitarian considerations. Poor Syrian innocent civilians and millions of poor refugees.
Obama seems to want now to attack Syrian and maybe Arad is correct and maybe not. He didn’t spell out what he thought might be bad for Israel so we have to guess. That’s why I am suspicious of him he criticizes by innuendo.
First of all I’m not so sure we have not thought about it or even have contingency plans for it but as long as Assad had them and didn’t threaten us or use them as now I guess we took the position of having to live with a low level threat. Today it’s not so low level first because they were used, secondly they could be transferred to Hezbollah for services rendered in fighting for Assad. Then if the opposition gets hold of them it’s a different kettle of fish. Today we know where they are being stored tomorrow we might not.
For the same reasons we say we can’t wait till the Iranians have weaponized Nukes.
Igite a real war against whom? Syria is in no position to fight us in a real war but could hurt us and hurt us bad if we don’t see him relieved of his chemical weapons and missiles.
I believe Israeli Intelligence has a good handle on this but who knows. You go with what you know and have confidence, in the final analysis.
Not so you need to combine two chemical elements first and they are stored in a separated condition.
make the attack look like the rebels or Assad did it for openers. Even so not sure the world cares especially in America where the topics of interest are pretty pedestrian and BTW I really don’t care what they will do, like what for example?
There is no difference between Syria Hezbollah and Iran. I believe you first take care of the treats to your rear before you attack frontally.
Assad can even be left in place if he has the threat against Israel removed.
The IDF has been itching to have a go against Hezbollah ever since the 2nd Lebanese war and they had to take into consideration that Syria could attack Israel in defense of Hezbollah so the idea is not remote or out of the question. Obama could pave the way for an Israeli action depending on what are the results of the American attack. If America can attack Syria certainly Israel has more justification for the same.
@ Shy Guy:
@ bernard ross:
@ yamit82:
@ Laura:
@ oldjerry:
@ Vinnie:
FELLOW PUNDITEERS THIS SONG WILL CURE ALL THE TROUBLES IN THE WORLD INCLUDING “WHAT TO DO WITH FELIX”:http://youtu.be/L8-BI89mb9A
As I’ve been saying all along…
OK, lights out.
oldjerry Said:
@ yamit82:
@ bernard ross:
@ Laura:
Shy Guy you’ll love this,right up you alley: http://youtu.be/L8-BI89mb9A
Ted, my comment, 40, is in moderation. So…. moderate! 🙂
Shy Guy Said:
The sunni jihdis in syria are drawing in Hezbullah and causing them to extend and split their forces between the 2 theaters. At the optimum point it would behoove the interested parties to deal the blows to hezbullah from the 2 venues. Assad and Hezbullah cannot do much for iran if fighting for their own lives. Sunni jihadis are still pouring into syria. If the ultimate goal is Iran then Assad need not be deposed only degraded along with hezbllah. If syria is a goal(pipelines,etc) then a negotiated fragmented Syria may also be enough to achieve.
bernard ross Said:
I disagree. Asssad is on crutches and the Lebanese government does not want to get pounded again. Assad also knows that if he touches US forces when they have not attacked him that the US Senate, Congress and every normal citizen will all turn around and support flattening Syria. He needs that like a hole in the head, which is exactly what he’s trying to avoid so hard these days from closer to home.
It’s past 1AM here and GCC does not compute. Google tells me you’re most probably referring to the Gulf Cooperation Council. That’s America’s dirty work, not Israel’s. And if Israel benefits from it, so be it. But even Israel seems to have doubt to what point supporting the rebels is good or bad.
Shut eye time. Leila tov!
It’s not by chance.
Next stop for jihadi sinai mercenaries: paid excursion to Syria, Lebanon, Iraq.
Shy Guy Said:
before anyone strikes Iran it is wise to weaken or depose Iran’s proxies of syria and hezbullah. Both are slated to bring blowback to israel, US forces, Jordan, etc. in the event of an iranian attack. It would be easier for israel to deal with Iran alone than with Iran, syria and hezbullah att the same time.
Shy Guy Said:
Obama is doing GCC dirty work in Syria. He has been arming and training the GCC jihadis for 2 years, I wonder why?
yamit82 Said:
The way you [and I] constantly talk about BB, we should think that they were both bought by the Americans.
But there you go again. Everything’s a conspiracy.
My guess is that Arad was sounding the alarm about the total farce of Oslo and the endangerment of Netanyahu’s 2 state solution to the country. He got in BB’s face and had to go. They found their excuse in an interview Arad gave about Israeli civilian nuclear cooperation with the US or something like that.
yamit82 Said:
1. He’s slightly busy at the moment, in case you haven’t noticed.
2. And what about vice versa? Iran has explicitly threatened Israel a half a dozen times since Obama threatened Syria.
3. Why do you think Hizballah will behave any differently whether Israel attacks either one of its primary allies, Iran or Syria? That threat is still there and that threat is essentially Lebanon, not exactly Syria.
Regarding Arad, on the contrary, ever since leaving Netanyahu’s grip, he’s back to himself, the academic, not the politician. Indeed, Arad seemed like he was treading on pins and needles as Netanyahu’s advisor.
Shy Guy Said:
Assumptions on your part that If Israel attacks Iran it will achieve the aims of the attack.
That Assad will not unleash all that he has or can against us.
That Hezbollah will refrain from attacking Israel with their 60-8000 rockets and missiles.
I say that 150-160000 missiles raining down on Israel is as existential a threat as a few low kiloton Nukes exploding in Israel at ground level. That if the Syrians use the max of their Chemical weapons we have real problems especially if the IAF is being used to the Maximum in Iran. Logic should dictate that you first neutralize the real threats to the north before you go after Iran.
Never leave your rear exposed is as good a military axiom today as it was thousands of years ago.
Something happened to Uzi Arad from his first tenure under BB to his second. His track record seems to be pretty light judging from his comments and what materialized based on his advice. I think he like many others has been bought by the Americans.
Why did BB fire him?
OT, sort of:
Pass the popcorn
@ Laura:
No, they won’t, at least not from me. I don’t see how “going after the puppetmaster instead of the puppet” is an argument that can be turned into a case against acting against Iran.
As to Yamit’s charges above, to the extent that they are directed against moi, yes, of course I am concerned about Obama…I live here! Everyone who lives here should be, and considering how anti-Israel he is, you should be, too. (By the way Yamit, my arguments are essentially the same as those put forth by Melanie Phillips…would you charge that British Jew as being only concerned about Obama and America, being too biased that way to see things as clearly as you claim to?)
For my part, I operate from the assumption that Obama is never going to do anything militarily against Iran. So, again, this idea that ‘the same arguments used against action in Syria will be used to prevent action against Iran’ carries no weight with me.
Israel is going to have to be the ones to hit Iran, if this needs to be done at any time for the remainder of the time Obama is in office. Which it probably will. So, any relationship between U.S. action or inaction on Syria on the one hand, and U.S. action or inaction on Iran on the other, is a baseless straw-man argument.
Hypothetically, assuming we had a real Commander-in-Chief, there woudln’t be any pre-strike “debate” about hitting Iran, if the U.S. were going to do this in an effective way. Tactical surprise would be very important; any justifications would have to be made after the fact, as Reagan did when he struck Libya in 1986, for example. Once again, this business about ‘how conservatives would react to a possible strike against Iran’ is moot, or at least should be.
Congress has already passed non-binding resolutions of U.S. support for Israel in the event of an Israeli strike on Iran. Those may perhaps be worth no more than the paper they are written on, but the sentiment is there and the most practical move supporters of Israel here can make is to keep the pressure on Congress to support Israel in such an eventuality.
Yamit, remember what a mess of things Olmert & Co. made of things in the ’06 war in Lebanon? Now, multiply that by ten and you’ve got what we have to deal with in terms of Obama taking us to war. They are a bunch of morons. Obama, Kerry, Hagel, Rice, Dempsey…my G-d it is awful.
Israel dealing with Iran successfully will not only remove a major, primary source of regional instability and threat to Israel at its roots, but will also greatly enhance Israel’s perceived deterrent posture in relation to any other adversary, particularly Syria. That would be far better than having to absorb a WMD attack from Syria as a prelude to Israeli action, which is what the likely scenario is in the event of a major U.S. strike on Syria.
@ yamit82:
Taking conceit to a whole new level.
You go, girl!
@ Laura:
Very good and right you are Laura. These commenters can’t shake their petty political biases and narrow perspectives even in such situations re: Israel. It proves my long contention that the primary concern of Americans commenting on this site is Obama and America and if they are conservatives then that’s what concerns them most.
I am not surprised or shocked I have no expectation of them.
Laura Said:
Using your logic, then all the more so should Israel strike the greater and not the lesser threat. Either way you’re claiming we’ll get a scolding. And Iran should have been whacked a long long time ago.
And again, you’re confusing America with Israel. You want America to do Israel’s dirty work even though it is not to America’s betterment. I want Israel to do Israel’s work. America couldn’t be counted on even for Iran, even if you could convince the US that Iran is a direct threat to the west, with or without Israel.
Laura Said:
You’re assuming that Debka and the like is Israel.
And if it’s Israel you want to reference, pay attention to what Uzi Arad just said.
Ted my comment to Vinnie #28 in moderation. pls release.
Apparently Geller believes the Israelis are lying. If she believes Obama is lying about assad having used chemical weapons, then she has to certainly believe the Israelis are lying. And why would the Israelis lie? To get us to go to war for them. That is ultimately the narrative that Geller is inadvertently promoting.
@ Shy Guy:
Yes it is the biggest threat, but do you think taking military action against Iran will get any more support than striking Syria is getting? That’s what you fail to realize. The same arguments will be used to oppose going after Iran based on the fear of it leading to a wider war. And as long as Obama is president, conservatives won’t support attacking Iran. Syria is a trial balloon. Now we know what to expect regarding Iran.
Vinnie Said:
Israel is not America we have very good Intel and know exactly where they are.Vinnie Said:
Americans are arrogant, stupid and incompetent.
How we do it is our business, it can be done a lot easier than you think. May not be cost free in terms of casualties on our side but it can be done completely and efficiently.
A tactician you ain’t, the surest way to have Israel buried in missiles from Lebanon and Syria is to attack Iran beforehand and I say that using your assumption that Iran’s program can be attacked successfully which I have my doubts at this point. Israel might need to use her whole Air-force for a sustained attack on Iran.
Screw you this is not about Obama it’s about us and our survival. In the end we we have to do what we have to do even with BB.. Obama may force BB to do what he never intended, wanted or planned. I have been waiting for over 5 years for Obama to force us out of the American vice. BB is the main impediment but it can still happen if Obama succeeds. Obamas’ seeming failure is thus our life jacket. If things go south here BB is the most expendable Israeli in the country. He who understands, understands.
Bloody fool it’s not about Obama it’s about us. I want our backs to the wall. It’s the only way to get what needs to be done here done. We don’t need America or you. I want the world to see a crazy, mad bunch of Jews doing their thing. We hold all the matches to ignite and destroy what’s most prized in the West. Time to flaunt our wares.
@ yamit82:
All very nice but what does that have to do with America being justified for attacking Syria.
You have presented Israel’s case.
Even from Israel’s standpoint, Israel has not thought about attacking Syria’s chemical stockpiles for decades. So why now? If the answer is because Assad will be dead meat any day now, then why not wait for that day? But if the beats back the rebellion, why should Israel dare ignite a real war – not just a declared one – with someone so heavily armed and who will be fully backed militarily by Putin?!
Even if we tried, how do you know how much Israel knows as to the stockpiles’ locations? These can be stored in very conventional looking artillery shells and spread all over the place.
What if they’re stored near civilian areas and by blowing them to pieces, we will create vapor clouds that will kill and maim 100s of 1000s? What do you think the world will do then to Israel? Send a stiff warning?
I don’t understand why you’re not talking about the biggest threat – Iran.
@ oldjerry:
Yes, but the same arguments opposing Syrian military intervention will be used with Iran. That is what ultimately concerns me. I don’t see the isolationists supporting a strike on Iran, and they are now the majority opinion of the conservative movement.
@ Vinnie:
I agree.
Again, I agree. That’s why I advocated limiting military action to taking out the weapons, NOT taking sides in the Syrian civil war.
Ted, My Comment #23 to Shy Guy in moderation pls release.
@ Shy Guy:
Syria doesn’t have an Aswan Dam.
Syria for what it’s is still in a State of war with Israel. Egypt for what it’s worth is not a Vassal of Iran and a Client state of the Russians. They may become a Russian client but that still remains to be seen and could be the best thing for Israel. It will take years and billions the Egyptians don’t have to convert from American weaponry to Russian and Chinese. They will be essentially neutered in the interim.
Syria with purported 1000tons of chemical weapons along our northern border is a deterrent to the IDF even if they are not used. That’s almost as good as having Nukes. Having a Russian Base close to our border is very dangerous, besides giving Assad a defensive shield by their presence they have monitoring and offensive/defensive capabilities Threatening not Just the Israeli Air-force but commercial aviation as well.
It can be assumed the Russian Med fleet carries nukes as well. Get Assad out or so weakened that the rebels will attack the Russians is ideal.
A weak neutered Syria defanged of her chemical weapons takes a major shield and protection out of Iran’s hands. If Israel ever decided to go at Iran, Syria becomes a minimal threat. Those same Jihadist, the ones some like Vinnie are so concerned about will do a number on Hezbollah aided by Lebanese Sunnis. Years of internecine conflict between Shia and Sunnis is not a bad trade off.
In any event Syria essentially does not exist, they have no economy and no central controlling government. It could well happen that non Jihadist MB Syrian Muslims will rise up against all foreign elements in Syria? Could be that Syria is broken up into small enclaves along religious and ethnic clan controlled territories. The cost to Syria bankrupt before the civil war, is no longer repairable after 2 years of civil war. There are already 2 million refugees a half million in Jordan alone. Turkey might make a territorial move against Syria as well.
In no scenario do I want to see Assad survive with his missiles and Chemical weapons and with the Russians building up a Naval force at our doorstep and financed and supplied with weapons by Iran, Russia and China.
Let no one forget that Hezbollah is Iran’s forward vanguard for attacking Israel. They too have 60-80,000 missiles aligned against us and who knows how many chemical weapons have made it into their arsenal or how many will in the future?
Israel needs the MB and Al-Qaeda to war to the death with Hezbollah. Better to have them kill each other than lose our kids trying to do the same thing.
An attack against Israel by Syria or Hezbollah may give Israel her casus belli to try to eliminate the Chem weapons and missiles if Obama fails to do it. That Assad was scared enough to gas his own people in panic means that he is not predictable and any attack by Obama might trigger an irrational response against Israel This may be what’s in back of Obama’s push for a limited strike. If true it’s devilish in conception.
@ Laura:
OK, let’s take a moment to consider the feasibility of destroying Assad’s chemical WMD stocks in a series of air strikes…
During Gulf War One, we did our best to knock out Saddam’s WMD capabilities. We did a lot of damage. Then, after the war, as per the ceasefire agreement, we got inspectors on the ground…and discovered there was a lot more that we never hit.
Opponents to Gulf War Two accurately pointed out in the months leading up to that war that inspectors on the ground arranged for the destruction of far more WMD capacity than we got from a military attack (of course, they had no answer for the fact of Saddam’s increasing interference with inspectors on the ground, to the point where they could no longer do their jobs…but I digress).
You really think we’ll be able to knock out all or even most of Assad’s WMD capabilities without “boots on the ground”? If so, I’d say you are wildly optimistic, based on past historical experience.
The best way to ensure Assad uses these weapons on Israel – which he’s had ever since he’s been in power, and his father before him – is to engage in a military exercise of the necessary scope and scale needed to deprive him of said weapons, or at least to mortally threaten his grip on power. A major U.S. strike is a recipe for this.
The only “good” outcome of this would be such a calamity forming the pretext for an Israeli hit on Iran’s nuke program. But at what cost in Israeli civilian lives in advance of the same? Shouldn’t we just go after Iran in the first instance, as suggested by Melanie Phillips?
I see no other possible good outcome from this. And on top of that, I am mistrustful in the extreme of both Obama’s agenda – as you well know, he is an Olympic-class hypocrite and liar – and his ability to function as Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces. The less opportunity this empty suit snot-nosed left wing academia punk has for directing our forces in battle, the better.
Which reminds me of a second potential ‘positive’ outcome for a prospective strike: The definitive political unraveling of Obama; but if Congress turns him down on a strike, and particularly if the GOP takes the Senate next year, we can have that anyway without a shot being fired.
Why is everyone in such an uproar over chemical weapons? Chemical weapons are not the existential threat. Nuclear weapons are and pretty soon the one country which has threatened to wipe out Israel will have them. So as a matter of denial we are concentrating on Syria and ignoring Iran.
Laura Said:
Egypt has a massive stockpile of chem weapons. They’ve had it for decades, just like Syria. What are you advocating that no Israel government thought wise to do for about 30 years?
@ Laura:
Laura, never mind the Tea Party, one way or the other. Is Melanie Phillips also in cahoots with the Tea Party? I think not.
I would also say that having worked with them at the grassroots level, with the exception of a few outliers (e.g., Ron Paul and possibly Rand Paul), the Tea Party is VERY pro-Israel, and is perhaps the most genuinely pro-Israel major segment of the American political scene today.
I would add that some other very active advocates for Israel – such as Sarah Stern of EMET (Endowment for Middle East Truth), and Gerald Honigman (author: “The Quest for Justice in the Middle East”, an extremely well-researched and pro-Israel historical volume), also oppose a prospective U.S. strike on Syria.
As an aside, oh, the irony of your juxtoposition of Assad with chemical WMDs and Hussein with chemical WMDs…Assad probably got most of what he has from Saddam, just prior to Gulf War Two.
To me, the more relevant question is the difference between Assad with chemical WMDs and a future Syrian, post-Assad MB/Al Queda regime with access to such weapons. Which would you prefer…really?
Both are bad, of course, except that Assad won’t use them on Israel unless he is really on the ropes, whereas the MB could very well use them on Israel far short of that – or supply them under the table to terrorist ‘non-state actors’ who will.
Laura Said:
Evelio says…
@ Vinnie:
True, but something needs to be done about the chemical weapons. We don’t necessarily have to overthrow assad, just destroy his arsenal of WMD’s if its possible.
@ Felix Quigley:
Such great friends that they don’t care that chemical weapons are in the hands of Israel’s enemy. BTW Geller IS Jewish. What’s the difference between saddam hussein with WMD’s and assad with them?
I’m sorry to say that in reality Geller is more concerned with her status in the tea party movement than she is about Israel. She won’t take an opposing position. If the tea party movement opposes striking Iran, what position will Pam Geller take?
At first glance, the article above seems outlandish. But I put nothing – NOTHING – past Obama.
I ask Yamit82: Who is the greater threat to Israel: Assad with chemical weapons…or his likely MB/Al Queda repalcements with the same chemical weapons?
Egypt’s Mubarak represented the same political governing elites who went to war with Israel many times in the past. But then, look at Morsi. And now, the Mubarak-types are back in power in Egypt…and everyone with half a brain is relieved at this. Morsi is of the same ilk that would replace Assad, except that Morsi didn’t have access to a big stockpile of chemical WMDs.
Russia, of course, does not have a very pleasant history vis-a-vis Israel or the Jews. Yet, in many past postings, I have seen you, Yamit, advocating for closer ties with them – short of an alliance, of course – at the expense of the U.S. You mention above with indignation how Russia spies on Israel from Syria…did you miss the recent reports that Israel is among the most important targets of the U.S. intel apparatus?? Not that I was surprised by this, and I would expect that you were not, either.
Like Shy Guy and Felix above, I’m with Melanie Phillips on this one. Skip the Syrian preliminaries and hit Iran’s nuke program. Because the Syrian preliminaries involve mass Israeli casualties up front. Assad has already said in the past – to Iran’s disappointment – that he would not join in a retaliation against Israel if Israel hits Iran. He really doesn’t want to do this if he isn’t completely against the ropes; he’s got his hands full with the rebels. So, why provoke a scenario that leads to lots of dead Jews? Do we HAVE to pay this price to hit Iran? I say if we don’t have to, we shouldn’t.
Hit Iran and Assad loses his most important patron. I’d wager that the ones writing the checks for Russian arms for Syria are the Iranians; put a crimp in that and that might well discourage the Russians in Syria too, to an extent, at least. The civil war may drag on for some time after that – I realize hitting Iran won’t end it – but that at least takes major pressure off of Israel while allowing the bad guys on both sides in Syria to keep grinding each other down. Israel benefits from that by default.
But take Assad out, and we get the MB in charge. Never mind this article above, we all know that is the fact of the matter.
And that is what Obama’s agenda is all about. Putting MB regimes all around Israel, which Obama has at least some influence over, so he can use this as leverage to get Israel to “cry uncle” on the PA issue. That is the whole point of his presidency.
Remember what happened a while back when those terrorists hit Eilat, I believe it was, out of Egypt? Remember how they were aided by Egyptian border police, and Israeli security forces shot some of them? And then the Israeli embassy in Cairo was put under siege…which was only lifted after Obama demanded and got an apology from Israel to Egypt for killing their terrorist scum border police? That is the dynamic Obama has in mind for dealing with Israel, in microcosm. He only wants to get rid of Assad because that is an element he has no influence over, to which Israel can point to and say, “Well, we can’t take any ‘risks’ for peace; look at what is on our northern frontier, and you can’t do anything about that, President Obama.”
Look, helping Obama put another MB regime on Israel’s borders is not a good idea. Really. Geller or no Geller.
This planned attack on Syria is so steeped in hypocrisy that it’s nauseating.Hundreds of thousands, if not millions were brutally murdered in Somalia,the Congo and elsewhere by Jihadists. Coptic Christians are burnt alive in their churches. Hardly a word about these atrocities. But now Assad seems to be holding off the Jihadists and the Muslim Brotherhood who want to turn secular Syria into another Seventh Century Islamic paradise. So that the Arab Spring which has failed in Egypt, Libya and elsewhere must be brought to Syria.
Mr. Quigley, I agree with your post above.
Except for the Trotsky gobbledegook.
How could you ever know. You like Devolin are mired in anti-communism. So was Hitler. Read Mein Kamph.
Besides the above isa total diversion.
I agree with Melanie Philips on this. If Iran is the danger tot he Jews then hit Iran…do not hit its weak vassal Assad.
That is the diversion right there. That is why you PLAY INTO THE IRAN LOVING STRATEGY OF OBAMA AND CLINTON.
It is all a diversion and Jews are more in danger than ever.
Melanie Philips writes
.
You slander Pamela Geller. You show who you really are.
Geller is the foremost libertarian in America.
It pains me that a low slanderer like Yamit82 has ANY support on the once great Israpundit.
Geller and Spencer are the BEST friend that Jews have.
Felix Quigley Said:
Who beside you is a Trotsky lover, follower and disciple??
Case closed.
Question?? Who is the greater threat to Israel Iran or MB/Al-Qaeda???
Who has over 130,000 missiles targeted on Israel???…Hezbollah an Iranian Proxy and Syria an Iranian dominated state with an army of 300.000, planes, tanks, artillery and 80,000 missiles some armed with chemical warheads??? Who has given the Russians a Naval base to both spy on Israel and threaten our Air-force? Assad or Sunni Jihadists? Who has gone to war with Israel in the past 65 years 3 times? Syria or MB/Al-Qaeda? Who presents a direct existential threat to Israel… Syria, Hezbollah and Iran or Saudi Backed Jihadists?
That’s enough to determine the right side to back without knowing the details of the conflict.
Israpundit is going down the drain on this one. In regard to Laura comment 2 in which she attacks Geller, and therefore Spencer even more, this is a moment of truth for all Jews. This woman Laura has projected as being a jewish patriot for a long time. Now she protects Obama and slanders Geller who is a true Jew and a true American libertarian.
Best answer to this woman Laura is contained in Wild Jew on Jihadwatch comment
Wildjew replied to comment from George | September 7, 2013 8:35 PM | Reply
The pro Obama cabal Yamit, Shyguy, Laura, fascist Devolin now well exposed…keep digging Yamit I am lovin it!
All we need now is for the open Trotskyist hating Fascist Devolin to weigh in on the side of Obama and against both Atlas Shrugs and Jihadwatch. Keep digging Yamit82 you old pro US Imperialism bore.
The source, this Bodansky guy, write for global reasearch.ca, a crackpot lefty think tank. Check out their previous articles on Israel and you’ll see. Geller should not trust this trash.
Why did the IDF’s top analyst drop his Syria WMD bombshell?
Was Itai Brun’s public declaration that Assad’s forces have used nerve gas an effort to push US intervention? Or was it an extraordinary gaffe?
Israeli intelligence seen as central to US case against Syria
Netanyahu to hold second security cabinet meeting on crisis in two days; top minister says it’s unthinkable for Assad to be allowed to go on gassing children
Again I ask why Geller choose to accept the Islamist jihadists and Russians over Israeli Intelligence reports???
Israeli General: ‘Syria Used Chemical Weapons’
A senior Israeli military official has said Syrian forces have used chemical weapons against rebels several times.
Brigadier General Itai Brun said military intelligence believed the nerve agent sarin had probably been used “in a number of incidents.”
Why would Geller choose to believe MB and Al-Qaeda over Israeli Intelligence????
@ Laura:
I agree with you 100%
Honestly, I have never been a fan of Geller and she is proving my opinion correct of her.
This issue should transcend narrow national politics. Unfortunately it’s not the case. Israel cannot count nor should count on America for anything and the Syrian issue should make it clear if any had any doubts before. I have never had any doubts.
Assad ‘launched chemical attack in moment of panic because he was scared rebels would take Damascus’, say spies as Russia sends missile cruiser to Mediterranean
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2411254/Syria-crisis-claims-Assad-launched-chemical-attack-scared-rebels-Damascus.html#ixzz2eEt5xOId
Report: AIPAC to mount major lobbying blitz for Obama’s Syria strike plan
EU sides with Russia’s Putin, urges against US ‘military solution’ in Syria
This is a blood libel against America. I don’t believe we had anything to do with it. And frankly Pam has lately been pushing these black helicopter theories. Even if they don’t intend to, by Pam and the author promoting this, it disparages our nation not just Obama. Apparently they don’t care so long as they can attack Obama.
Hezbollah Admitted that Assad Was Behind Chemical Attack
German intelligence says it intercepted a phone call in which Hezbollah official admitted that Assad gassed his own people.
looks like Geller for reasons of American internal politics wants to believe the disinformation of Assad’s opposition which includes the MB and Al-Qaeda.
For Israel, a U.S. Strike Is a No-Brainer – NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/07/opinion/global/for-israel-a-us-strike-is-a-no-brainer.html?_r=0