It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Israel may use military force ‘to secure’ Syria’s alleged chemical arsenal

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Although you do have to consider the source (RT) it seems like we are getting one step closer to intervention in Syria. I wonder if people would wake up if there were no WMDs found in Syria? I'm sure if there aren't any found, some will be planted to avoid a similar debacle as in Iraq in 2003. I guess we will have to wait and see. We all thought this would happen. All of the recent dis-info put forth by the MSM.


The Israeli army is considering using military force to prevent Syria’s alleged chemical warfare stockpiles from getting into the hands of Hezbollah or Al-Qaeda. Tel-Aviv believes that Damascus is no longer capable of securing its arsenal.

­Syria has never declared it possesses chemical weapons stocks, but the Israeli military does not put its existence under question. Tel Aviv believes Syria has been busy producing mustard and nerve gas for the last 40 years.

On Monday Israeli Maj. Gen. Yair Naveh, the country’s deputy military chief, warned that Syria could pose a threat to Israel with its chemical weapons. He declared Syria has “the largest chemical warfare stockpiles in the world,” and warned that Assad’s regime could "treat us the same way they treat their own people."

Some Israeli politicians claim the Syrian government is already using chemical weapons against its population. A senior member of the ruling Likud party, Ayoob Kara, told Israel Radio on June 9 that the Syrian government is using “chemical weapons against men, women, and children.”


Israel may use military force "to secure" Syria's alleged chemical arsenal




posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by SUICIDEHK45
Although you do have to consider the source (RT) it seems like we are getting one step closer to intervention in Syria.


Why the "questioning" of the source? RT? I read it daily and it seams to me centre in its coverage with regards to other more left and radical anti american sources. Also RT is one of the main cooperaters with "http://Globalresearch.CA" - a quite sobering and reliable source on information. RT is for certain more reliable and unbiased, than any of the CNN and FAUX news. RT readers and commentators usually blame RT for being to PRO American.
If you really wish to have pretty unbiased news, - the kind of "just reading it off as it happens", go to RIAT-NOVOSTI. If you want to read real faermongering and paranoia, go to 1913Intel.com.

But as to the article: Sure if all fails, "someone" has to bring up the WMD boogyman. And naturally if the USA is not yet comitted to any military intervention, then Israel has to do "something" to get the USA into this. After all it's an "S"election year.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Guenter
 


There has been some talk on ATS about the credibility of RT. I just thought I would put it right out front that RT was the source of the story.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by SUICIDEHK45
 

Jesus freaking Christ! The United States and Israel have to be the scariest most paranoid girly government on the face of this planet. Just a bunch of pure suckers !



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by SUICIDEHK45
 


Oh crap.

Israel attack Syria - what are the chances that Iran will attack Israel in retaliation? Are the Iranians capable of inflicting damage on Israeli territory using missiles, air strikes etc?

If Iran attack Israel, the USA will get in on Iran, then all hell breaks loose.

*Holding breath*


EDIT TO ADD - looks like the Israelis are sending out a mixed message here. On one hand, Maj. Gen. Yair Naveh, the country’s deputy military chief, is saying they would like to intervene to get hold of the chemical weapon stockpile
On the other hand, the deputy prime minister Shaul Mofaz is saying:


"Since in the not-distant past the powers chose military intervention in Libya, here the required conclusion would be immediate military intervention to bring down the Assad regime,” he said.

But he made it clear that Israel would not take part in the intervention.

"We cannot get involved, for understandable reasons. But I think that the West, led by the United States, has an interest in guarding the threshold (so) genocide does not take place,” Mofaz told Reuters.








edit on 14-6-2012 by FlyInTheOintment because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SUICIDEHK45
 


TY for pointing this out. I usually roll my eyes when I see FAUX and CNN listed as source. RT is defenitely not the best of the alternate sources, However if I were stuck on an island and I had a choce of news access among the main stream media and RT, I would opt for RT.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyInTheOintment
 


As I had said in a similar Syria post before: All wars begin in fall after the harvest is in. Sure and the US "S"elections coming up, what ya expect? So enjoy the BBQ season this summer, this might be our last one for a long time to come.
On a side note: I see it as the "self fulfilling" of prophecies. All this end of the world talk, Nostradamus, armageddon, 2012 and this crap. So now people believe it, and foremost the "devout" leaders simply follow it. And naturally "we" have to follow as well, - because TPTB simply 'create" the situation that F8** it up so bad that we got pretty little of a choice. Plus with all the envionmental pollution in the air, what "Spiritual" experiences do all those leaders have?



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   


I just read the article twice and no where in there does it say that Israel will intervene to "secure" Syria's chemical weapons. In fact it said that Israel does not want to intervene at all. They said they would just assume the west, led by the US, take control of the situation. They said that they are concerned that Syria is using chemical weapons on their own population or that Hezbollah may get their hands on the weapons.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by NoRemorse762
 




Sorry, but although the phrase 'secure' isn't used, the meaning of what was said is quite clear:


The Israeli army is considering using military force to prevent Syria’s alleged chemical warfare stockpiles from getting into the hands of Hezbollah or Al-Qaeda. Tel-Aviv believes that Damascus is no longer capable of securing its arsenal.


Which can clearly be read as: ''They can't secure it, so we''ll move in and do it for them.''

So this isn't fear-mongering, it's legitimate reporting based on the source. Only error was a mild misattribution, so a slap on the wrist (not a big picture condemning the premise of the thread) would have been sufficient for the OP, imho.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyInTheOintment
 


That is a funny pic.

Anyway, All countries are considering all options. This is Israel after all. Everything Israel says must be taken with a grain of salt. Because some General is talking out of school doesn't mean anything. Israel is always boasting big things and waving their big stick. When Israel means business they don't tell the media. They just go off unilaterally and drop bombs on a nuclear weapons facility, which they have done. If they were truly worried about chemical weapons they would select a few thermite bombs and incinerate the stockpile. Israel has always and will always have a big bark, but they have a secret selective bite.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Im sure that is Israel notices that Syria's chemical arsenal is becoming loose and transferred to Hezbollah then yeah Israel is going to act to keep that from happening. In fact, The US or some other power would probably do so before Israel could.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join