Syrian Rebels Claim to Take Over Chemical Weapons

The gist of it is this: Assad cannot even maintain control of his own missle bases and (by inference) his own weapons of mass destruction.

Please tell us, yet again, how this guy is a competant leader and a stabilizing force in the region?

I would counter-propose that if Assad has plans to use chemical weapons against his own people as a last resort...and he fears the wrath of the rest of the world, should he do so, then planting a false story that they are now under the control of the rebels, should allow him to use them against his own citizens (as he intends) while framing the rebels for their use.

So the US belly-aches to Assad that he best not use his chemical arsenal and then the terrorist infiltrators just happen to find some 'converted' missiles thereby presenting the illusion that Assad was planning to use chemical weapons. Couldn't be any more transparent could it?

I think that with the revelation that Iran is (and most likely has been for a while) now in country, we should probably stop thinking in terms of what Assad wants, would do, or is thinking, because those things are probably all moot at this point.... Syria's agenda is now playing second fiddle to Iran's...Assad has always been a puppet, the only difference now is that he doesn't have to wait for the phone to ring to get his orders...

Or maybe he's giving the Iranian revolutionary guard their orders......

Originally posted by IAMTAT
I would counter-propose that if Assad has plans to use chemical weapons against his own people as a last resort...and he fears the wrath of the rest of the world, should he do so, then planting a false story that they are now under the control of the rebels, should allow him to use them against his own citizens (as he intends) while framing the rebels for their use.

You're right, but only if Assad is actually in charge...if, as i posited in my previous reply, it is Iran, i don't think they would go that route...they aren't that dumb. I think Iran believes that if they can provoke an attack on themselves by the west, then they will be able to rally their neighbors to their cause. For that to happen, whether in Iran, or in Syria, they would have to be able to say that any attack was without cause. This would be especially effective for them if Israel were to initiate any sort of unilateral action against either(which, by the way, is what i think is most likely...).

reply to post by IAMTAT

lame attempt at discrediting Assad imo,Syria was pretty fn stable before NATO showed up ,so was Libya
Now Alfsa-qaeda maniacs may posses chemical weapons/wmd,why this can be viewed as a good thing defies logic..

Originally posted by Ben81
why would they risk a world war with Russia and China ?

You continually go down this road, invoking China and Russia and war. As has been stated China and Russia are not going to risk their own countries economic interests by engaging in a war in order to save a dying regime, a regime by the way that is now protected by Iranian forces instead of Syrian forces.

As for Russia and their presence -
Russia may evacuate Syrian base, says Navy chief

The Russian Navy may evacuate the Syrian port of Tartus in the event of a hostile attack, the military branch’s chief was quoted as by Russia Today.

The personnel on duty at the base will be moved out of the area if need be, Vice Adm. Viktor Chirkov said during a radio interview.

Such a move, however, would require the direct order of the president, Chirkov added.

The opposition Free Syrian Army has previously threatened to target Russian bases in Syria.

Over 50 sailors and officers are currently serving at the Tartus base, which is used for the repair and refueling of Russian vessels, according to Russia Today.

Assads government is imploding...
Assads army is abandoning / fleeing / defecting to other countries.
Assads diplomatic corp is defecting.

Russia is not going to defend a corpse.

reply to post by Xcathdra


The Russian leadership has been obsessed with the idea of America and the EU engineering the overthrow of governments that, for whatever reason, they find unsuitable.
President Vladimir Putin and his team seem to be convinced that something like that could happen to Russia.
The UN, nor any other body or group of countries has the right to decide who should or should not govern a sovereign state,but besides action within the UN,there's not much Russia will/can do to stop them..

Originally posted by all2human
reply to post by IAMTAT

 

lame attempt at discrediting Assad imo,Syria was pretty fn stable before NATO showed up

,so was Libya
Now Alfsa-qaeda maniacs may posses chemical weapons/wmd,why this can be viewed as a good thing defies logic..

edit on 30-8-2012 by all2human because: (no reason given)

Assad has pretty much discredited himself...as a leader, as well as a stabilizing influence in the region. He's murdering his own populace, destroying his own cities, his government is collapsing, his military is defecting right and left...and the boob can't even keep his own missle bases secure.

Iran is pulling his strings now...and he just rolls over and lets them. What an awesome and inspiring leader.

reply to post by IAMTAT


Youv'e been drinking the punch if you believe that..
His forces are fighting an invading force..
You call Al-qaeda having WMD a stable scenario for the region lol
imo your posting in the wrong forum
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by all2human


On the contrary, all2human. Read more carefully please.

reply to post by IAMTAT


What a great leader Assad must be.
He has to call in elite Iranian military units in order to help defend his own power structure and Russian naval bases from his own populace.

Originally posted by quackers
So the US belly-aches to Assad that he best not use his chemical arsenal and then the terrorist infiltrators just happen to find some 'converted' missiles thereby presenting the illusion that Assad was planning to use chemical weapons. Couldn't be any more transparent could it?

Assuming this article is true...why are you so surprised that Assad would use chem-weapons to save his a**?
He's already bombed his cities to rubble with Migs, missles and helecopter gunships.

reply to post by IAMTAT


Only one side has mentioned their use, those provoking this fight. Should Assad just stand by and let terrorists assume control? There isnt a single nation that would stand back and let some band of hoods backed by foreign powers waltz in and take over. And if it is a civil war what business is it of ours anyway to pick sides? Only those with their own agenda like to stick their noses in the trough with the rest of the pigs.

Just edited to add, we've seen first hand these so called rebels comitting war crimes, yet why no outcry from the peanut gallery about their actions? No instead its just warmongering reactionists itching for an excuse to stick their noses in that trough.

Originally posted by quackers
reply to post by IAMTAT

 

Only one side has mentioned their use, those provoking this fight. Should Assad just stand by and let terrorists assume control? There isnt a sine nation that would stand back and let some band of hoods backed by foreign powers waltzz in and take over. And if it is a civil war what business is it of ours anyway to pick sides? Only those with their own agenda like to stick their noses in the trough with the rest of the pigs.

Iran has most certainly "picked sides"...so has Russia. BOTH now have military forces on Syrian soil.
So far, the U.S. and NATO have kept troops out.
As far as Al Qaeda helping the rebels?...well, the last I heard, U.S. special forces killed their supreme leader...What was that guy's name...Osama bin Laden? How is THAT the U.S. siding with Al Qaeda terrorists?

The U.S. supports the Syrian people yearning for freedom from Assad's brutal dictatorship...Al Qaeda has infiltrated the Syrian freedom fighters to a degree (it's what they do)...but if you're looking for "pigs" with an agenda sticking their nose in the trough of opportunity, that is the Syrian civil war...look no further than Iran!
IRANIAN boots are already on Syrian soil...and IRANIAN soldiers are already actively engaged in killing Syrian civilians.

reply to post by quackers


Because IMATIT is snake,on the flag waving ,warmonger's side ,who wants to see blood flow in Iran while he defends the poor defenseless people of Syria,while they get caught in the cross-fire,by actions created and supported by HIS government!
All the while knowing quote:"By destroying their military and leadership, occupying them for a brief period of time to install a democratic government, before withdrawing our forces,...we have seen, time and again, the country fall into the hands of terrorist groups, anarchy, or even more vile dictators.
In the end, what evolves is a country that is even less stabilized and conducive to world or regional peace"


Can't say i didn't read TIT

Originally posted by all2human
reply to post by quackers

 

Because IMATIT is snake,on the flag waving ,warmonger's side ,who wants to see blood flow in Iran while he defends the poor defenseless people of Syria,while they get caught in the cross-fire,by actions created and supported by HIS government!
All the while knowing quote:"By destroying their military and leadership, occupying them for a brief period of time to install a democratic government, before withdrawing our forces,...we have seen, time and again, the country fall into the hands of terrorist groups, anarchy, or even more vile dictators.
In the end, what evolves is a country that is even less stabilized and conducive to world or regional peace"

Can't say i didn't read TIT

edit on 30-8-2012 by all2human because: (no reason given)

Name calling? How childish. Looks like I got under your skin with my last point.
Obviously, you've run out of semi-intelligent rebuttals.
I'm sorry but it's hard to take you seriously when you resort to childish name-calling. Sad, really.

reply to post by IAMTAT

not even close
I'm not going to lie,knowing that people like you exist does pis*** me off ,but i will admit even though i may not agree ,you are entitled to your opinion,i'm sorry if i hurt your feelings..

reply to post by IAMTAT

double post

Originally posted by all2human
reply to post by IAMTAT

 

not even close
I'm not going to lie,knowing that people like you exist does pis*** me off ,but i will admit even though i may not agree ,you are entitled to your opinion,i'm sorry if i hurt your feelings

edit on 30-8-2012 by all2human because: (no reason given)

No hurt or hard feelings, all2human. Apology accepted.