Isn't it so nice that Israel is so proud of her violation of international law?
Isn't that nice?
Meanwhile, the MSM kept the war drums going today by covering the story for a SECOND STRAIGHT DAY (after they ignore so many Times front-page stories), and actually posing the question whether the U.S. would use the Israeli strike on Syria as an example for Iran.
So here we have Lebanon last year (a test example for Cheney on Iran) and now this skullduggery on Syria.
Methinks war is coming -- SOON!
"Israel Silent on Reports of Bombing Within Syria" by STEVEN ERLANGER
JERUSALEM, Oct. 14 — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Israeli officials declined Sunday to confirm or deny a report that an Israeli Air Force strike against Syria last month had bombed a partly constructed nuclear reactor of North Korean design.
The report, published in The New York Times on Saturday, was featured prominently in the Israeli news media on Sunday. But Israeli officials continued their silence about the Sept. 6 airstrike, though they have signaled they are proud of the operation; a senior military official said it had restored “military deterrence” in the region.
Former Israeli officials and intelligence experts would not discuss whether Israel hit a nuclear reactor that was under construction. But they said the report was plausible given their understanding of Syria’s ambitions in the realm of nonconventional weaponry and its longstanding quest for strategic parity with Israel.
Maj. Gen. Aharon Zeevi Farkash, Israel’s former chief of military intelligence, called the notion that Israel had targeted a nuclear reactor in Syria “logical.”
Regarding the Syria strike, General Zeevi Farkash said Hafez al-Assad, Syria’s former president and the father of President Bashar al-Assad, had “long spoken of Syria’s weakness opposite Israel in the realm of air power, technology and ground forces,” and the need for a nonconventional ability, which in the past meant chemical weapons.
But he added that a “constellation of interests” between North Korea and Syria could have led Syria to go “a stage further” in its quest for strategic parity and deterrence, by moving beyond its chemical ability into the nuclear realm, “as Iran is doing.”
Noting the pressure on North Korea to end its nuclear weapons program, the general suggested that smuggling some elements of its program to Syria would have allowed the North “to preserve the knowledge it has accumulated and not just throw it away.”
Uzi Arad, a former head of Mossad, Israel’s intelligence agency, and the national security adviser under former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said that he did not know what Israel bombed in Syria but that a nuclear reactor was plausible.
[I am SO SICK of NaZionist fucking lies!!!!
"This story is nonsense.... The mainstream media seems to have learned nothing from the run-up to war in Iraq. It is a sad commentary on how selective leaks... are still treated as if they were absolute truth. -- Joseph Cirincione senior fellow and director for nuclear policy at the Center for American Progress]
Israeli analysts, meanwhile, expressed surprise at reports that some American officials considered the Israeli airstrike to have been premature. Several American and foreign officials have said it would have been years before the Syrians could have used the reactor to produce the spent nuclear fuel that could, through a series of additional steps, be reprocessed into bomb-grade plutonium.
[Yeah, all surprised that the U.S. didn't unzip Zionist trou, huh?
What arrogant shitscum!]
But Emily B. Landau, director of the arms control and regional security program at the Institute for National Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University, said, “The one lesson that Israel has learned from the Iranian experience is that if you don’t take care of something like this at the very initial stages, you’re going to have a bigger problem later on.”
[So Israel will be wacking Iran soon, too, huh?
Or are they going to order the U.S. to do it?]
"Pre-emptive Caution: The Case of Syria" by DAVID E. SANGER
WASHINGTON, Oct. 14 — It was President Bush who, a year after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, rewrote America’s national security strategy to warn any nation that might be thinking of trying to develop atomic weapons that it could find itself the target of a pre-emptive military strike.
But that was the fall of 2002, when the world looked very different from how it does in the fall of 2007. Now, the case of Syria, which Israeli and American analysts suspect was trying to build a nuclear reactor, has become a prime example of what can happen when Mr. Bush’s first-term instincts run headlong into second-term realities.
Five years later, dealing with nations that may have nuclear weapons ambitions — but are also staying within the letter of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty — looks a lot more complicated than it once did.
This time it was the Israelis who invoked Mr. Bush’s doctrine, determining that what they believed was a nascent Syrian effort to build a nuclear reactor could not be tolerated.
[Can you imagine the reaction if any "enemy' cited Bush's doctrine?
The Zionist papers would be calling it AGGRESSION, wouldn't they?
Pffffttttt!!!]
In a curious role reversal, some of Mr. Bush’s own top advisers were urging restraint before Israel bombed the site on Sept. 6, raising questions about whether the threat was too murky and too distant to warrant military action. Those are precisely the kinds of questions Mr. Bush’s critics say should have been raised about Iraq.
[All bullshit!
The U.S. was either for this and gave its approval, or the Zionist state is calling the shots.
This is simply ALL BULLSHIT for public consumption!]
The Israelis are thinking five or 10 years ahead. They saw a chance to thwart the Syrians and to fire a warning shot that the Iranians could not fail to notice.
[Except they are not five to ten years out from striking.
That comes by early next year at the latest!]
Michael Green, a former director for Asia at the National Security Council and now a professor at Georgetown University:
“If you are Israel and you are looking at this, the value of striking Syria is that it sends a signal, including to the Iranians. This follows the Chinese proverb that sometimes you have to kill the chicken to scare the monkey.”
[Gee, in some quarters, that would be known as TERRORISM!!!!!!!!]
