You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Iraq-Jordan
Iraq says has photos of Syrians with guerrillas
2004-12-23
Iraq has photographs of Syrian officials with guerrillas who have been fighting U.S.-led forces before planned national elections next month, a senior Iraqi diplomat said on Thursday. The Iraqi ambassador to Syria, Hassan Allawi, told Britain's Times newspaper in an interview his country had photographs that showed Syrian officials with guerrillas who were captured when U.S. and Iraqi forces stormed Falluja last month.
Digital cameras, like blogs, are everywhere.
"Prime Minister Iyad Allawi wrote a letter to the Syrians saying he had pictures but was not going to release them, despite being under pressure from the Americans to do so," the ambassador said. Hassan Allawi said the photographs were found on a leader of a group of former Baathist intelligence personnel who served under Saddam Hussein. He said one picture showed a guerrilla, named by the Times as Moayed Ahmed Yasseen, also known as Abu Ahmed, standing next to a senior Syrian official. The Times said Yasseen was arrested in Falluja in mid-November. Iraq has repeatedly accused Syria of helping Jordanian al Qaeda ally Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Saddam supporters to wage an insurgency before the Jan. 30 elections. Syria denies any links to guerrillas in Iraq and says it is doing its best to tighten security along its hundreds of miles (km) of desert border.
In that case they won't mind if we tighten the screws border security, will they.
U.S. President George W. Bush has warned Syria not to meddle in Iraq and has threatened to use economic and diplomatic measures against Damascus. Washington accused Syria of sending military equipment to Iraq during last year's U.S.-led war that toppled Saddam. Allawi told the Times there had been an "Iraqi Baathist invasion of Syria" since Saddam's fall that threatened the Damascus government. "It is overwhelming," he said. "They stole gold and robbed banks and came here. They have enough funds to keep fighting for 30 years." 
Posted by:Steve White

#6  I think OP has hit on it. We are kind of busy in Iraq and Afghanistan (plus Kosovo, Germany, South Korea,...). I don't know why the President hasn't asked Congress for an increase, nor why Congress hasn't done it by itself.

Personally, I'm hoping that once the elections are out of the way in Iraq, and they get some of their own troops going, we can scale back to 50K or so, then use the rest to clean up Syria (with Israel's help, perhaps?), then clear the decks for the heart of the problem: Iran.

OTOP, remember that this is the President who appointed Colin Powell, let the UN delay us and give Saddam those extra months, still talks about the roadkillmap, is going to give the Paleos a huge Zakat,...
Posted by: jackal   2004-12-23 3:57:16 PM  

#5  As I told my wife back in about 1995, we're going to have a time when we regret Bill Clinton's destruction of our military. The time is now. It's not hard to tear down a military unit, but it takes a LONG time to replace one. We had 18 Army divisions in 1992, now we have 9 1/2. It takes anywhere from two to three years to build a combat-ready division from scratch these days. Training is more intense, and the material we're starting with is less prepared. The only way to take on Syria or Iran right now is with nukes. It'll be at least another two years before we have enough combat troops to actually go in on the ground. Note that the number of troops in Iraq is going UP, not down.

My scenario would be to add five more Army divisions, another two or three Marine Expeditionary Units, and another four Air Force fighter-bomber wings. Once that's done, attack Syria with conventional arms, and nuke Riyadh. Iran will go ballistic, and we'll have the excuse to start lobbing in Tomahawk missiles. The destruction of Riyadh will cut off the oil money, send shock waves through the Arab world, and scare the bejesus out of Korea and China (one really dirty nuke on Aswan or the Three Gorges Dam, and how many people die?). It might even be a wake-up call for the tight-turbans in Sudan, but that's a stretch.
Posted by: Old Patriot   2004-12-23 3:46:45 PM  

#4  i don't understand why we've been so reserved with Syria and Iran. Atleast alittle more bite in our threats.
Posted by: Floting Granter5118   2004-12-23 3:04:11 PM  

#3  don't know....but somebody(s) has the foot on the brakes. if the isrealis know where the hizbo's and hamas's are staying in damn-ass-cuss we know also.

it's pretty obvious we are being restrained, or are restraining ourselves. I dunno.
Posted by: anymouse   2004-12-23 1:53:21 PM  

#2  I cant understand why the US allows the Syrians to continue with these actions?

What are we waiting for? and WHY?
Posted by: Threck Phuth7614   2004-12-23 9:27:58 AM  

#1  cxlose the border - declare Syrians PNG and kill any you find. Simple. Effective. Oddly satisfying
Posted by: Frank G   2004-12-23 8:48:16 AM  

00:00