Article

2003-10-30 Syria-Lebanon

In first, U.S. voices assessment of WMD to Syria

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2003-10-30 12:22:20 AM|| || Front Page|| [11132 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Middle East Newsline?

Posted by Yank 2003-10-30 12:29:58 AM|| 2003-10-30 12:29:58 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 I think it's more a semi-subtle way of pointing out to the lunkheads in Damascus that we can find a causus belli if we really want to. They're dirty, and everyone knows it.

Posted by mojo 2003-10-30 1:09:44 AM|| 2003-10-30 1:09:44 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 It was in the 29 Oct Wall Street Journal as well.

Posted by Brian 2003-10-30 2:20:10 AM|| 2003-10-30 2:20:10 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Gertz wrote about it in the Washington Times as well.

Posted by Daniel King 2003-10-30 10:09:04 AM|| 2003-10-30 10:09:04 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 I heard a news report on the radio this AM about the Senate Intelligence Committee's work on the WMD "issue." I wonder if this "official" assessment was issued to counteract the perceived political effort of the committee. The administration has been playing its cards close to its chest on this issue, even though there has been much speculation about WMD going to Syria before the war.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2003-10-30 11:01:04 AM|| 2003-10-30 11:01:04 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 I said this months ago, but who cares? Maybe I'll start a liberal think tank and see if I can get those fools to throw tons of money at me. Beats working for a living...

Posted by tu3031 2003-10-30 12:01:29 PM|| 2003-10-30 12:01:29 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 Mark your calendars boys, here we go...I estimate sometime after next year's elections...(yeah going out on a limb, I know )

Aris, taking you at your word (a mistake, probably, but what the hell...), you are onboard with us now that we are building a casus belli for Syria, right ? Right ?

Posted by Carl in N.H. 2003-10-30 12:38:35 PM|| 2003-10-30 12:38:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 I still find it very hard to believe that Saddam, who expected the Yanks were bluffing, would pass along his WMD to Syria who has not been a on and off enemy despite their Bath party allegences.

I find it hard to believe that Syria, watching the US buildup to invasion of Iraq would take the WMD and set themselves up as next in line.

I just don't buy into these reports.

Posted by Yanks 2003-10-30 2:50:32 PM|| 2003-10-30 2:50:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Carl> "Aris, taking you at your word (a mistake, probably, but what the hell...), you are onboard with us now that we are building a casus belli for Syria, right ? Right ?"

Let's say that I'm *more* onboard with you where Syria is concerned than I was with Iraq.

But, really people, WMDs *again*?? Can't you find a casus belli slightly less stupid than this? Given how Syria is (IIRC) in a declared state of war with Israel and occupies Lebanon and such stuff, I really don't think that the idiocy called "WMDs" is really your best choice here by far.

And if you don't find WMDs there either, it'll be somewhat difficult, geographically speaking, to convince people that Syria then somehow managed to pass them on to Iran. :-D

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2003-10-30 5:00:39 PM|| 2003-10-30 5:00:39 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Thanks Aris, glad I'm wrong.

Re Iran, no need to convince us that Syria "passed" anything on -- we don't really believe that oil-rich Iran needs a nuke plant, so there's the casus belli right there...

Posted by Carl in N.H. 2003-10-30 6:23:44 PM|| 2003-10-30 6:23:44 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 For once I agree---unlimited oil reserves and the asses need nuclear power-----NOT

Posted by NotMikeMoore 2003-10-31 12:54:36 AM|| 2003-10-31 12:54:36 AM|| Front Page Top

09:49 Anonymous4684
04:07 Bulldog
04:04 Bulldog
03:44 Bulldog
01:11 NotMikeMoore
01:08 NotMikeMoore
00:58 NotMikeMoore
00:54 NotMikeMoore
00:41 NotMikeMoore
00:39 NotMikeMoore
00:31 NotMikeMoore
00:20 NotMikeMoore
00:19 NotMikeMoore
00:16 NotMikeMoore
00:06 Jarhead
00:00 Jarhead
00:00 NotMikeMoore
23:58 Fred
23:55 Jarhead
23:54 NotMikeMoore
23:51 Jarhead
23:49 Jarhead
23:49 NotMikeMoore
23:44 NotMikeMoore