Report: Syria, N. Korea building nuclear site together
Yitzhak Benhorin
Published: 13.09.07, 10:34
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
13 Talkbacks for this article
1. "many US officials" = State Dept. imbeciles
Barron ,   Israel   (09.13.07)
They'd easily sell out Israel to protect their Saudi/Arabist interests. Feh!
2. Nuclear Facility
M. Hartley ,   Atlanta, US   (09.13.07)
If the photo with the headline is supposed to show a nuclear facility, Syria has a long way to go. Actually, that "facility" looks more like a North Georgia chicken house, and a pathetically small one, at that. If you're not sure, park yourself about 2 miles downwind from it and you'll know without a doubt and within in a minute whether or not it's a chicken coop or some other facility. The only thing worse would be a paper mill.
3. Putin dropped the father of all bombs to hide the evidence!
Now we know where ,   what the big hole is   (09.13.07)
4. N. Korea and its proliferation
Brod ,   USA   (09.13.07)
America should ensure in its talks with N. Korea that they should also stop exporting nuke technology and arms to other countries in the region and other parts of the world where such tools are channeled to Islamist-Jihadist terrorist organizations around the world.
5. War is inevitable.
Terry ,   Eilat, Israel   (09.13.07)
If reports are true that America plans on bombing Iran, then that is when we should make a preemptive strike on Syria. It wouldn't surprise me if a deal has been made between the US & Israel - we make concessions to the Palestinians in return for American bombing of Iran & we get the green light to attack Syria. The Sunni Arab states (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc.) will be happy to see Shi'a Iran defeated, Iraq returned to Sunni domination, & some "progress" (however temporary) towards a Palestinian state. The Syrian alliance with Iran cannot be viewed too well by the other Arab states, especially as it involves creating a Shi'a victory in Lebanon. Even if my "conspiracy theory" is untrue, it is what is happening even if there are no quid pro quo agreements. There are other aspects to this as well. Prime among them is to block renewed Russian influence in the region. Second, it perhaps offers some chance of stabilizing Iraq. Third, the impotent EU would like to see progress on a Palestinian state. Two questions arise. One, will this grand strategy actually work? Two, is this in our interest? I would have to write a book to answer these questions. There are costs & disadvantages, unintended consequences, as well as benefits. This New Year should prove to be quite interesting.
6. To #5 Terry
M. Hartley ,   Atlanta, US   (09.13.07)
I think, all this BS between Israel, Syria and the PA is a stall tactic. Since our ground troops are tied up in Iraq, it wouldn't surprise me if there weren't some deal in the works to the effect that, ok, we'll go after Iran from the air where we don't have a shortage, if you'll chip in the ground troops, should they be needed. Together we'll do something with Syria. Hamas, Hizbollah and most of the insurgency in Iraq would be taken care of by default, because without Iran, they're dead in the water. Abbas, if he plays nice, might get him a State in the process, but it probably won't be exactly what he had in mind. Maybe y'all can "enthrone" him in Syria, shipping the Palis off with him. Maybe I'm wrong as rain, but something about the picture as it is now is just a little too freaking hoaky all the way around.
7. America cannot bomb Iran
Toneii ,   Alpharetta, USA   (09.13.07)
We're completely tapped out in the false war we started in Iraq. President Bush is already abusing our troops by overworking them with redeployments. We even have our national guard there, who are supposed to defend locally to the US. But Ari Fleischer and his Freedom's Watch PAC still want us to attack Iran, Syria and North Korea as William Kristol, Kagan, Cheney, Libby, Wolfowitz, etc had layed out in their plan called "Rebuilding America's Defenses" in 1998. It's all coming together just as they had envisioned back then, with a New Pearl Harbor, the Iraq war, and Iran was next on their list. One has to wonder if any of this could have come to pass if Monica Lewinsky had not upset the Democratic successes of President Clinton.
8. To #7
M. Hartley ,   Atlanta, US   (09.13.07)
Get Real! Monica didn't upset anything. Bill Clinton did that all by himself.
9. #7 America Cannot Bomb Iran - Wrong!
Bill Foonman ,   Jacksonville, USA   (09.13.07)
Of course they can and chances are, they will. Yes, you are correct. The U.S. is tapped out on the ground (their Achilles Heel) and American soap-opera generals know that the U.S. has never won a ground war whether it be Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq etc. They simply don't stand a chance against Ahmadinejad's fanatical Islamic "martyrs." However, the U.S. may implement a war that encompasses two main strategies: 1. Cutting off Iran's gas supply - pressuring Iranians to overthrow their government, and 2. An aerial bombing campaign to paralyze Iranian defenses and allow American bombers to destroy the 1000+ already-identified nuclear facilities. America's strength comes from the air - not on the ground. The question is how and when Israel, Hamas, Hezbullah and Syria will be drawn into this mess? I believe that Israel will deal with them while America neutralizes Iran.
10. #7...wrong
DR ,   Floridda, USA   (09.13.07)
I bet you would sooner believe what Ahmadinejad, Chaves and Assad say before trusting your own president, right? The US can destroy Iran in two minutes, but that will never happen. I think we have to give their people a chance to overthrow monkey, idiot man and let the Syrians try to do the same. the problem is that anyone who opposes the governments in these countries is executed in public. So it will probably come down to military might and people will whine and moan about how the US is a bully. We have plenty of cheese for that whine.
11. Nuclear weapons
Renate Baramy ,   Ramat Hasharon, Isra   (09.14.07)
If there is only a small percentage of truth that North Korea supplied Syria with any nuclear devices, and seeing that they strongly criticized Israel against the so called strike, I say it was a good thing, if it happened. Just the thought that such a regine has nuclear weapongs puts the whole aea in jeopardy.
12. #5 Terry
Mark ,   USA   (09.15.07)
I fail to even glimpse any advantages in losing Jewish territory and setting up a terror state. What's there to consider? Regarding nuclear neighbors, the fact is that they don't need nukes to defeat Israel. A well-organized attack using the fifth column plus rockets flying from all three sides would be the end of Israel, especially if they use chemical weapons. The economy you feel so proud of would collapse. Besides, your people seem so disheartened that they appear ready to give up. And as far as the US attacking Syria or Iran by using Israel is cowardly in the extreme because the Americans WON'T come to the aid of Israelis when they need it (when have they done so?). I don't know how can you even stand the idea without feeling deeply offended at being used like that. Terry, your TBs are almost always right on the mark. Too bad you are not seeing the forest for the trees. Your real immediate danger is the creation of Palestine and the loss of your land. Everything else is nothing but a side show. Because once you give up the territories, you'll have indefensible borders and whether the Syrians have nukes or not won't really matter then. Hasn't the experience of Disengagement taught Israel anything?
13. Really? But Syria and N.Korea are Peace-loving countries!
The Doc ,   Haifa, Israel   (12.13.07)
Here goes the lame N.Korean "indignation" at Israeli claims that N.Korea has been helping Syria's Nuclear ambitions. N.Korea is looking for ways of securing Nuclear facilities and weapons abroad and is willing to pay the Muslims with Nuclear Bombs. At least now they are not trying to lie that hard anymore. It's been all in the open. The ones to blame fornot taking active steps to destroy this route is the Israeli politicians, NOT the Mossad. But there is nothing to worry about - IAF will turn this one into rubbles too and again send Syria and N.Korea back by 10 years.
Back to article