Who's next?

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Will that happen or will Bush finally realize that his days attacking other nations without UN mandate better are over?

What do you think?

 

[G-Man]

I don't think he'll attack Syria, but I greatly doubt that the UN has anything to do with it.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

btw, this is meant as a thread for serious discussion and thus NOT a duplicate for this thread:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=50276

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

OK, waht do we know on Syria. they are Iraqs best friends (out of necessity and because of a lot of families living on both sides of the border).

They most certainly do not have any significant quantity of gas or bio weapons.

They certainly do not have nukes.

The never officially supported terrorists, but they do have their problems with Israel.

The are good friends with the Brits, as was Iraq before 1990.

They do not bow to US supremacy.




I expect Bush to try and bend Syria to his will

 

[Stapel]

Hmm, I really think the whole Iraq 'thing' showed the UN is good for peace situations (hunger, rebuilding countries, criminal courts, peacekeeping) only. As soon as the possibility of war comes in, the UN is simply not needed. Bush already thought so, and IMHO he has proven to be right!

Waiting for a UN-mandate is just an endless story. The UN is represented by NON-democratic countries, so listening to this NON-democratic organization is not really necissary inmo.

I think it is fine someone in this world does some serious dictator bashing!

It is quite likely other dictators will pay more attention now to the values of democracy! Democracies have the rigth to tear down dictatorships and the duty to build up democracies. Even at the cost of 'acceptable' civil casulaties. For the simple reason dictators cause more civil casulaties.

So, another country being attacked depends largely on how other possible 'victims' react on the latest developments.

 

[G-Man]

Syria is also one of the biggest supporters of terrorism in the world, it is suspected to have sheltered many Iraqi top leaders (and this has nothing to do with families on both sides or any of that stuff), it's state media publicize racism, it controls another country (Lebanon) and had tried to invade two others (Israel and Jordan) as well as being in a conflict with Turkey, it's known to have many SCUDs and it's very likely to have biochimical weapons. It's also involved in military and military equipments deals with the two remaining members of the "axis of evil".

 

[Yoda Power]

I think Libya is next.

 

[Belle Du Jour]

I thought Libya had recently gone out of its way to "rehabilitate" itself somewhat in the eyes of the world.

 

[G-Man]

From what I've heard Libya and N Korea are probably the next countries to get nuclear weapons capabilities.

 

[nixon]

Politically, we cannot afford an extension of military engagements. Next one up, is North Korea, but not now.

 

[knowltok2]

Originally posted by Lt. 'Killer' M.
They most certainly do not have any significant quantity of gas or bio weapons.

How are you so sure of this? I'm not saying that if they have them they should be invaded or anything, but why are you so sure?

They certainly do not have nukes.

Agreed

The never officially supported terrorists, but they do have their problems with Israel.

Remove the word, "Officially" and I think you may have to amend that statement. If they give money, weapons, and support, but do it "unofficially", does that make it okay?

I expect Bush to try and bend Syria to his will

I do too, but not by invading.

 

[metalhead]

2 articles very pertinent to this discussion:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,5944-645911,00.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19197-2003Apr13.html

April 14, 2003

US tells Syria to co-operate or risk conflict
From Tim Reid in Washington

Bush accuses Damascus of developing chemical weapons


PRESIDENT BUSH yesterday accused Syria of having chemical weapons. In the clearest sign yet that Washington is turning its sights on Damascus’ links to terrorism, two of his most senior Cabinet members also warned the country against harbouring Iraqi officials.
Mr Bush told Syria that it “must co-operate” with Washington as it continues its effort to overthrow Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq.

He also repeated earlier warnings from Donald Rumsfeld, the US Defence Secretary, and Colin Powell, the Secretary of State, that Damascus must not harbour fleeing members of Saddam’s regime.

“We believe there are chemical weapons in Syria,” Mr Bush said. “We expect co-operation and I’m hopeful that we will receive co-operation.”

He did not threaten Syria with military action, but told it, along with Iran and North Korea — who, with Iraq, form his “axis of evil” — that the example of Iraq shows “we’re serious about stopping weapons of mass destruction”.

General Tommy Franks, commander of coalition troops in Iraq, said that it could take a year to search every site in Iraq where weapons of mass destruction might be hidden. He said that up to 3,000 locations are earmarked for visits which are progressing at the rate of five to 15 a day. He added that Syrian fighters had joined Iraqi soldiers to fight inside Iraq.

US Intelligence has given warnings that Damascus has a nascent chemical and biological weapons programme, but the accusation has never before been made publicly by the Bush Administration.

Imad Moustaphi, Syria’s deputy ambassador to the US, denied the claims, calling them “a campaign of disinformation” to distract attention from civil disorder in Iraq.

However the accusation, coming from the President himself, marks a significant increase in Washington’s aggressive rhetoric toward the regime of President Assad.

Mr Rumsfeld, who last month accused Syria of channelling military equipment including night-vision goggles to Iraq, said yesterday: “Being on the terrorist list is not some place I’d want to be. The (Syrian Government is making a lot of bad mistakes, a lot of bad judgment calls, in my view, and they’re associating with the wrong people.”

He added that there was “no question” that some senior Iraqi leaders had fled to Syria.

His comments came as the Pentagon announced that a half-brother of Saddam, Watban Ibrahim Hassan, had been captured in northern Iraq, apparently trying to reach Syria.

Watban, apprehended near the northern city of Mosul, was the “five of spades” in the Americans’ 55-name most wanted list, issued in the form of a deck of cards.

General Franks also said that several senior members of the regime had been captured in western Iraq. Meanwhile Yemen granted political asylum to Mohsen Khalil, Iraq’s permanent ambassador to the Arab League in Cairo.

General Powell also told Syria not to offer shelter to Iraqi officials fleeing Baghdad.

He said: “We think it would be very unwise if suddenly Syria becomes a haven for all these people who should be brought to justice who are trying to get out of Baghdad. Syria has been a concern for a long period of time. We have designated Syria for years as a state sponsor of terrorism.”

The US stance towards Syria has become markedly more aggressive since the start of the Iraqi campaign. Yesterday’s comments were Washington’s latest move to increase the pressure on Damascus, which also gives shelter to the leaders of the Palestinian groups Hamas and Hezbollah.

The rhetoric is part of a new phase of muscular US diplomacy in the region which has been given added force by the demonstration of US military might in Iraq. But the targeting of Damascus has raised fears that Washington plans to turn its attention to a military assault on Syria.

However it is unlikely that the Administration would entertain the idea of another pre-emptive military campaign so soon, particularly with a presidential election next year.

There is also recognition in Washington that military action against Syria, or even the overt threat of it, would confirm fears that the US is intent on subjugating the Arab world.

President Assad has voiced concern that Syria is next on the US “war on terrorism” list.

The White House and the State Department have denied that President Bush plans any more “regime changes” in the region. But Washington hopes to use the leverage gained from its overwhelming military victory to exert uncompromising diplomatic and economic pressure on regimes to change their behaviour.

 

[CurtSibling]

Syria?

Nah.

Absorbing Iraq will keep the USA's hands full for the forseeable.

I think N Korea will thaw out and begin cooperative talks.
Mr Bush will be thinking about re-election soon, so another war is out of the question.

Unless it is an easy one.

 

[Belle Du Jour]

France?

 

[joespaniel]

Originally posted by Lt. 'Killer' M.
OK, waht do we know on Syria.

They most certainly do not have any significant quantity of gas or bio weapons.


The never officially supported terrorists, but they do have their problems with Israel.

You obviously dont know much about Syria.

 

[joespaniel]

According to open sources, Syria has one of the most extensive chemical weapons (CW) capabilities in the Middle East and among developing countries worldwide. Syria allegedly received initial chemical warfare assistance and supplies, including chemical agents, from Egypt prior to the October War against Israel in 1973. Analysts claim that the country now has an indigenous capability to produce and weaponize nerve (e.g., sarin and VX) and blister (e.g., mustard) agents. There are some allegations that Syria received Russian assistance in developing these agents, and that it acquired dual-use technology and equipment from various European countries and India. Syria possesses Scud-B and Scud- C ballistic missiles capable of being fitted with chemical warheads, and in 1999 it allegedly tested a Scud-B carrying a warhead designed to disperse VX. Open sources assert that there are at least three Syrian facilities currently engaged in producing CW, located near Damascus, Hama, and Safira village (in the Aleppo area). Damascus ratified the Geneva Protocol in 1968, but so far has declined to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).

 

[Tassadar]

Originally posted by Belle Du Jour
France?

If you are talking about psychological war, its already start.

As for Syria, they already said a week or two ago, that they choose to side with Irak. And now, Bush see (galadriel mirror or crytal balls) chemical weapon in syria as well, where are Irak's one is still a mystery.

Like i said, a pandora box have been open by a realy cool guy .

 

[joespaniel]

a. The Syrians provide patronage and political, propaganda and operational support to at least 10 of the 35 terrorist groups (or more than 30%) appearing on the US State Department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism (as of April 1998). The ideology of these terrorist organizations calls for the destruction of Israel and they oppose the peace process, the Oslo Accords, the Palestinian Authority and Yasser Arafat.

b. The terrorist groups under Syrian patronage can be divided in to four categories as possible:


1) Hezbollah;

2) Palestinian Islamic organizations: Hamas, Palestine Islamic Jihad/Shkaki);

3) Radical left-wing Palestinian organizations: the PFLP-GC/Jibril, the PFLP/ Habash, the DFLP/Hawatmeh, The Palestine Liberation Front, the Fatah Revolutionary Council/Abu Nidal, Fatah/Abu Mussa and an extremist faction of the Popular Struggle Front;

4) Other Middle Eastern and International terrorist groups: Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), Japanese Red Army and other terrorist organizations.


c. Hezbollah and other Palestinian terrorist groups’ policy of carrying out terrorist attacks is part of Syrian strategy and is influenced by it. However, Syria does not have sole and absolute control over these terrorist groups. Contrary to the 1970s and 1980s, Syria cooperates with its strategic ally Iran, and the terror attacks carried out by Palestinian Islamic organizations serve the joint and shared interests of the two countries. Thus, the Syrians make use of the Islamic organizations which receive ideological guidance, political and operational instructions as well as military and financial support from Iran.

d. The headquarters, training bases, logistical, political and propaganda offices of these organizations are primarily based in Syria. In this framework, it should be noted that Damascus is the primary center of left-wing Palestinian organizations opposed to the Palestinian Authority and the Oslo Accords. Syria serves as an important arena oactivity for Hamas outside of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, and senior Hamas officials carry out operational, political and propaganda activities from Damascus. The infrastructure of the “Palestine Islamic Jihad” outside of Judea, Samaria and Gaza is primarily located in the vicinity of Damascus, from where its operations and activities in the “territories” are directed.

e. The leaders of most of these terrorist organizations reside in Syria, from where they oversee and direct the military, political and propaganda activities of their organizations against Israel and other Arab states. Among the senior leaders and activists of the terror groups residing in Damascus are: Dr. Ramadan Shalah, Secretary-General of Islamic Jihad and his deputy Ziad Nehaleh; Imad al-Alami, chairman of Hamas’ “Interior Committee”, who is a dominant figure in activating the organizations’ military apparatus for carrying out attacks; Ahmed Jibril, George Habash and Nayef Hawatmeh, leaders of the three main left-wing Palestinian terrorist organizations. Also active in Syria are middle- and low-ranking military activists of all the abovementioned groups.

f. The Syrians permit these groups to maintain their military and political infrastructure in areas under their control in Lebanon. The most widespread infrastructure belongs to Hezbollah, which is also the leading group which concentrates attacks in southern Lebanon. The Syrians also permit some limited activity by the left-wing Palestinian terrorist groups. With Syrian approval, the Beka’a Valley continues to serve as an organizational and training center for Middle East and international terrorist groups.

g. The Syrians support a number of anti-Turkish terrorist and underground organizations, particularly the “Kurdish Workers Party” (PKK). They allow the PKK to train in Syria and Lebanon and to use both countries as operational and political-propaganda bases against Turkey. The PKK's leader, Abdallah Ocalan lives in Damascus, and several senior members of the organization also live in Syria. The organization has bases and offices in Damascus, northern Syria, the Beka'a Valley in Lebanon and along the Syrian-Turkish border which are used for operations.

h. Islamic terrorist groups operating in Arab countries against pro-Western regimes find sanctuary in Syria and Lebanon and use them as bases for their training activities and logistical infrastructure. The terrorist organizations direct their terrorist and subversive activities against Arab governments from Syria and Lebanon, and the Syrians do not make any serious efforts to prevent it, despite repeated and varied protests by Arab states, including Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain.

i. The Syrians grant sanctuary to terrorist and criminal industries in Lebanon's Beka'a Valley. Both in areas under Syrian Army control and in those under the control of Hezbollah, there are widespread “industries” for the planting and production of drugs and large-scale currency forgery (especially American currency). The industries' products are marketed in Israel, Arab states and Western countries. There are many indications that the Syrians assist these industries and enable them to exist, since they share in the enormous profits generated, and possibly also because of their interest not to confront Hezbollah and powerful local elements dealing in these “industries.”

 

[Tassadar]

joespaniel,

According to your post, Syria would had provide much more help to Al-quaida type of organisation then Irak. And Syria represent a much greater threat to Isreal than Irak was.

So why the preventive strike on Irak, insteed of Syria ?

Will Isreal do a preventive strike like the coalition did ?

What the russian will do ?

 

[Stapel]

Originally posted by G-Man
From what I've heard Libya and N Korea are probably the next countries to get nuclear weapons capabilities.

A few years ago I read an article on the non-proliferation treaty (english?). At the time it was not signed by Israel, Pakistan and India. And broken by Iraq, Iran and Libya (not according to 'warmongering republicans ', but officialy stated by the UN.
But, afaik, Libya has been silent last few years. They have cooperated in the Lockerbie trial and not defied the US (like NKorea). They have also hosted an important Italian football match last year! They seem to be on the right way, so attacking them won't give a nice signal to other countries, thinking of switching to 'the right way'.

And above all: Mister Gadafi once saved my beloved FIAT from bankrupcy.