Please visit the new home of Majikthise at bigthink.com/blogs/focal-point.

« Federal agent indicted for cyber-stalking with DHS database | Main | Double or nothing... »

September 24, 2007

RAW STORY: Israel struck missile cache in Syria, not nuclear site

My colleague Larisa Alexandrovna reports that the Syrian facility bombed by Israeli fighter jets on September 6th was a missile site, and not a nuclear facility.

Sources told RS that Syrians were attempting to modify these missiles to deliver chemical payloads with the help of the North Koreans. The missiles themselves also originated in North Korea.

The Israeli attack on the Syrian missile site was allegedly payback for a serious accidental explosion at a Syrian weapons facility in July, 2007.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c61e653ef00e54efc85ab8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference RAW STORY: Israel struck missile cache in Syria, not nuclear site:

Comments

A missile depot makes more sense than a nuclear site, since Syria doesn't appear to have a very sophisticated nuclear program, and NK isn't stupid enough to send nukes to Syria given the consequences of being found out. Israel took a bit of a beating from short range missiles during the recent Lebanon war, so they've every reason to be concerned about them, particularly if they're capable of carrying chemical warheads.

The "payback" mechanism -- "allegedly payback for a serious accidental explosion at a Syrian weapons facility" -- is obscure to me. On this account, the strike was to warn the Syrians to be more careful? Or that what they were up to chemically had become so obvious that Israel won't let it pass?

If the No Dong is an upgraded SCUD, it should be cspable of delivering a nuclear payload -- the Soviets built the original SCUDs to lob tactical nuclear weapons onto NATO. They were very inaccurate, but you don't want a one kiloton burst even a kilometer away from you, or G-d forbid in the general direction of Tel Aviv.

Yeah, I'm with Dabodious. The Israelis exacted 'revenge' against Syria for a Syrian weapons accident which killed Syrian soldiers??? Could you run that by us again? Go slower this time.

This has been widely surmised. I suppose you mean that the recent strike was a result of the accident exposing a missile facility. An accident may have allowed Israeli intelligence to pick up via communications revealing detail about the site. The response being a punitive and intimidatory strike against another leg of the Syrian missile system.

This has been widely surmised. I suppose you mean that the recent strike was a result of the accident exposing a missile facility. An accident may have allowed Israeli intelligence to pick up via communications revealing detail about the site. The response being a punitive and intimidatory strike against another leg of the Syrian missile system.

LB

Note that a number of people, myself included have made double posts. I no longer think its operator error, thinks instead it is a Typepad glitch.

I'm sure it's a TypePad glitch. I've been doing my best to keep on top of the double posts, but they keep multiplying. I don't usually delete doubles because they're few and far between, but lately they've been cropping up in just about every thread. It's not you guys.

If the attack on Syria was retaliation by the Israelis for chemical weapons, Persse's scenario makes sense a lot of sense.

Israel doesn't want Syria dabbling in chemical weapons. The accident might have alerted Israel to the program, or at least made the Syrian efforts more difficult to ignore. Striking a Syrian missile dump linked to the chemical weaponization program could be construed as a warning/retaliation for a weapons program Israel abhors.

Striking a Syrian missile dump linked to the chemical weaponization program could be construed as a warning/retaliation for a weapons program Israel abhors.


Isnt's that pretty stupid though, considering everyone knows Israel has the bomb? Special treatment just looks bad, even if we know they're always the "good guys."

Less and less reasons to trust Israel, who's really painting herself into a corner.

(Short enough for ya?)

Mary: Isnt's that pretty stupid though, considering everyone knows Israel has the bomb?

A chemical weapon mounted atop a missile is classified as a weapon of mass destruction (WMD). A battery of Sarin-laced missiles has the potential to kill thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of civilians in densely populated urban areas. Israel is a small country compared with the USA. If you compare the populations of the USA versus Israel, every thousand persons killed in Israel would be equivalent to 43,000 killed in the USA. To suggest that a nuclear weapon trumps a chemical weapon is a very specious argument indeed.

Less and less reasons to trust Israel, who's really painting herself into a corner. Not even the Syrians are willing to provide any details about this raid. Don't you find this fact to be a bit suspicious?

This post from the Armchair Generalist has some interesting details about the accident in Syria and the weapons program it suggested to observers at the time.

I already added a link to it in the post above a few minutes ago. But here it is again, for those who read the post earlier.

I agree with IF Stone: All governments lie.

Israel is like any other nation state.

One little tiny problem: Assuming there was an Israeli (or Israeli with US help) attack on a Syrian-Iran chemical weapons facility, under what conditions does Cheney's office stay quite about it? Ahem. Axis of Evil + WMD and the administration decided to handle it _quietly_.

Does not compute. There are, of course, reasons why the administration might keep a botched mission, or a fake mission, or a botched and fake mission, quiet but I can't think of any reason they would hesitate to take credit for blowing up WMD.

I'm curious, are there Syrian rumors about what happened?

Potato, patahto, etc...

even if we know they're always the "good guys."
_______________________________

They are?

Attacking people because someday they might attack you is evil. There is no defense for it, as it is an excuse any nation could use against any other nation at any time.

getting 'payback' for an accident is just plain disgusting.

The comments to this entry are closed.