Are you ready for Round 2?

[Nagorak]

Honestly, this would be pretty funny if it weren't for real. I guess the time to press the case for attacking Syria has begun (actually they already started in the first days of the war). Couldn't find any WMDs in Iraq so, of course, they must have shipped them off to Syria.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/13/sprj.irq.bush.syria/index.html

Strange how all these countries who never were on very good terms with Saddam (was anyone?) are now supposed to be his best buddies. It makes just as much sense as religious extremist Osama bin Laden being in league with secular dictator Saddam Hussein who has spent most of his reign cracking down on religion and creating a secular Iraq.

But, hey, the administration said it, so, according to most people on this board, it must be true. Personally, I'm looking forward to round 3 when Bush announces that Syria shipped all the WMD to Iran through a tunnel dug beneath 400 miles of the Iraqi desert. And then round 4 when it turns out Iran has shipped the arms by nuclear submarine...erm make that a gigantic subterranean drilling machine to North Korea.

Maybe Bush should have become a sci-fi author, instead of a failed business executive and a half bit politician?

 

[Fred]

What are you talking about? They have at least 5 sites under review for WMD, most of which have tested positive for nerve agents. Not to mention the supposed Uranium positive thats all hush hush right now.

Wait for scientists to confirm or deny the existence before you make yourself look stupid, yes this takes time.

 

[pax]

Im not too sure about the humanitarian reasons for taking on Syria but again this is a country with wmds... I say kid gloves are called for... we got lucky with Iraq (not sure actually, the jury is out on that one for now) but we may eventually fuck up if we keep going after regimes with wmds...

US wont have either UK or the UN at all on this one... What resolution would they be enforcing if they attacked? If the US still cares about UN resolutions that is...

 

[kars]

I must say I'm a bit confused. What are the "rules" as to which country is allowed to have WMDs?

 

[nutball]

$wmd_ok = ($name =~ / (United [States|Kingdom]) | Russia | China | France/);
throw new Wobbly() unless $wmd_ok;

Ahem. Sorry.

 

[RussSchultz]

I believe there's several international treaties governing who may have nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, biological weapons.

Generally, nobody should have chemical weapons or biological weapons.

Nobody should be developing nuclear weapons.

The known nuclear powers continue development to modernize and make safer their currnet nuclear arsenal.

 

[Mariner]

The known nuclear powers continue development to modernize and make safer their currnet nuclear arsenal.

Hmmm. I assume you mean they intend to make Nuclear weapons safer against 'accidentally going off'.

Seems a bit strange to say they are working on making such horrendous devices 'safer' when they are actually just working to make them 'destroy things more efficiently'.

 

[nutball]

I was under the impression that the spirit of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was that non-nuclear powers undertook not to develop nuclear weapons on the understanding that nuclear powers would pursue a programme of nuclear disarmament.

Of course I also assume that this latter commitment will be given in such suitably woolly diplomatic language as to be essentially meaningless. You wouldn't want to make the world a more dangerous place by getting rid of nuclear weapons, that would be reckless.

 

[MrsSkywalker]

Syria has always been a safe haven for terrorists and terrorist organizations. However, I don't think we need to hop into the fray with them right now. There have always been and will always be dictators, tyrants, and terrorists. It's the darker side of human nature, and even in the most civilized of societies, there will be people who tap into that darker side. I am a supporter of Bush's administration, but I think that there may be a feeling of granduer going on right now. I hope he doesn't take it too far. While I believe that Syria should be carefully monitored, I think our focus at the moment should remain on the rebuilding of Iraq. Perhaps the UN can make a comeback by turning 100% of their attention to Syria. It might not do much good, but it would keep them occupied for awhile

 

[Sxotty]

I think Bush needs a lesson on when to keep his mouth shut. Syria is run by punks, but he should have been willing to publically show supplication to Syria for help, and privately tell them listen guys you need to give us these war criminals or else. Then they would not have to lose face and everyone would look better.

 

[nutball]

I think Bush needs a lesson on when to keep his mouth shut. Syria is run by punks, but he should have been willing to publically show supplication to Syria for help, and privately tell them listen guys you need to give us these war criminals or else. Then they would not have to lose face and everyone would look better.

Yeah, but that's International Diplomacy, and Bush doesn't seem to have grasped quite how to do that yet. Hope he gets the message, soon.

 

[Natoma]

I think Bush needs a lesson on when to keep his mouth shut. Syria is run by punks, but he should have been willing to publically show supplication to Syria for help, and privately tell them listen guys you need to give us these war criminals or else. Then they would not have to lose face and everyone would look better.

Couldn't have said it better.

 

[Natoma]

Here's another article.

Article Here

Some pertinent quotes:

Over the weekend, U.S. leaders bombarded Syria with accusations of harboring Iraqi leaders and possessing chemical weapons.

Bush also contended that Syria has chemical weapons, a charge made in recent CIA reports and one that has been denied by Syria.

“We say to him (President Bush) that Syria has no chemical weapons and that the only chemical, biological and nuclear weapons in the region are in Israel, which is threatening its neighbors and occupying their land,â€￾ Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Buthaina Shaaban told Reuters.

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said Britain and the United States had no intention of invading Syria after Iraq, but Damascus had “important questionsâ€￾ to answer. Syria has long been on a U.S. list of countries supporting terrorism.

Hmm. This may be far from over people. I read some articles a few weeks ago that said that some people believe that our war on Iraq (I say 'on' instead of 'with' because let's face it. This was a beatdown. Not a war. ) is merely the first stepping stone in a larger campaign meant to 'cleanse' the middle east of extremism and terrorism. That once Iraq was contained, we'd go after Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc. To be honest, I thought it was bunk.

But after what's been going on the past few days, I don't know anymore.

Here's a pertinent website. http://www.newamericancentury.org/. And here's the mission statement with regard to the things I've stated above, along with those who have signed it: http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm. The mission statement was June 3, 1997.

Some names of note: Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush, Steve Forbes, Elliot Abrams, Dan Quayle.

Are we slowly but surely becoming an imperialist nation? Dear god, where is this all leading......

 

[nutball]

I wouldn't take that Jack Straw quote as proof positive that this is going to go further (at least not with the UK on-board). It's more like British diplomatic double-talk.

Frankly I think the UK went about as far as it could with Iraq. If the US wants to carry on and give Iran, Syria, etc., its own brand of special assistance, I personally think you will be doing it without the UK alongside (we'll probably still be cleaning up the mess in Iraq for a start). I can well imagine Blair/Straw will be bending over backwards from now on to rein in the hawks in Washington (at least as far as their influence goes). They'll probably try and stall Bush for a couple of years until the next US election.

Are we slowly but surely becoming an imperialist nation?

Errmmm... there are a number of answers to that question. For example: "Yes", "No" and "what do you mean becoming?". Difficult question. I'll think deeper when I'm more sobererer.

 

[Tahir2]

It has been speculated on the BBC news and Panaroma (IIRC) that you may actually see a split decision occur on the question of Syria re: US and UK. UK and Syria are 'pally, pally' apparently... well it was news to me. Heh.

 

[Fred]

Wait Syria and the oil connection.. Hmmm

Yes, there are some hawks in the administration who are off the mind to rid the middle east of 'punks' once and for all. That was clear from the getgo to people who weren't caught up by some of the bunk rhetoric. For right or for wrong, I think Bush is very sincere in ending terrorism, and his strategy for such (and after al,l the american people demanded no less).

There is of course a truism to the stance. 9/11 scared a lot of people, and with due merit. It spoke volumes to the lengths some of these individuals will go to get at us. Hardly anyone thought such an operation could exist outside of the movies, and those that did were dismissed as alarmists and warmongers. I admit to being one of them.

Now, I am no longer sure. I don't know if its justified or not, if the solution is the brute force method.

But we have dealt with passive diplomacy for decades now, and that has led us no where with these 'states'.

Reagan brought the Cold war to an end with strong arm tactics. Iraq/Afghanistan have been success stories as far as im concerned. That of course doesn't imply that such a course of action will continue to be a success.

Perhaps we've scared them enough that diplomacy will have some weight behind it.

 

[Tahir2]

Can I say Poo?

 

[RussSchultz]

Just not twice.

 

[Tahir2]

Does everything revolve around oil...

 

[kars]

It's a bit scary to read all this about Syria when you've read the "Iraq was a trial run"-article by Chomsky I must say. Say what you will about him, but he seems pretty good at these kind of predictions...