Tag Archives: Chemical weapon

In Case You Missed It When It Happened

Posted on by

One of the stories the media is currently ignoring is the origin of the chemical weapons that have been used in Syria. Some were manufactured in Syria, some were supplied by the Russians, and some were given to Syria by Iraq during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq by America.

The Canada Free Press posted an article today about the weapons Iraq sent to Syria. The story is told in a book by Georges Sada entitled Saddam’s Secrets .

The article in the Canada Free Press reports:

In 2006, Sada laid out the case against Saddam Hussein in a book titled “Saddam’s Secrets,” wherein he writes that the Iraqi leader ordered barrels of chemical weapons loaded onto civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats had been removed and flew them into — you guessed it — Syria.

…Sada claims there were a total of 56 such flights. “Saddam realized, this time, the Americans are coming,” he said. “They handed over the weapons of mass destruction to the Syrians.” He also said that the Iraqi official responsible for transferring the WMDs was a cousin of Saddam Hussein named Ali Hussein al-Majid, known as “Chemical Ali,” and that the Syrian official responsible for receiving them was a cousin of Bashar Assad.

Please note that the weapons were moved when Saddam Hussein realized that the Americans were coming. Because we telegraphed our arrival, Saddam had ample time to move his chemical weapons. In Syria there is a different issue. As long as the Russians are in charge of securing the chemical weapons, they will be dealing with Bashar Assad–thus as long as that process is continuing, Assad will remain in power. Unfortunately, the choice in Syria is either Assad or Al Qaeda. Either way, the people of Syria and the Middle East lose. The situation is Syria is such that it will take someone with the wisdom of Solomon to sort it out in a way that is beneficial to both the people of Syria and the world.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Who Is Running The Country?

Posted on by

This article is based on two articles–one from the U.K. Telegraph today and one from Associated Press today. Both articles are related to the bizarre turn of events yesterday when Secretary of State John Kerry unintentionally suggested a solution to the Syrian crisis. Secretary of State Kerry in an offhand remark suggested that if Assad would hand over all his chemical weapons Syria could escape American attack. The suggestion was picked up quickly by Vladimir Putin, and President Obama (and Harry Reid) had an excuse to delay a vote in Congress (which the President was likely to lose) about military intervention in Syria.

The Associated Press article reports:

Syria said Tuesday it has accepted Russia’s proposal to place its chemical weapons under international control for subsequent dismantling.

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem said Tuesday after meeting with Russian parliament speaker that his government quickly “agreed to the Russian initiative.”

Al-Moallem added that Syria did so to “uproot U.S. aggression.”

So what is going on here? The current government of Syria is an ally of Russia. Russia just bought them some time. Even a small strike by the United States could turn the tide in favor of the rebels, and John Kerry’s offhand remark gave Russia a chance to avoid that strike.

Syria has agreed to the arrangement. Has anyone asked if the facilities to make chemical weapons will be inspected and dismantled?

I don’t support a military strike on Syria–I am not convinced there is anything to gain be getting involved in a civil war where there don’t seem to be any good guys. I am sorry that the President misspoke about a red line, but that is not worth killing anyone. I am not sure that this new idea is a solution–I think it is more of a delay tactic, but I think it is better than sending American weapons or troops.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Rewriting History

Posted on by

One of the problems with the Internet is that whenever you say something it can be instantly checked.

McClatchy is reporting that today President Obama stated that he did not draw a red line concerning the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government.

The article reports the statement:

“I didn’t set a red line, the world set a red line,” Obama said. “My credibility is not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line. And America and Congress’ credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these international norms are important.”

Well, there is an inconvenient video that was posted on YouTube a year ago:

The statement about the red line comes at about 1:54 in the video.

It would have been nice if a grown-up President had confirmed his previous statement and stood by it. I don’t support military action in Syria, but I certainly would have more respect for the President if he were more honest about his previous statements.

The problem with the statement made today is that the President typically refuses to take responsibility for his previous statements. There is no reason to assume that in the future he will take responsibility for his actions.

Enhanced by Zemanta