Oct 02 2007
Israel Confirms Air Strike On Syria
Israel has finally publically acknowledged its recent air strike deep inside Syria:
The army confirmed on Tuesday for the first time that the IAF did, in fact, hit a target deep inside Syria on September 6.
This was the only detail released for publication; Israel has kept quiet on the subject until now.
…
The information was released a day after Syrian President Bashar Assad told BBC Radio that IAF jets had hit an “unused military building” in his country.
No specifics on the target which is thought to have been possibly a nascent nuclear facility being put in place with the help of North Korea. NK nationals were supposedly killed in the attack making that speculation believable. But what I see in the silence from Israel and the US, and from Assad’s asinine comment about an unused building, is silent pride in a job well done. If it was something less threatening than a nuclear site we might have heard more. But the level of silence tells me something big happened. Something Assad is ashamed to admit.
One of the most “curious” aspects of this affair was the “disappearing” North Korean ship which docked in Tartous 3 days prior to the attack.
2 excerpts from this article:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/903955.html
“Ronen Solomon, who searches information in the public domain for companies, told Haaretz he found references to a ship called Al Hamad on three different Web sites after the initial reports of the Israeli raid in Syria on September 6. These included the official sites of Syria’s Tartous Port and the Egyptian Transportation Ministry.
Two of the three sites said the ship was flying a North Korean flag, and the third site reported it was flying a South Korean flag. ”
and
“Following the Washington Post report, Solomon returned to the three sites, and discovered that all mentions of the North Korean flag on Al Hamad had been deleted, and that the ship’s flag was now registered as “unknown.”
Looks like several somebody’s, including the Egyptians, are trying to cover their tracks.
AJ
Since the news is out that the Russian tech support guys at the Iran reactor site have left it brings up to possibility that maybe Syria and Iran decided to stop payment on the Russian missile systems that didn’t work as advertised.
They are probably pointing fingers at each other saying your stuff doesn’t work and the other side saying you aren’t using it correctly.
This could be a reasonable conclusion linking the events.
Silent pride, or perhaps a desire to keep an unlawful act of war on the down low, unless, of course, the threshold for bombing another sovereign nation is now the possibility they MIGHT use their weapons on you, in which case, I guess its okay for Russia or China to start bombing the US; ditto for India v. Pakistan.
Get Pelosi on the phone!
Sooth,
Yeah, we are such a threat to Russia and China. And sovereignty means benign.
SooothGhoul one nation attacking the assets of another nation is considered grounds for war?
Also isn’t Syria by providing rockets and other arms to terrorists entities knowing they will be fired upon the Israeli population an act of war?
Isn’t murdering a politician of another country to help destabilize that country so as to hold some control of it an act of War?
How about a nation that trains, funds, and supplies terrorists to be used to destabilize regions and affect politics in their favor, aren’t those acts of war?
Correction:
“sovereign” means “benign”(not)
Check this out. Over 200 fires have been set all over Lebanon. They are burning from Beirut to the Bekkah Valley. Speculation is that Syria has set them, possibly as a diversion for a coup according to the linked blurb but also possibly as a screen from airborne reconnaissance. I think the Syrians are up to something big in Lebanon.
More on the fires from Reuters. al-Reuters has different speculation on the reason for the fires:
I’ve got to hand it to sooth – I try to imagine the most idiotic thing possible for anyone to say on a possible topic, and yet Sooth always goes beyond that.
and again, that strange wannabe fascination with the intricacies of “legality” of which he has not the faintest understanding. The threshold for bombing another nation is simple – it’s done when any nation percieves the risk of real war as less than the risk of tolerating a false peace. For all the bleating about “international law”, there is no such thing except as voluntarily agreed to by various nations. When there is no longer any voluntary agreement to abide by such agreements, no legal framework exists.
To put it simply, no law anywhere has any more weight than the physical force available to back it up. Who enforces so-called “international law”? Ask the peacekeepers in Darfur who died because they weren’t allowed to have any weapons. (they were only there for “peaceful purposes”, not to fight, dont’cha know)