Syrian Foreign Ministry: Chemical and Biological Weapons Are Secured and Would Only Be Used in the Case of External Aggression

Jul 23, 2012

Syrian Arab news agency - SANA - Syria : Syria news ::

So Syrian statement is similar to the one used by powers holding Nuclear weapons then............

Which would be fine if 188/196 UN members hadn't signed up to making chemical weapons illegal. Whilst I accept that Syria was not a signatory, it does indicate they're pissing into a global wind if they think that holding a chemical stockpile as a 'deterrent' is defensible. Do you defend it?

No such agreement exists on nuclear weapons and I think it unlikely ever to occur. Besides the nuclear powers, many non-nuclear states appreciate that the large-scale stability of the last 70 years would have been impossible without them.

Chemical weapons are no use as a military strategic deterrent. As demonstrated by Saddam, their primary use is to put down rebellions by uppity locals in such a gruesome way as to deter any future attempts. A well-trained military is certainly hindered by them, but no more.

Since the Syrian government, from the beginning of the internal rebellion, has been claiming that the Syrian people aren't rebelling, and the only ones fighting the government are foreign fighters who have infiltrated the country, then the "necessary justification" has already been met, and we can expect to see bio-chem releases on "foreign fighters" in residential districts soon.

ES and GK,

Both very well made points.

If their sole purpose is a deterrent then it is effective......

Israel with nukes and bio weapons
Saudi's with Pakistan nukes
Taiwan with nukes and bio weapons

All are a threat IF forced into a corner.

Syria stated its position which is no difference to any other state or do you feel that only a few states should have the right to have a deterrent ?

I thought I was pretty clear but here goes...

Only different in that its chosen deterrence method is viewed as 'beyond the pale' by 96% of the governments in the world. That's pretty different in my mind.

'Deterrent' isn't synonymous with 'WMD'. The right of states to have WMD is restricted by the NPT, the CWC and BWC and whether or not you think those are fair treaties is beside the point, because the vast majority of nations (including Ireland!) signed up to all 3 after years of debate and review. The virtually-universal rejection of CW and BW by people of all creeds and cultures is powerful and is undoubtedly the reason why the Syrian government (not normally viewed as 'fluffy') felt the need to issue its statement.

All states are allowed to have a conventional deterrent and one could argue that Syria's formidable GBAD and large regular army has done quite a good job over the last 30 years. You can be assured that the Israelis are not scared of chemical war!

Think you will find its closer to 100%

Right which is why numerous countries still have secret chemical weapons or can make them very easily IF REQUIRED.

The pretence of countries that they wouldn't use them is laughable as in the last 100 years the countries who have used chemical and nuclear weapons are the ones telling everyone else they can't have them.

No doubt some will argue that the horrors of chemical weapons in WW1 persuaded countries not to use them yet Kurds were gassed after that even when effect known because it was politically expedient to do so.

While nukes shouldn't be used post WW2 the nuclear powers saw nothing wrong using service personnel as guineau pigs and would do so again if it could get away with it.

Agent Orange used in Vietnam even when its effects known was use of a chemical weapon.

The use of Phosphorus against civilians pretty much breaches ICRC guidelines but hasn't stopped in being used by any of the major blocs.

Countries attempting to use morality about weapons is laughable especially when countries hold these weapons or even worse destructive one and would use them when threatened by an external force.

Isn't the holding of a deterrent done specifically to prevent extenal threats and safeguard the nation rather than something to threaten others ?

If thats not the case then we in the UK have been lied to for 60 plus years.

IIRC the US has always classed use of chemical or biological weapons in the "weapons of mass destruction" category and threatened to retaliate with a bucket of instant sunshine

GK:

It is interesting to recall that when I was involved with OIF back in 2004, the term used by our Army, our Sec Def, and our Coalition regarding quite a few of the people we were shooting at and dropping bombs on was

Foreign Fighters.

Granted, among the captured were no small number of young men from Libya, Saudi, Syria, Morocco, Tunisia, etcetera, who were there to help in the "cause" against the

Uh

Foreign Troops (us, and by "us" I refer to all of the nations whose troops served with the coalition)

who were in Iraq doing this, that, or the other.

"Foreigners" are apparently fair game.

Hmmm, looks like we are missing a trick on our own southern border, on this side of the pond. :E

with the Caveat that "if its used by one of their "current" Allies on people who are not their allies then the above statement will not apply............. as per Saddam when he was Donny Rumsfields best mate.

The biggest long term loser in this rebellion (and that of all the neighbouring states) will be Israel.

Not only will they simultaneously lose their disingenuous claim to be "the only democratic state in the ME", but they will also lose the support of all the ME dictators from whom undemocratic peace agreements have been bought by US/Israel with payments to their personal Swiss bank accounts.

When true democracy takes hold in ME, Israel will have to either acquiesce and accept their 1967 boundaries, or go nuclear.

Trim Stab, I suspect that there will be choices in between your two extremes.

Excluded middle fallacy: look it up.

Russian Navy Baltic and Northern Fleet elements have now passed through the Strait of Gibraltar and into the Mediterranean. Positional info from the Morse Code weather.

Baltic Fleet Tanker Lena

25th July, 06 GMT

8345 Kilohertz

RMP DE RKO81 25061 99358 70049 22233 @0622Z

35.8N 04.9W Heading South East at 11-15 Knots

Map Link

Actually the NNPT states that nuclear countries were supposed to get rid of their weapons. They ignored that and simply used the treaty to stop anyone else getting weapons.

How many wars have their been in the last 70 years of 'stability'? two nuclear states (UK and US) have been involved in most number of wars.

So you could argue the NNPT has made warfare more likely.

but limited its extent..........

Syria or Iran?

Donley: New Bunker-Busting Bomb Ready To Use

The Air Force’s 30,000-pound behemoth bunker buster is ready to be used if needed, Air Force Secretary Michael Donley said Wednesday.

The Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or MOP, is designed to destroy deeply buried bunkers that protect chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, but Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told the Wall Street Journal earlier this year that the bomb needed more development to be able to take out Iranian bunkers.

Since then, Syria has disintegrated into full civil war, making the U.S. government worried about the Syrian regime’s stockpile of chemical weapons. “The Syrian regime needs to protect these weapons,” Defense Department spokesman George Little said Tuesday. “And I think I’ve been very clear, as have others in the U.S. government, that it would be unacceptable not to secure them.”

After speaking at the Capitol Hill Club in Washington on Wednesday, Donley was asked if the MOP was available to be used. He was not asked where it might be used. “If it needed to go today, we would be ready to do that,” he said. “We continue to do testing on the bomb to refine its capabilities, and that is ongoing. We also have the capability to go with existing configuration today.”

Russian Warships Will Not Enter Syria Port

Syrian rebels threaten to attack Russian naval base - World - DNA

Ok, I forgot their third option - dupe the USA and UK into fighting their wars for them on their behalf.

You start to figure it nay not be going as NATO and Qatarabia want, when France starts demanding outside action ro prevent killing while arming the SFA, Turkey closing the border because Syria gave the Kurds bases and everybody realising that Al Qaeda are getting involved.

Israel happy for Status Quo as better the devil you know,as they found when Libya collapsed and all the missiles headed straight into Gaza.

If (when?) the rebels win this ongoing unpleasantness, I fear that for the West, it will be a clear case of "be careful what you wish for". Very, very big time.

Trim STab, thanks so much for being predictable. :ok: :hmm:

As I said, there are a variety of other ways this all plays out.


Andu: Amen! :ok:

Whenever I hear our noble resistance fighters chanting 'Allu Akbhar' the alarm bells start ringing.

Call me cynical...

Me too, phil... Those "freedom fighters'" idea of an Arab Spring is to 'spring' the world, both them and the rest of us, back to the 14th century.

I believe the current sorry excuse for leaders we're 'enjoying' in the West are about to find out just how wise those 'unenlightened' earlier Western leaders were in lending support to those awful despots who have led the Arab world for the last half century or more.

A mate of mine, who served as a very senior diplomat in Cairo only a few short years ago, at the time of the first demonstrations in Cairo, said, prophetically, I think, that "...two years from now, those Egyptians demonstrating in the streets will be looking back to the Mubarak years as 'the good old days' - particularly the women."

Careful what you wish for indeed...

Theres an awful lot crawling out of the woodwork Andu !

Sometimes better the devil you know.

The Black Sea Fleet elements of the Russian Navy Task Force are returning to home port.

Russian naval unit to continue mission in Mediterranean without Black Sea Fleet ships | Russia Beyond The Headlines

At least two vessels of the Baltic Fleet Task Force element have left the Mediterranean. Currently heading northwards off the coast of Portugal.

And now the Kurds in Northern Syria want independence. I can't see that pleasing our NATO ally Turkey and it makes accurate predictions to the final outcome of this conflict even more impossible.

I can see Iraq and Iran maybe adding to this to skewer Turkey and NATO.

That's passing strange.

NATO went to great lengths to use armed force to support the independence of Bosnians, Croats, and Kosovars. (Albanians who moved north?) During the bombing raids on Serbia, a Greek staff officer I worked with was distraught.
His point: "we are bombing the wrong people!"

Why not throw the full weight of NATO in support of the Kurds? :E
The initial liberation of the Kurds, begun on 2003, ought to be followed up upon! :ok:

Lonewolf 50 have you considered the likelihood of the unintended consequences of this idea? Count me out.

It was 91 but then someone went back on the idea.

Rose:

Yes, I have. Frequently. (See the smilies I chose ... )

I think the Kurds have every bit as much right as the Kosovars, Bosniaks, and any number of other "special" nationalistic groups to the support of the international community.

It is just possible that the point I am making is:

Who picks who gets special treatment, and why? Why are the Kurds unspecial? What made Libyans special?

For racedo: I am more than passing familiar with Operation Provide Comfort and such, thanks.

Some news from Moscow

NATOSource • Russia will not let EU search its ships for Syria arms

Good point ....

Idiots in State Dept / NSA . CIA or of the other Allied countries meddlers who decide something must be done and nobody has the Cojones to says stop usually. Then the stupid exercise gets worse as collective stupidity overcomes any resistance to insanity of idea.

Bit like Brzezinski deciding to interfere in Afghanistan in 1970's, 9/11 was a bit of blowback on that as well as USS Cole and lots of other crap.

RR

EU has no right to search any countries ships going to Syria unless they in EU territorial waters. The definition of EU territorial waters of course would mean that member states cede their territorial rights to the EU to do as they wish, something unlikely to happen.

Any attempt to do so has no legal basis and no different to an act of piracy on deciding to search ships in International waters with no legal basis in International law.

Course precedence would allow other countries right to do so as well be it military or civilian craft.

Good. The less we keeping sticking our noses into the internal affairs of these places the better. The fools in charge cannot even run our own nations properly let alone having a desire to get involved in things which do not concern them.

Just struck me that Mrs Asma Assad is a full British Citizen (born in London , schooled in Acton)

So she can come home and, due to her right to a family life, presumably bring her husband with her

Maybe he'll go back to being an eye doctor at St Mary's in W London and she can take up merchant banking again...................

Works for me, since bankers nowadays seem to be synomyous with "criminal" and worse. :E

odd they were probably quite normal folk in London & suddenly turn into raving mass murderers

but then ol' Adolf was always kind to children & dogs..............

I no longer have any idea as to who the baddies are or even if there are any goodies. The media have been making misleading statements and/or comments from the beginning - but then they usually do. We, the great unwashed are told what the movers and shakers want us to know.