Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Syria in the Gunsights
NewsMax ^ | Monday, April 26, 2004 | Jack Wheeler

Posted on 04/23/2004 7:02:40 PM PDT by ThermoNuclearWarrior

Syria in the Gunsights

Jack Wheeler

Monday, April 26, 2004

The argument for taking out the government of Syria is growing by the day. The only things holding back the Marines from seizing downtown Damascus and imprisoning Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad as a war criminal are (a) the lack of manpower to prevent the place from collapsing into anarchic chaos before a transitional government can be set up, and (b) the literally hysterical objections of the State Department. Consider these justifications, any one of which would be reason alone to rid Syria of the al-Assad pestilence:

Syria has a 600-mile border with Iraq. Al-Assad is orchestrating the insertion of thousands of Al Qaeda, Hizbollah, and other Jihadi terrorists into Iraq, arming them, and letting them come back to Syria and resupply. It is these foreign terrorists that are primarily responsible for the atrocities in Fallujah and elsewhere, killing US and Coalition soldiers as well as innocent Iraqis.

As arms inspector David Kay has noted, Saddam’s “missing WMD” were shipped to Syria before the war began. Starting in January 2004, Al-Assad began flying shipments of WMD components to Sudan to hide them in warehouses in Khartoum, the Sudanese capital. Afraid of the US response, Sudan’s leader Omar Bashir is now having second thoughts, and is ordering that Syria take back its Scud-C and Scud-D ballistic missiles and chemical weapons components.

On April 17, Jordanian police seized an amount of WMD chemicals being carried into Jordan from Syria by Al Qaeda terrorists. Three booby-trapped pickups were loaded with explosives and VX poison gas containers. Jordan’s King Abdullah and his intelligence chief General Kheir publicly announced that if the terrorists had succeeded in their confessed plan to detonate the VX in Amman near the American Embassy, over 20,000 people would have been massacred.

The evidence is becoming overwhelming that the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad provided the hiding place for Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, that it has begun providing them to Al Qaeda terrorists, and that it is waging a proxy guerrilla war upon the U.S. and the Coalition military in Iraq.

Sanctions, such as those authorized by Congress last December in the Syrian Accountability Act, and other forms of political and economic pressure, are very rapidly becoming far-too-little-far-too-late solutions, and very dangerously so.

Twenty thousand human beings were almost slaughtered in Jordan this month. Whatever anarchic chaos occurs in Syria after a B2 strike obliterates the Presidential Palace in Damascus, it is preferable to al-Assad-backed terrorists succeeding in their next VX attempt.

Syria is leaving President Bush with little else than the military option. The sooner he exercises that option, the more lives will be saved, American, Jordanian, and Iraqi.

Jack Wheeler is the Publisher and Editor of To The Point at www.tothepointnews.com.

© 2004, To The Point, Inc.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/4/23/143043.shtml


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: biological; chemical; gunsights; insurgents; iran; iraq; next; sudan; syria; terror; terrorist; war; weapons; wmd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-169 last
To: Iberian
The policy of containment continues with Syria --- we have agreed with Egypt that Syria is "hands off unless Syria engages in overt acts." We wait, therefore, for Syria to "shoot first."

Iranians would rather settle their own differences. I'm not sure, but I am under the impression that Iranians make up the largest mid-East represenation of descendants within the United States. Those that wish for more freedom "back home," generally like the soft approach. So, again, without an overt act by Iran, we wait for them to "shoot first."

Yet, I must say, that as I look back on certain events of Year 2000, I wondered then, about the sudden rise in arrogance that could be found, here, among the students at university who were allegedly from Lebanon.

They were definitely overt, so to speak, and they were arrogant, and they were then, already acting like conquerors. I wondered what was up.

I was given to understand that President Clinton had ordered U.S. Marine officers to train certain parties under the auspices of the government of Syria, done to demonstrate an act of faith by him, that he was "neutral" in regard to the Arab/Israeli conflict. Sounds like one of his "military agreements," such as that whereby we were also training Red Chinese military "operatives." Something that Anthony Lake & Co. probably approved/promoted.

Which reminds me of the aid given to the same Red Chinese by Israel.

Not to mention the other cockeyed schemes of Morton Halperin.

You might say, that the lawyers have the thing so entangled, that the lawyers still have the thing entangled, because un-entangling is not their nature.

Because President Bush is determined to do things upon the advice of lawyers at each step, well, there's your answer.

You might have wondered why we did not invade Lebanon, so that our forces would be on the west and on the east of Syria, just in case, when we went into Iraq?

Yet the planners looked upon Lebanon as being, what indeed, Iraq has become, and so they demurred.

Lack of resources, yes, but the problem is, that combat power is not patrol power, and the Defense Department is a much tougher nut to crack than apparently any of the countries in the gunsights --- DoD, as we have seen, has not figured out the manpower requirements for patrol power.

The efficiency experts have entangled so much of what "the Pentagon does." At the core, the problem is that in peacetime, in order to procure, you must have a doctrine upon which to justify expenditures.

In wartime, a lot of that doctrine is discovered to be ineffective, wasteful, and sometimes harmful, as the training that accompanied the doctrine, is "all washed up." Suddenly you have equipment that must meet demands outside the peacetime doctrine; and many other plans that are "scrapped."

Mr. Rumsfeld, to his credit, is trying to resolve that nightmare come to life, yet again; but his Robert McNamara-ish tendencies are selling wartime expectations very, very, very short.

Lack of resources, yes; and, a lack of giving the arts of deception and surprise, not to mention other capabilities of the enemy, enough credit, such that, we find ourselves wrapped up in the "new paradigm" zeitgeist at the expense of several lessons learned the hard way, that are thrown out because they are errantly confused with "being part of the past" and "being part of the old ways" simply because on a sheet of paper, on a memo, the lessons learned are from the "old eras."

We continue to fail to plan for heavy losses of material, something that Pearl Harbor taught us the hard way, and the modern leaders have chosen to ignore.

161 posted on 04/24/2004 4:24:57 PM PDT by First_Salute (May God save our democratic-republican government, from a government by judiciary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: monkeywrench
Didn't China just send people to Syria last week?

Got a link?

162 posted on 04/24/2004 4:29:18 PM PDT by Momaw Nadon (Goals for 2004: Re-elect President Bush, over 60 Republicans in the Senate, and a Republican House.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Silverfox183
I didn't mean to say that Iran would be easy to occupy. I just think it would be easier to occupy than Iraq or Syria. There is a much larger educated pro Western movement in that country. I think a lot of people would be surprised at the amount of pro western people over their. It's nothing like Iraq or Syria. But I understand there are still a lot of people we would have to deal with in that area. Syria seems like the most difficult nation to occupy of the three. I have a feeling Syria is going to make a mistake of supplying chemical and/or biological weapons to terrorist groups. Once a chemical attack is used in Iraq against our troops or in Israel, especially if it kills many, I think we/they will use nukes in retaliation. We have to show that any state sponsored WMD attack is met with our own, even more devastating, WMD attack.
163 posted on 04/24/2004 8:53:50 PM PDT by ThermoNuclearWarrior ("If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking." - General George Patton Jr.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
Number eight is certain to be successful, and yes--we DO have the assets.
164 posted on 04/25/2004 2:48:53 PM PDT by boris (The deadliest weapon of mass destruction in history is a Leftist with a word processor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
http://www.beijingfm.com/p/33/023cc9a12f0f6b.html?id=WNAT17ff2133e3d8f097ff7764f85c399434
165 posted on 04/25/2004 2:51:45 PM PDT by monkeywrench
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Momaw Nadon
All of the below:

2. Impose more economic sanctions on Syria and Iran to get them to abandon terrorism and WMDs.

3. Use covert operations to topple the regimes in Syria and Iran. Hope that democracies arise from the aftermath.

4. Launch a surgical air strike against sites in Syria and Iran that are believed to contain terrorist assets and WMDs.

5. Launch a surgical air strike against the heads of state and their loyalists in Syria and Iran. Also, launch a surgical air strike against sites that are believed to contain terrorist assets and WMDs.

First, what is our goal in the Middle East? We need a strong pro-American regional power. We had Iran, until Jimmah Cartah abandoned the Shah. Then, we had troops and bases in Saudi Arabia. Now, we are attempting to set up a unified, peaceful, prosperous and democratic Iraq. The Sunnis don't want that and the Shiites aren't supporting us enough to ensure success. So, what now?

I would send Powell to Syria, Iran and to the Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq. I would give all parties an ultimatum. To Syria and Iran stop supporting the insurgents in Iraq and give up all WMD's.

Here's what the or else is:

!. We will bomb the leadership, intelligence, terrorist and WMD sites.

2. The US will back the Kurds and take slices of territory out of Iran and Syria to create a Kurdish State with 50 million Kurds.

This Kurdish State will be under American protection. The remainders of Syria, Iran and Iraq will be attacked at will, if the continue to harbor terrorists. We'll move our Turkish, Iraqi and Saudi bases into Kurdistan.

166 posted on 05/01/2004 1:08:05 PM PDT by Jabba the Nutt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: ThermoNuclearWarrior
Syria needs to be addressed (not in the way clinton would think).

I hope Assad realizes he has a bullseye on his forehead (just like Arafat). Time to take out the garbage.

5.56mm

167 posted on 05/01/2004 1:12:05 PM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin
You would be right, if we were trying to establish democratic governments in Syria and Iran. Personally, I say we give the Iraqis six months, then give up on the Democracy Project. We cannot do this for them, they must fight the terrorists within their own country.

For Iran and Syria, we just want governments to give up on WMD's and stop sponsoring and harboring terrorists. We can bomb them until they comply. Both countries are making our Iraq construction project much more difficult.

My plan be would include the formation of Kurdistan with slices of territory taken from Syria and Iran. That's what we need to tell these people. Do they want an American-backed Kurdistan on their borders filled with American military bases?

168 posted on 05/01/2004 1:21:43 PM PDT by Jabba the Nutt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: snopercod

containment but no state sponsorship


169 posted on 06/22/2004 8:18:54 AM PDT by First_Salute (May God save our democratic-republican government, from a government by judiciary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-169 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson