Bill Richardson to the rescue!
Posted on 09/22/2007 7:30:07 PM PDT by Libloather
Israelis seized nuclear material in Syrian raid
Uzi Mahnaimi and Sarah Baxter
September 23, 2007
Israeli commandos seized nuclear material of North Korean origin during a daring raid on a secret military site in Syria before Israel bombed it this month, according to informed sources in Washington and Jerusalem.
The attack was launched with American approval on September 6 after Washington was shown evidence the material was nuclear related, the well-placed sources say.
They confirmed that samples taken from Syria for testing had been identified as North Korean. This raised fears that Syria might have joined North Korea and Iran in seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.
Israeli special forces had been gathering intelligence for several months in Syria, according to Israeli sources. They located the nuclear material at a compound near Dayr az-Zwar in the north.
Evidence that North Korean personnel were at the site is said to have been shared with President George W Bush over the summer. A senior American source said the administration sought proof of nuclear-related activities before giving the attack its blessing.
Diplomats in North Korea and China believe a number of North Koreans were killed in the strike, based on reports reaching Asian governments about conversations between Chinese and North Korean officials.
Syrian officials flew to Pyongyang, the North Korean capital, last week, reinforcing the view that the two nations were coordinating their response.
Bill Richardson to the rescue!
AND pay.
I can’t remember the date we heard that N Korea had supposedly agreed to abandon its nuclear program. Wasn’t it shortly after this Sept 6th raid?
I DO remember that the announcement came from NK alone, no other country would confirm it. There seemed to be a lot of scurrying around for several days before the agreement was confirmed, but in a blurry way.
I think maybe N Korea’s unilateral announcement was a ruse, an effort to salvage what they could from the talks before the news of their proliferation came out. THey knew, once the world learned about the Syrian raid, NK’s negotiating position would be zilch. After the raid, they tried to jump ahead of the bad news and “announce” results that had not been granted at the talks.
The other parties’ response was vague and note that it has not been touted by the president or anyone else as some kind of “breakthrough”. Something’s going on behind the scenes at those talks. And I think it involves a lot more than our simply “rewarding” NK for disarmament.
This is all getting “veddy interestink.”
I think I would Not Vote and try to Kick Out anyone sworn to Serve and Protect MY nation if they DIDN'T have Plans at the Ready to Attack Any Conceivable Anti-West, Nuclear Agressive nation!
Read On too other various Cross-Referrence Subjective articles (All written as being and BY Known Anti-Bush, PRO-Democrat writers ) too that attempt to mis-lead Americans (Still thinking they are a bunch of Politically Un-Educated Readers!) with their own Objectives views by QUOTING " Un-Named, Un-Verifiable ..BUT! Highly Placed " Sources for their attacks!
Typical Left Supporting writers and Media.
DA
“and of course, the Germans could never be democratic and never the Japanese....its an old imperialistic argument that is very very tired.”
If we were embarking on a defeat->occupy->rebuild strategy, as we did in Japan and Germany, you could make an argument for Iraq.
“No country is ever READY for democracy. Guess by tthat reasoning we should just wait till democracy springs forth full blown from Medusa’s head...and then let the people have freedom.”
Your idealism is admirable, but in this case it’s also idiotic. The only thing “springing from Medusa’s” head will be islamic fundamentalism. It is not up to the USA to “let the people have freedom”. You want to “give” it to people who do not reject terrorists.
Excellent!
Never forget that disinformation is our ally as well.
“Bet you, it was in Iraq at one point in time.”
I suppose your point is that we were justified in going into Iraq. I’m not arguing that point. My point is that we are going to do nothing about WMD in Syria, Iran, or Saudi Arabia.
Here's the crew and here's what they did when they saw a mess...
“Ahem. We aren’t leaving.”
We’re leaving. It’s hard to see it now, but when Iraq sides with our enemy, when they make it clear they ARE our enemy, even the politicians won’t be able to withstand the heat from the American people.
Unfortunately, rational dialog is not possible at this point. The pro-iraq mob makes it impossible to state one is against our present course in Iraq and not be deluged with the “surrender” or “anti-military” or “unpatriotic” or “terrorist” or “leftist” labeling and propaganda that is all that is left of the pro-iraq argument.
thanks. I just couldn’t help myself.
I always assume bush is a very busy man and I always give him way lots benefit of the doubt.
although I disagree with you, you present the other view well. And that view also can not easily be dismissed.
I am not so idealistic. the notion of “democracy’ in this region is extremely an uphill battle but worth the attempt as it will erode and is the only thing to erode fundamentalism from within.
Hard to stay on the farm when you’ve seen gay Paree! { political theory}
Actually the lack of world response is quite interesting. The ;ast time they took out the nuke camp in Iraq, everyone in the world including the US was outraged.
I suspect the crickets you hear chirping are the rest of the world hoping Israel does what needs to be done.
Ditto - We had better and really, really fast.
I doubt seriously that Syria wants to be the identifiable source of a nuclear attack against Israel given their geographic position. They would be wiped off of the map. Syria is not a proxy of Iran. Hezbollah is.
I believe the enrichment process leaves a tell tale signature. Terrible source, but I remember a Tom Clancy book that talked about the same subject.
Send Carter over to make Syria sign a treaty like he did with North-Korea.
LOL, what the HELL are you saying here? Where is the conflict in the president relaying what the DPRK has said and the fact that what they said turns out to be a lie? Are actually claiming the president is responsible for the lies of the DPRK?
Send me some of whatever you smokin'', dude.
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.