Posted on 12/11/2011 11:46:53 AM PST by jhpigott
—Don't know why, but as I recall the convoys were under observation. Perhaps it was a judgment call - that attacking them might mean the release of the agents - killing civilians, etc - which was highly unacceptable politically. But then, killing civilians was what won WWII. Maybe we will relearn that lesson one day ...
It's been well-known and established that the Syrians have had their own massive chemical weapons program for decades.
Yeah, but the wussy Republicans LET them all forget about it. They should have been trumpeting that FACT in weekly press conferences until the main/lamestream media was forced to pick up on the story. But noooooo!
And also Saddam’s stock pile. Chemical weapons, actually, are no big deal. Mix chlorine with amonia and you’ve got a chemical weapon. Nerve gas is extremely similar to bug spray. I once had a small dog that I applied too much flea poison to her skin. She became ill, so I brought her to a vet, and he injected her with atropine, same as for nerve gas. Biological and nuclear are the real worry.
“Damascus armed 600 one-ton chemical warheads “
Now we see how the Damascus prophecy becomes plauseable...they use that on a nuclear wielding country...say the French and Damascus will be nuked...if the use one on Israel...they’ll be nuked!
It appears that it is past time for an industrial accident to eliminate Assad and his fellow serial killers.
I don't think it will be France doing the nuking, but I could be wrong. They don't seem to have the stones for that kind of response. The Isaiah 17 prophecy may or may not be a result of Israel's doing, but I suspect that it is a direct result of the events that we're watching now.
I just wonder if we'll be here to watch it unfold or not. The timeline from Isaiah 17 to Armageddon gets to be extremely bloody in short order.
-——they can do any number of things under the table to destabilize Assad without taking overt, actionable military action——
That same statement can be applied to the Arab League.
The tense however is wrong. The action is in the present tense and actually underway at the present.
Assad’s action is the response. It is defensive in nature
So, how’s that change working out for you?
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.