I would offer a guess that the Israeli bomb probably leveled the facility and it was smoothed over.
The Syrians are smart enough that if they wanted to bulldoze the site to hide it they would've done a better job of it.
I saw a piece at Arms Control Wonk about this a few days ago. I'll dig for it later.
Right now .. well, I still find it rather hard to get seriously scared of a possible, albeit highly improbable Syrian nuclear program after spending my first 40 years on Planet Earth looking down the barrels of a much, much MUCH bigger Soviet nuclear shotgun.
We have, for all intents and purposes, the same deterrent now that we had then. I doubt that the Assad dynasty finds it any easier to live with than six Soviet premiers did.
Same thing goes for Iran, of course. And North Korea. And absolutely anybody else on earth who is fixed in place to receive retaliation, should they be so suicidally unwise as to commit a first strike.
For that matter, the same thing goes for us. We hit Iran with nuclear weapons, and we are liable to lose more than those goddamned fools inside the Beltway can easily imagine. The counterstrike may not, in fact, probably will not, come from the victims if it comes. EVERYBODY on this little tiny dirtball is scared of nukes going off. Which means that anybody, or some collection of anybodies, may become the agents of retaliation.
We live in a universe where the laws of physics support the eminently practical construction of nuclear weapons. That isn't going to change EVER.
We also live in a world where absolutely everybody, including heads of state, is mortal and afraid of death. In this fact lies our only present mitigation.
We had better start getting used to this. We've had, what, THREE GENERATIONS ALREADY.
God's bleeding wounds, what does it take to make people face facts?????
I am convinced that the Chinese embassy bombing was intentional. China got their revenge with that spy plane thing.
WINGNUT: She wasn't covert, damnit!
She was...she was...a secretary...yeah, that's right...a real purty secretary!
I am convinced that the Chinese embassy bombing was intentional.
you dont realize how stupid the intelligence services can be, especially with all the dependence on 'electronic' intelligence versus human intelligence (i.e. agents)
Looks like something Colin Powell might have come up with in 2002/3.
If the Iranians, supposedly, have a massive subterranean matrix of nuclear facilities (for world domination purposes............. see SPECTRE/Blofeld), why would the Syrians plant something so obvious on a hill/mountain, for all to see/bomb?
and it was smoothed over.
why?
so obvious on a hill/mountain, for all to see/bomb?
hide in plain sight. it wasnt satellites that identified that site. it was a agent on the ground. it just looked like some building from space.
hide in plain sight
Yeah, but you would hide a building amongst other buildings........ not on some desert hilltop...... surrounded by just desert (at least from the shot).
I think...I say, I think, that that Russian nuclear shotgun is still loaded and....
Pointed our way.
.
You guys never stop shilling for the Armed Forces, do you?
I think...I say, I think, that that Russian nuclear shotgun is still loaded and....
Pointed our way.
LOL.
Of course it is.
If Nelson Freaking Mandela. were president of the Russian Federation right now instead of Putin, he'd still be derelict in his duty if he didn't put whatever mitigations he practically could in place, to check the runaway belligerence inside the DC. Beltway.
Where else on Planet Earth right now are you going to find a more dangerous combination of insanity and power?
Nobody wants to be the next Iraq.
The Syrians have no real experience with nuclear weapons, and no infrastructure.
The DPRK spent 30 years creating expertise and infrastructure.
OTOH, they do have an active chem/bio program, and there have been rumors about them putting that on Scuds.
More likely, to my mind.
Nah, I don't buy it. Who can say what the building was for?
Now, why would the Syrians cover up? How about a ballistic missile program, intended to improve their chemical arms, as customers of the North Koreans? That would be the North Koreans that countries are forbidden to buy missiles from under current UN NSC orders. If the Syrians fessed up and truthfully refuted what the Cheneyites -- not actually the Israelis if anybody noticed -- then the Cheneyites and the Bushies would have a casus belli to hit the Syrians under UN NSC rules. Or they'd at least claim one.
I see what I judge to be a big building, with few indications of the usual containment units, water sources and power lines needed to fire up even a research reactor. Now, missing one or two of those things, maybe. All of them, and within an hour's drive of the U.S.-occupied Iraqi border? B.S.
On top of all that, the Cheneyites say the Israelis say they have evidence from the ground? Okay, good, put up or shut up, then. Take it to the IAEA, let's let it all hang out.
This is being manipulated to push us to hit Iran. And lets think about this, too, for a moment. Suppose all the conservative hysteria over this is true, which I don't believe for one second. But suppose it is. How far along then do you think the Iranian version of this is? Yeah, that's right. If it is true, then it probably means we really don't want to hit the Iranians because they would in all likelihood possess a deterrent at this point.
So, if it's lies as I surmise, we don't want to get into more war over lies. If it's true, then we really don't want to get into more war over something worse than lies. Either way, this ought not be a casus belli for the Bushies and Cheneyites.
"Right now .. well, I still find it rather hard to get seriously scared of a possible, albeit highly improbable Syrian nuclear program after spending my first 40 years on Planet Earth looking down the barrels of a much, much MUCH bigger Soviet nuclear shotgun."
Ramen. 20 years in my case. The oceans haven't completely "protected" us for a long time, if ever.
"Nobody wants to be the next Iraq."
Now that's a phrase that bears repeating often, especially in the next few months.
why did they scrub the site? and why didnt they bitch more about the Israelis bombing the site?
Hubris, I offered you an answer for that. How about they were paying customers of North Korea's ballistic missile offerings, which under most interpretations of international law is currently illegal to be a customer of. Evidence of that could be used as a casus belli to hit Syria. So, if you're Syria, do you admit what you were up to, even though it wasn't nuclear? There's been rumors, badly sourced like the nuclear ones, that Syria on the QT has told the U.S. this is exactly what it was about and it had nothing to do with nukes.
They scrubbed the site to contain the fallout? If they'd have bitched more, they'd have had to reveal the fallout that escaped?
Or it was a training exercise for doing Iran and Syria was paid off, by the US probably with arms, to let them do a test run. It doesn't look very "active" in the first photo.
I'm am just not buying the reasons its not a nuke site.
like i said, i aint sold either way, but my "benefit of the doubt" has been cashed in.
Israel have between 200 and 500 nukes, so the balance of terror is tipped their way. We've got plenty of options open to us long before Syria or Iran have a bomb. I'm sure Syria were doing naughty things there, but nukey stuff, let's see the evidence.
I mean, if publishing the data compromises any agents, well, they've done that for less.
Israel have between 200 and 500 nukes
I dont think so.
I got no problem with a syriyan nukeular programm, if they wnat to stay off the US empire hit list thye need strong deterants.
The weird part about this story is how it wasn't breathlessly reported on in the corporate media as how to respond to "WMD threat". This mystery makes me think both that this had very little to do with a nuclear threat and/or that the construction of this site involved a third party that no one wants to name.
This photo simply shows a warehouse sized facility that was destroyed. The building in the northwest corner appears to still be intact. It is likely we will never have a clear idea what this site was used for.
However, as a matter of policy it has to be said that the lack of any sort of parity in the region in regards to nuclear weapons will cause any opposition regime to Israel to pursue nuclear weapons. The first one to get it, whether it be Iran or Syria, will be able to break the Israeli nuclear hegemony and will become the de facto leader of the anti-Israel coalition, and will also greatly imperil the ability of regimes in countries like Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia to prevent their populations from joining the nuclear-armed anti-Israel coalition.
This is the first time I've seen photo's of the alleged nuclear research site. Within a second of viewing it, my thought was .. where's the water? No way you're gonna be doing nuclear research/development, which means a reactor, without a handy source of water.
Its either a massive fuckup or it involved biological/chemical/missile type stuff. The Syrian reaction, low key complaining and bulldozing the site would be the same in either case. Larry Johnson's explanation for their muted reaction makes sense in my opinion.
Alright, Hubris, you seem to doubt our reasonable analysis of "evidence" that only shows a big building. If you don't believe us, why don't you check out John Pike's analysis over at GlobalSecurity.org? He points out, by noting when each important article on the story appeared, how very little has actually been said about what happened and how much innuendo has been put forth, including innuendo by Cheneyites like Bolton.
Next, for your perusal Hubris, go check out Debka's top story today, about how Bush is moving away from diplomacy toward, well, not diplomacy with regard to the Mid-East and North Korea. Take with a grain of salt, of course, but it's worth reading to understand what the neo-cons are thinking these days. Bolton and his crew always wanted confrontation with North Korea, not diplomacy. I view this whole raid's aftermath as being about neo-con views in Washington toward Iran, Syria and North Korea and torpedoing current administration policy toward North Korea as opposed to actual Israeli security. And, yes, Israel has done stupider crap to support neo-con ideas in Washington. See last summer's Lebanese adventure for details. I've seen this movie before, Hubris. And so have you. Don't buy into their lies on the basis of a couple satellite photos that show not a lot of anything.
Also, Hubris, I'm not sure why you doubt bjacques' estimates of Israeli nuclear might. Don't get me wrong -- I don't want to see Israel's neighbors arming themselves with nukes. I do have a problem with that, unlike at least one other person on this comment thread. However, don't doubt Israel's seriously large nuclear might. Bjacques' estimates are about right, I understand. You can check out GlobalSecurity.org for information on that, too.
Maybe you weren't aware of it, Hubris, but Israel is the fourth largest nuclear power in the world, following in order the U.S., Russia and China. And like those three and France, Israel is in the elite club of five nations with the so-called "nuclear triad," the ability to conduct nuclear strikes via bombers, land-based missiles and submarines. This means Israel could be wiped out as a country but still possess the means to conduct a second strike. It's the nuclear triad that has traditionally sealed the deal for Mutually Assured Destruction. Israel also is one of only four known countries with an effective land-based 3-stage missile, basically an ICBM. (Britain abandoned their program long ago and France makes do with intermediate range and sea systems, though it can't be doubted that either has the capability to create ICBMs if desired what with the Ariane and other things.)
Democrat lies are no better than Republican ones
On the Chinese embassy bombing
The Truth Behind America's Raid on Belgrade
The Observer
On May 7, 1999, the B2--at $44 billion the world's most expensive plane--took off from Whiteman air force base in Missouri, its sleek black belly loaded with missiles, destined for Belgrade. It flew high across the Atlantic and Western Europe before opening its bomb doors over the Adriatic and releasing the most accurate air-drop munitions in the world--the JDAM flying bomb. It is so precise a weapon it is accurate to a range of less than two meters.
The bombs carried on that B2 rocketed towards their target--the southern end of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade--demolishing the office of the military attaché and killing three "journalists." The midnight strike was so precise the embassy's north end was untouched, leaving the marble and glass of the front entrance and the ambassador's Mercedes and four flower pots unscathed.
The CIA, U.S. State Department and British Foreign Office claimed the strike had hit the wrong building. It was, they regretted, a terrible mistake.
But as mobs stormed the U.S. and British Embassies in Beijing, and Chinese President Jiang Zemin refused to take President Bill Clinton's phone calls, an entirely different story was being revealed on the other side of the world.
At the Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC) in Vincenza in northern Italy, British, Canadian and French air targeters rounded on an American colonel on the morning of 8 May. Angrily they denounced the "cock-up." The U.S. colonel was relaxed as he replied to the complaints: "That was great targeting … we put two JDAMs down into the attaché's office and took out the exact room we wanted … they (the Chinese) won't be using that place for (re-broadcasting radio transmissions) any more, and it will have given Arkan a headache."
Last month The Observer raised the first serious challenge to the official version of events and claimed the embassy was targeted directly. U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright described it as "balderdash." Since then, as this paper's journalists have continued to pursue the story, more witnesses have come forward.
The true story--though it is being denied by everyone--is that the Americans knew exactly what they were doing. The Chinese Embassy in Belgrade was deliberately targeted by the most precise weapons in the U.S. arsenal because it was being used by Zeljko Raznatovic, the indicted war criminal better known as Arkan, to transmit messages to his Serb death squads in Kosovo.
In the immediate aftermath of the attack there were some among non-U.S. staff who were also suspicious. On 8 May they tapped into the NATO target computer and checked out the satellite coordinates for the Chinese Embassy. The coordinates were in the computer and they were correct. While the world was being told the CIA had used out-of-date maps, NATO's officers were looking at evidence that the CIA was bang on target.
The Observer has gathered evidence from sources within NATO and also spoken to other serving officers, from intelligence officers to a military officer with the rank of a general. All are in agreement. The Chinese Embassy was deliberately bombed.
According to one of these sources, it was the fact that the embassy was being used to rebroadcast signals for Arkan and his White Tiger death squads that swung the argument to hit the embassy. "Had it just been a transmitter for the Yugoslav Army, they might have held off."
It is not only The Observer's NATO witnesses who have blown a hole in the CIA's original story that the embassy was bombed by mistake because the agency used old maps of Belgrade to work out its target list. This is a cover story which nearly all experts, including one's of America's most eminent China hands, Ezra Vogel, have judged not credible. The US's own National Imagery and Mapping Agency describes the wrong map story as "a damned lie."
The claims made by the CIA's director George Tenet to the Congressional Select Committee on Intelligence on 22 July have come under renewed scrutiny--and been found wanting. Tenet told the congressmen there were no visible signs that the building was an embassy, no flags and no insignia. But photographs taken in the immediate aftermath of the attack show a different story. These pictures show the Red Flag at the main gate and two signs covered in Chinese script on the side of the building. The embassy was clearly marked by a sign in Serb saying "Ambasada Narodne Republike Kine" (Embassy of the People's Republic of China)--stark evidence that the CIA chief was not telling the whole truth.
Equally compelling is the fact that the location of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade was hardly a state secret to Belgrade's diplomatic corps, who regularly met U.S. diplomats at receptions in the building.
Not only were the embassy coordinates in the NATO computer, as the air targeters discovered, but the Chinese Embassy had long been a prime target for Western intelligence, and would therefore have been extremely well identified.
The reason for the scrutiny was that for years the Chinese Communist regime has been cooperating with the Serbs in building up its military capability. The eyes and ears of the Western world--the US's National Security Agency and Britain's GCHQ--were watching and listening.
Asked what could have been the motives for a deliberate attack, a French official replied: "The possibility that the Chinese were helping the Yugoslavs in a number of ways, including militarily, and concern among American intelligence that China was indulged in a wholesale espionage against America." "The aim was to send a clear message to Milosevic that he should not use outside help in the shape of the Chinese," said a NATO intelligence officer.
One source, a senior air force officer, said: "I would lay money that the Chinese civilians killed by the bombing were intelligence officers. The Americans knew exactly what to hit and how to do it … far from not knowing the target was an embassy, they must have been given architect's drawings."
An intelligence expert told The Observer: "If it was the wrong building, why did they use the most precise weapons on Earth to hit the right end of that 'wrong building'?"
and why didnt they bitch more about the Israelis bombing the site?
Hubris,
Israel wanted to provoke them. Syria has learned from the past and didn't bite.
Brian Bell,
How far are you willing to keep Israel as the de facto military ruler of the Middle East? US government policy has been effective in supporting Israel to use it as one tool in stabilizing the region for US interests(making it unstable in everything else). The introduction of a new nuclear power in the region might actually lead to a long term stability that could bring a resolution to issues such as the occupation of the West Bank and the imprisonment of Palestinians in Gaza. Right now Israeli government policy is not responsive to any outside force other than their dependence on the US for weapons and money. Integration of Israel into the community of states that surround it (and no this doesn't mean kicking out the Jews) rather than having it be a satellite of the US and European powers will go a long way in bringing long term stability.
As far as international pressure to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons to countries like Syria and Iran, the only successful tactic is to stress their treaty obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that both countries are a party to. The US government saying "I don't like you so you shouldn't have nuclear weapons" isn't a convincing one, and will do more to spread the current proliferation of arms than anything else. Coupled with a significant drop in the US's power profile and you have a disaster waiting to happen for our country and the places where this brinkmanship game is being played.
Wengler, I don't have an answer to your first question, but I strongly disagree with the premise that adding Arab or Iranian nukes to the Mid-East will change anything positively. Those countries won't be able to reach parity with Israel in time to achieve any kind of strategic balance. All their quest for those kinds of arms would do, at best, is touch off a strategic imbalance likely leading to war. The more countries that have them, the more likely they are to be used, not less likely. I'm of the opinion that MAD was less a formulated policy than simple observation of a condition after it existed, and it could have gone either way on any number of occasions. If there had been a major power imbalance, as there would be if an Arab state or the Iranian state managed to get a couple nukes together, I think the whole thing goes bad. So, no, I don't think the non-Jewish Middle Eastern states ought to be nuclear armed. I think that's an insane idea.
With nuclear weapons, long experience has shown that parity exists as soon as the other side has 1. In that sense, they are very stabilizing.
Hubrius, it's important to understand the culture. Israel was flexing its muscle to show Syria it could go in and make a strike with little fear because the US has its back.
It's a major insult to the pride of Syrian leaders and to make a big deal of it without striking back undermines their image in the eyes of their people. So, they covered it up like it's no big deal and shut up about it so it doesn't become a big deal.
If someone pushes you around in a bar and you don't do anything about it, you look like a weenie if you keep complaining about it and did nothing. So, you play it down and go on.
And, nothing pisses Israel off more than something like this to be ignored. It is now Israel's insult for going in and bombing what most of the world believes was a warehouse that posed no threat. If Syria complained too much everyone would think they were just covering up the fact that it was more than just a warehouse.
If I were playing poker with Israel and Syria I'm pretty sure the Syrians would go home with most of the money.
2 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
