Jeffrey Lewis of Arms Control Wonk dismisses the nuclear theory -- and notes an expert who thinks that Israel hit SCUDS
Someone pointed this out in the comment section of the previous post. Lewis makes a strong case, but that was before this piece of information was revealed.
What I find really fascinating about all this is that we're debating how to interpret what is ostensibly a 'knowable' fact. This place does exist inside Syria, and someone could go there and report what is there, and that would be the end of it. Yet, Syria for some reason won't allow it, and no one else seems to be able to circumvent these restrictions (or, if they have, they haven't revealed what they've found). So, we're left to argue over bits and pieces of fragmentary information, trying to fit them into what seem to be one of two broad meta-narratives:
1. The proliferation narrative where it is nuclear and possibly very dangerous
2. The Bush Administration is exaggerating the nuclear aspect for its own venal purposes and the site, while dangerous, was not that dangerous.
(since Israel is silent, most of the 'facts' are emerging in the Western press from Western sources--US and here UK)
What I worry about (and why I called the previous post consequences of failure) is what if it really is nuclear proliferation? The Bush administration has so badly bungled this issue both in Iraq, Iran, and North Korea that no one is willing to believe them or support some sort of action when they say there is real and dangerous proliferation because all the times that they've claimed such in the past, they've been horribly wrong and with disastrous consequences.
But, I don't think that this will stay this secret for too long-- there are too many players, too many 'facts' that someone will find a pilot or commando or sneak into Syria or get a publicly available satellite photo or something and start to unravel the thread.
If the israelis could get samples of NK radioactive material, would they fake such a strike?
Of course they would.
If they knew what data the USA was looking for to say it was NK material, would they synthesise something that would pass and tell people they did a ground assault to get it.
Of course they would.
If the Bush administration saw a chance to distract attention from their various blunders into a brand new fake story, would they do it?
In a heartbeat.
If syria had a chance to get a nuclear program from NK which wasn't that successful at it and which is under close international scrutiny when they didn't do it with pakistan, would they?
Maybe. It's a lot harder to predict syria than to predict israel or Bush. We don't know as much about syria.
Commenting by HaloScan.com
