December 5th, 2012
06:44 PM ET
Bracing for a chemical weapon attack
Sources tell CNN’s Barbara Starr that the Pentagon and US intelligence services are consulting with Syria's neighbors Turkey, Israel and Jordan about what to do if it looks like Assad is about to launch a chemical attack on his own people.
A senior US official says all the allies are now considering how to keep Syria from putting chemical warheads on its artillery or missiles.
But an airstrike to stop it, could cause havoc if residual chemicals escape.
What if Assad leaves? US officials say they have long been planing for 'the day after Assad" – such as training Jordanian troops to provide security – but for now they just hope Syrians troops will keep those chemical weapons under lock and key.
@natlsecuritycnn on Twitter
I do not even know how I ended up here, but I thought this post was great. I don't know who you are but definitely you're going to a famous blogger if you are not already 😉 Cheers!
https://www.electricpercolatorcoffeepot.com/10-top-coffee-bloggers/
The failure to act in this venue-to deter the proliferation or use of Syrian chemical and biological weapons, rests squarely and exclusively with the utterly gutless OSD-P (Undersecretary of Defense, for Policy) Mr. Thomas Miller. He has vacillated endlessly, and disrupted lost of proposed solutions and operations that could prevent this kind of disaster.
well as a canadian get your pres to approve buying oil from canada, It is a real mystery to us why there is so much opposition to canadian oil,. As the poster above said it would not matter what happened in the middle east, Canada has huge reserves of oil and gas as does the us, Why you would not want to buy energy from your friends is beyond me, North america could be energy independent in a couple of years, No reason for one more drop of western blood to be shed in the middle east its not worth it.
Tar sands
So matt you support buying blood oil do you, most anti canada types know nothing about oil sands what is it you dont like be specific
Maybe it's because we hope to make them run out of petroleum soon so that they will be completely irrelevant in the future. This must be our longterm strategy.
There are few times I would agree with the U.S. getting involved in other countries war BUT the use of gas or any other weapon of mass killing is one the them. If they are stupid and use chemical weapons then we and all other countries should take military action and stop the fool. It is called moraly right.
Morally Right???
911missinglinks dotcom watching this doco is morally right.... believing in 9/11 is CRIMINAL.
Here comes more blood shed, more death, and more inhumanity. It all happen again and again and again and again.
shut up you not makeing anything better go take your negitive self elsewere
Surely there is no chances that one thing will lead to another that will turn people war drunk at an instance? And a drunk is a drunk.
US is itching to drop some ordinance!
Thank you, Steve. How so very true that rings!
If we were energy independent , what happens in the middle east would be irrelevant to our strategic security. But if we drill our own oil, the military industrial complex would no longer need the colossus budget it now receives every year to defend far flung oil imports, the defense contractors and the banks that finance them would also lose profits to the ensuing military cuts. So all you leftys out there who think were not drilling for our own oil because of enviornmental concerns....your wrong and your playing right into the hands of neo-cons and war profiteers.....ironic but true.
Thanks a million, Nietsche666. I couldn't have said it better. I get so sick and tired of seeing all these stupid Tea Partiers posting their pro-war, anti-Assad, gung ho statements here yelling for us to jump into yet another war over there. Enough is enough!
IIf the ENTIRE WORLD was independent of oil then I would agree with you, Nietzsche666. This, however, is not the case.for the simple reason there are some other things the US has to import form other countries that depend on the Middle East oil supply.
Obama has been the most pro-drill president in our life time. The oil is gone.
I may know very little about the middle east but if I was Assad and I wanted to get the rebels off my back, I would give them a new enemy. I believe the Sarin is intended for Israel to create a new common enemy in the fight.
II doubt very much that baby Assad is willing to commit a state suicide by using weapons of mass destruction against IIsrael...
retard
htfhjkiutfh,
Sarcasm will get you everywhere.
WE WIL ALL THANK RUSSIA AND CHINA
He won't use them. This is a threat to ensure he gets save travel and haven in Iran, the only country in the world that would harbor a mass murderer. This goes far beyond anything the Hague can control as his crimes against humanity would be so catastrophic, killing tens of thousands without discriminating between friend or foe. Iran would not harbor Assad if he used chemical weapons against his own people as this qualifies as him being a "monster" and Iran does not need such horrendous publicity as it would make a US/Israeli strike a legitimate act even among the islamic Allied nations.
It's a world where people think there is such thing as a good monster and a bad monster. That there is a good brute and a bad brute.
So what is the difference with a car bomb, a Sarin munition, or even a nuke bomb to these people? There's a saying careful with a badly bleeding enemy armed to the teeth who has retreated into the bushes.
What is the difference? Chemical weapons are ILLEGAL.
What's my point?
Your analysis do not have any guarantee.
I think it is best for all who have no business with the war in Syria to get out of there.
Reblogged this on thesurvivalplaceblog.
OLD news. On Dec. 5th U.S. officials told NBC News "the Syrian military has loaded the precursor chemicals for sarin, a deadly nerve gas, into aerial bombs that could be dropped onto the Syrian people from dozens of fighter-bombers"....
Sarin in its deadly form is very unstable with a shelf life of about 2 weeks...a little longer if expensive ingredients are used. It has to be mixed just prior to use and the most effective way to deliver it is by artillery shells. Assad has the infrastructure for doing just that. When intelligence informs us they are beginning to mix the two main ingredients to manufacture sarin many incendiary weapons will be launched by the US and our allies.
I wasn't aware of the short shelf life once active. Time will tell but things could get ugly quite fast.
Sarin can be premixed as you say but most of the more modern weapons actually perform the mixing as the weapon is fired (e.g. the M687 155mm shell). This binary design is more complex than a simple shell filled with premixed sarin but it is safer (clearly a relative concept here), has a far longer shelf-life, and can be unloaded/reloaded as the precursors are far less toxic.
Maybe Mr.Lincoln there should learn some facts on a subject before he runs his yapper.
Keep on swallowing MSM bullsh!t, clover-boy.
HOW MANY MUSLIMS IS ASSAD GOING TO KILL THIS TIME DICTATORS COME AND DICTATORS GO BUT PEOPLE NEVER CHANGE
Shopuldn't the headline read "Bracing for more false-flag bullsh!t"?
*shouldn't*
How about "Bracing for Chemical Weapons Stolen-from-Libya-and-Smuggled-through-Benghazi Attack"
lol