Israel threatens Syria strike if rebels get chemical arms

Comments (15)
Abulafiah wrote:

Never miss an opportunity to attack a neighbour.

Jan 27, 2013 9:02am EST  --  Report as abuse
americanguy wrote:

The US and NATO have already said the same thing about 6 months ago, and the US has military assets in place in the area now to do the job if needed. The US has a long standing policy of not letting weapons of mass destruction fall into the wrong hands. Even Russia warned Syria (and that means all parties). All Israel is doing it big talk as usual, knowing someone else will do the fighting or come in to save Israel when things get messy.
Not impressed with Israel’s attempt to act tough.

Jan 27, 2013 9:33am EST  --  Report as abuse
gowintec wrote:

This is what I don’t understand about Syria, they claim foreign back rebels are attacking them, yet this statement…Syria is cagey about whether it has such arms but says if it had it would keep them secure and use them only to fend off foreign attack. That kinda contradicts the whole thing about foreign fighters, if they were foreign they would have used them, or it could mean they don’t have them. Either way any country near them can’t be blamed for being a little paranoid, you can’t trust Syria’s government or any government to tell you the truth.

Jan 27, 2013 9:42am EST  --  Report as abuse
usagadfly wrote:

Israel would be well advised to stop threatening aggression (“preemptive” anything) against other countries in the region.

Who doubts that the hands behind Syria’s rebels are not Israeli and American? Who??? Us??? Someday someone will get their hands on a nuclear arsenal in the region and then the waiter will bring the check. How hard is it to live with people you have already lived with for thousands of years already? Why does the USA meddle in such petty and nasty stuff in the Middle East? That day is over. Time to take care of our own, and I mean everybody here not just a tiny, tiny minority.

Jan 27, 2013 10:11am EST  --  Report as abuse
trex2561 wrote:

Israel should take whatever action they feel is necessary to protect their nation. In turn, their actions should not obligate the US to support them if it is not in our nations best interest to do so.

Jan 27, 2013 10:13am EST  --  Report as abuse
Life1 wrote:

So… Israel is committing to wipe out the rebels once it’s confirmed Assad has lost control? Or are they committing to wiping out the whole of Syria, Assad and the rebels?

Jan 27, 2013 10:50am EST  --  Report as abuse
BioStudies wrote:

Maybe Israel shouldn’t have set off 2 car bombs to assassinate members helping the Syrian army secure it’s boarder with Israel. Just a thought.

Jan 27, 2013 11:20am EST  --  Report as abuse
BioStudies wrote:

Maybe Israel shouldn’t have set off 2 car bombs to assassinate members helping the Syrian army secure it’s boarder with Israel. Just a thought.

Jan 27, 2013 11:20am EST  --  Report as abuse
boreal wrote:

Wonder what would happen figuratively speaking the day after an Israeli strike on Syria. Would that be the first domino to fall?

Jan 27, 2013 12:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ccdiane wrote:

If the rebels manage to overthrow a corrupt government, Israel will bomb them?

I can’t think of another way to read this. “Rebels overthrow dictator, are immediately bombed by neighboring country”.

Jan 27, 2013 2:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

Would it not be ironic if Israel came to the defense of Syria to prevent the chemical weapons from getting into the wrong hands. Really Russia should have already secured these sites. And Iran should have already sent troops to help defend Syria, but we see what type of friends those 2 nations are.

Jan 27, 2013 5:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@usagadfly

The rebels behind this are backed by Quatar and Saudi Arabia. The US and Israel have nothing to gain with the rebels getting power just like they lost a lot in Egypt and less so in Libya.

@boreal

Israel blew up a Syrian nuclear reactor not too many years ago, and nothing happened.

Jan 27, 2013 5:35pm EST  --  Report as abuse
nose2066 wrote:

“Any sign that Syria’s grip on its chemical weapons is slipping as it battles an armed uprising could trigger Israeli military strikes…” Now if a country just blows-up a munitions dump that contains chemical weapons, there is a very high probability that the chemicals fly up into the air and produce a toxic cloud that kills or injures people over a wide area. There are a lot of variables that would affect how many people would get killed or injured. Has this been taken into account, or would this just be dismissed as “collateral damage”?

Jan 27, 2013 7:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlNeuman wrote:

Typical Reuters biased “reporting” when it comes to Israel and Mideast. An uninformed observer (like “Dan Williams”) would believe from this that Israel is the big “threat” to peace in the region, since it mentioned that word and Israel numerous times in that article.
I guess Mr. Williams doesn’t think the Islamofascist wackos who have already committed innumerable acts of murderous terrorism in that region and indeed worldwide, and certainly not the certifiable psychotics in power in Iran about to go nuclear, are a “threat”!
Williams must be a graduate of the NY Times School of way liberal, know nothing journalism.

Jan 28, 2013 12:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
AlNeuman wrote:

Typical Reuters biased “reporting” when it comes to Israel and Mideast. An uninformed observer (like “Dan Williams”) would believe from this that Israel is the big “threat” to peace in the region, since it mentioned that word and Israel numerous times in that article.
I guess Mr. Williams doesn’t think the Islamofascist wackos who have already committed innumerable acts of murderous terrorism in that region and indeed worldwide, and certainly not the certifiable psychotics in power in Iran about to go nuclear, are a “threat”!
Williams must be a graduate of the NY Times School of way liberal, know nothing journalism.

Jan 28, 2013 12:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.