Analysts Find Israel Struck a Nuclear Project Inside Syria

[RamboLiberal]

Source: NY Times

Israel’s air attack on Syria last month was directed against a site that Israeli and American intelligence analysts judged was a partly constructed nuclear reactor, apparently modeled on one North Korea has used to create its stockpile of nuclear weapons fuel, according to American and foreign officials with access to the intelligence reports.

The description of the target addresses one of the central mysteries surrounding the Sept. 6 attack, and suggests that Israel carried out the raid to demonstrate its determination to snuff out even a nascent nuclear project in a neighboring state. The Bush administration was divided at the time about the wisdom of Israel’s strike, American officials said, and some senior policymakers still regard the attack as premature.

The attack on the reactor project has echoes of an Israeli raid more than a quarter century ago, in 1981, when Israel destroyed the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq shortly before it was to have begun operating. That attack was officially condemned by the Reagan administration, though Israelis consider it among their military’s finest moments, and, in the weeks before the Iraq war, Bush administration officials said they believed that attack set back Iraq’s nuclear ambitions by many years.

By contrast, the facility that the Israelis struck in Syria appears to have been much further from completion, the American and foreign officials said. They said it would have been years before the Syrians could have used the reactor to produce the spent nuclear fuel that could, through a series of additional steps, be reprocessed into bomb-grade plutonium.



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/14/washington/14weapons.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[Solon]

1. I'm trying to figure out what gave Israel the right to attack in the first place...

Its like every nation in the Middle East is playing Russian Roulette with an automatic pistol.

[hack89]

3. Israel and Syria have been technically at war since 1967

There have been on and off peace talks since 1967 but legally the two states are at war.

So Israel has the right to take actions to defend itself.

[Solon]

5. So are North and South Korea...

Doesn't mean they lob missiles at each other for kicks. I also don't see how a nuclear reactor was any sort of direct threat to Israel.

[hack89]

6. If the purpose of the reactor was to produce

nuclear weapons then there was a direct threat.

[Solon]

7. Most reactors have the potential to be used to make weapons...

the issue is whether that was the express purpose of this one, which isn't clear, and when it would actually have been online, which apparently wouldn't have been for quite a few years.

[hack89]

8. If Syria (or any country) was interested in peaceful nuclear power

then perhaps they shouldn't engage in covert agreements with North Korea. North Korea has an abysmal record of missile and WMD proliferation - it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that Syria was up to no good. As for the timing, besides a clear warning shot to Syria to behave, it serves as clear warning to Iran.

[Solon]

9. So does the United States, your point?

Giving this as an excuse means that every nation south of the U.S. border has justification to lob missiles at any military target or nuclear site within the United States.

[hack89]

30. Every country that we are in a state of war with?

Sure - now please remind me which countries those are.

In case you have forgotten, Israel and Syria have been fighting real (48, 67, 73) and proxy wars (Lebanon) for a long time. Syria and Israel have still not officially ended hostilities from the 67 war. Syria is not some peaceful neighbor being unjustly provoked - look no further then their role in the arming and build up of Hezbollah for their attitude towards Israel.

[Bluerthanblue]

10. seems to me that Syria recieved more than a 'direct threat'-

doesn't the door swing both ways?

Or is wrong only wrong when 'they' do it?

[ohio2007]

18. Syria has the latest Russian air defense system. Why didn't they use it

against the IAF ?
Dayr az-Zawr is almost on the Iraqi border!

article excerpt


.......
snip
On September 6, Israeli Air Force F-15 and F-16s conducted a devastating attack on targets deep inside Syria near the city of
Dayr az-Zawr.

http://www.ivanyi-consultants.com/articles/silence.html

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3436827,00.html

Asad should ask questions since he is being so generous with the Russian fleet paying port visits


http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3434145,00.html

Russian stuff that bad or are the Syrians that incompetent?

Should the Iranians be worried?

Seeing as all this Iran invasion talk has been on the front burner for almost three years now...

[hack89]

22. Check this out

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/articles/20070928.aspx

[ohio2007]

66. Now it makes sense why a death threat on Putin was made / lol

hey hack

how about a little football humor ?


Vinny Testaverde is suddenly flooded with endorsement opportunities.


http://www.profootballtalk.com/photo.htm

Can't find the pic of the camera that crashed to the ground in Seattle yesterday ;)
but that site has a few chuckles

[rayofreason]

26. Syrian air defense

1. Yes, Russian stuff is that bad (compared to our/Isreali stuff)

2. Yes, the Iranians are worried

3. The reason there was very little response (no "Arab street" etc.) is the level of humiliation on the part of the Syrians

[ohio2007]

15. The UN watchdog must have been asleep on this one

First the UN had no clue Iran had a nuke program. Now they failed to see evidence of a nuke program in Syria also?

What is the role of the IAEA and the UN ?

[martymar64]

67. Maybe they want to protect themselves from israel

The yalso have the right to defend themselves. Something the AIPAC crowd tends to forget.

[INDIA]

59. Do you really believe that? Really? REALLY? n/t

[PaulaFarrell]

28. So you'd be ok with Syria bombing Israel's reactors?

in the name of self-defense of course

[hack89]

29. If Syria wanted to commit national suicide,

sure why not? Lets hope they check the prevailing winds first - I suspect Jordan, the PA and Saudi Arabia would be pissed.

[YankmeCrankme]

47. He didn't ask if you thought it would be smart

He asked if you would be ok with them doing so. Do you agree that Syria or any other nation in the middle east has the right to attack Israeli nuclear reactors?

[hack89]

49. Sure - if they thought they represented a threat. nt

[NeoConsSuck]

34. Does Israel have nuclear weapons?

and if so, would you have a problem with the Arab world taking them out?

[hack89]

37. Yes and yes

only because it would lead to the deaths of millions of Arab innocents. No Arab country has the military capability to locate, target and destroy every one of Israel's hundreds of nuclear weapons. The end result of such an attempt would be mushroom clouds over Mecca, Damascus, Tehran and Cairo. Do you have any doubt that any right wing government of Israel would miss an opportunity like this?

[lumpy]

41. I would imagine the fact that Israel lies in close proximity

to other middle eastern coutries that their mushroom clouds would blow right back in the faces.

[hack89]

43. Ok - so Mecca and Tehran then

I think the prevailing winds are to the east but I could be wrong.

I suspect that Israel has designed it's warheads with proximity in mind so it may not be as big a concern as you might think.

[martymar64]

69. You seem so cavalier with the lives of millions

But I guess only israeli lives have value huh?

[hack89]

72. No - I have posted elsewhere in this thread

that it would be a tragic mistake if the Arab countries tried to attack Israeli nuclear weapons and sites precisely because millions of Arab innocents would die. I am merely pointing out the hard reality of the present balance of power.

[Hardrada]

48. Stormfront would be cool with that!

A lot of them want the whole Mideast shebang to go up. Why appeal to racists of that sort?

[hack89]

50. That's why I don't think it wise for the Arabs

to try to destroy Israel's nukes.

[Hardrada]

53. The neo-Nazis don't care.

End all the Mideast bother and the West can get on with Western European Christian Civilization as it was doing before. The neo NS party and camp followers di seem to have a certain evil logic. One cavil they have to this scenario is that the Iranians are technically, they think, Aryans and so should be spared.

[mallard]

35. Big "If"

They're just trying to cover for the action, make war against the lesser side palatable and make people suspect Syria has been secretly going nuclear. It's bullshit.

Meantime, Israel fears no pressure to declare its nuclear arsenal. It's just not worth debating as far as our one-sided Press goes.

[hack89]

38. What do you think they attacked?

and why is Syria so quiet abut it?

[bananas]

11. "modeled on one North Korea has used to create its stockpile of nuclear weapons fuel"

That should be a big clue as to what it was being used for.

[Solon]

12. "They said it would have been years before the Syrians could have used the reactor to produce the...

reactor to produce the spent nuclear fuel that could, through a series of additional steps, be reprocessed into bomb-grade plutonium."

Sounds like, if the intelligence report was completely accurate, then there still was no justification for attacking that particular site.

[ohio2007]

16. "They" ? who is "They" ?

how often are intelligence reports? 99 % of the time?
9%?
.09%

[Solon]

17. So the intelligence is accurate when it describes this as a "nuclear weapons site"...

but not in its readiness level? Hmm, I think some call that selective intelligence, picking out the parts you do like, and believing them, and ignoring the parts you don't like, because it disrupts your perfect little world. I'm done.

[ohio2007]

20. You say it was actually cement from North Korea the IAF bombed?

I call that story line misinformation put out by Syria
yet Assad refuses to allow inspectors in to show what was hit.


What has he got to hide?
It was only a train load of cement ( in Syria last month but three years ago in North Korea......


'Source' Notes Syrian Technicians Killed in Yongch'on
Train Explosion Incident

May , 2004

snip

The bodies of the Syrians were carried onto and
transported home on 1 May by a Syrian aircraft, which
had come to Pyongyang to deliver aid supplies.

Syrian and DPRK medical and military personnel who
were involved in transporting victims] were also reportedly wearing protective suits
similar to those worn by the DPRK military personnel
who arrived on the scene immediately after the
accident.

The same source said, "The action taken by Syria and
the DPRK indicates that the cargo was top secret
matter, which the two countries did not want to bring
out into the open." With regard to the DPRK and Syria,
the United States and other countries have indicated
concern that the two countries are continuing to
cooperate in the development of Syria's "Scud-D"
missiles, as well as chemical and biological weapons.

snip
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MewNews/message/19905

weather you like some parts of it or not,looks like there has been nothing going on for years ;)

[Solon]

23. I'm not necessarily saying that NOTHING was going on, just that there was...

no justification to attack without some imminent threat present. It takes years to set up a nuclear reactor, and even more years to isolate weapons grade radioactive material for use in bombs. Its actually quite difficult for a nation to clandestinely develop or build nuclear weapons without anyone finding out, even early on in development. It takes infrastructure, the transporting of relatively rare materials, and the construction of large buildings to successfully develop nuclear weapons. Besides that, the fact of the matter is that, while nuclear proliferation is a bad idea, as a defense mechanism, it is quite effective. So far, no nuclear power has been invaded by another nation, whether nuclear or not, so I can see why either Syria, Iran, or North Korea have an interest in developing nuclear weapons. I don't see why Syria, or Iran, or even Israel, have to give up their national security just because of where they are, or who they are.

[bananas]

45. "no nuclear power has been invaded by another nation" - not true

The Falkland Islands are British territory, so when Argentina invaded the Falklands Islands, they were invading a nuclear power.
India and Pakistan are both nuclear powers that have continuous border clashes, little mini-invasions, and they almost had a nuclear exchange a few years ago.
Iraq didn't invade Israel, but it attacked Israel with scud missiles during Gulf War I, and Israel had many nuclear weapons by then.
And of course the U.S. was attacked on 9/11, although that wasn't an invasion.
The idea that wars would end if every country had nuclear weapons is a fantasy.

[Toots]

31. "So Israel has the right to take actions to defend itself"

Any/every country has that right but Israel was not attacked, it did the attacking. Only in it's vivid imagination was it attacked and I could easily imagine you being a bank robber. Should you be defensively attacked? The Bush* Doctrine of Pre-emption is not worthy of what America used to stand for. "Home of the Brave"... indeed......In most people's mind it is called a "sucker punch"

[hack89]

39. We can play chicken or the egg all day

the simple fact is that Israel and Syria have been fighting real wars(48, 67, 73) and proxy wars (Lebanon and Hisbollah) for a very long time. There has never been peace between them. In such an environment, Syria had to know that covert cooperation with a pariah state know to sell nuclear and missile technology to anyone was going to be a provocation that Israel was not going to ignore.

[lumpy]

40. So the definition of war rides on a word called

"technically" I would say this is a great recipe for worldwide war. Time for India to drop the bomb on Pakistan, way past time for England to once more pulmigate war with France. Technicaly the US could bombard Cuba or perhaps Russia since "technically" they have been at war. So that means that "technically" the US had every right in the world to invade and render destruction to Iraq who "technically" never had attacked the United States of America. Clearly we in this country have not surpassed the tribal instinct of our ancient ancestors judging from this post.

[hack89]

44. They are at war - have been for a long time

the simple fact is that Israel and Syria have been fighting real wars(48, 67, 73) and proxy wars (Lebanon and Hisbollah) for a very long time. There has never been peace between them. In such an environment, Syria had to know that covert cooperation with a pariah state know to sell nuclear and missile technology to anyone was going to be a provocation that Israel was not going to ignore.

[The Stranger]

52. According to your laughable argument, the U.S. should bomb Russia, given

"the simple fact" that the U.S. and Russia have been fighting real and proxy wars "for a long time."

[hack89]

54. No - the risk of nuclear annihilation is too great

there is no such risk with Israel attacking Syria.

Based on Syria's past and present behavior, Israel would be foolish to allow they to gain nuclear weapons.

[The Stranger]

61. You seem only able to view this in terms of Israeli national interest.

Based on both of these nations' past behavior, it is necessary to expand your view from only that of Israel's national interest. There is also regional interests and U.S. national interest.

[hack89]

63. True - but it made perfect sense from the Israel perspective

and that is the only real point I want to make.

[The Stranger]

51. What utter nonsense.

They are not at war, "technically," "legally" or in reality.

[Supersedeas]

56. who knows how close they are now---didn't Bush approve the strike beforehand?

[hack89]

60. So why have they been holding peace talks?

http://yalibnan.com/site/archives/2007/01/secret_israel_s.php

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1167467765288&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/769460.html

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=81490

[The Stranger]

62. Because Israel still occupies the Golan Heights.

[hack89]

64. So the war hasn't ended, has it?

on edit: Bad things happen when you lose wars that you start. The question is whether Syria would attempt to regain the Golan by force if it could. What do you think?

[The Stranger]

74. They are trying to negotiate getting Israel to leave Golan since the war has been over 40 years.

And Israel has been settling the Golan, which also would indicate that the war has long been over.

Bad things happen when you lose wars that you start.

If you insist on cute little aphorisms, then take this one:

Bad things happen when you occupy (and settle) other people's land.

And here's a dollar's worth of free advice: They don't like it when you take their land.

[Megahurtz]

57. "Defend" Itself???

What did Syria do? That's right. Nothing.

[hack89]

58. So Syria is in bed with a country know to sell nuclear technology

indiscriminately and is secretly building a nuclear reactor of the type used to fuel weapons programs and yet Israel had no reason to feel threatened? OK.

[ohio2007]

13. Wasn't there supposed to be an "October Surprise" announced by the Iranian president?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iran/2007/iran-070926-irna01.htm
Seems the suprise was pre empted by the IAF.

Why is Syria so hush hush about this bombing?
Ya think they would be all over the UN asking them to come in and investigate the bombing "fall out"

[still_one]

14. Bingo

[aquart]

25. Well, IF it happened, they would be required to DO something.

And they don't want to do something. So it didn't happen. LOL!

We really aren't circuitous enough to deal with the Middle East. They have centuries of duplicity on us.

[Ian David]

2. What happened to that Vallerie Plame chick that was supposed to prevent this sort of thing? n/t

[lumpy]

42. The warmongers got rid of her.

You know that bunch who were responsible for stirring up the bomb pot.

[Joanne98]

4. Yeah right!

[bemildred]

19. "we've always been at war with Eastasia." -- 1984

It could have been a root cellar for all the evidence these lying weasels have produced. The only lesson they have learned from the yellow cake and aluminum tubes lies is not to bother with faking evidence. With no fake evidence, there is nothing to debunk, and you can just blather on forever with wild speculations and hyperbole.

[harun]

55. My money is on a pallet of 2 by 4's (n/t)

[FarCenter]

21. The New York Times is not a reliable source of news about Syria

Recall that it published stories by the despicable Judith Miller who was shilling for Cheney and the Neocons in the run up to the Iraqi invasion.

[goforit]

24. What does the NYT want us to believe. Always believe the opposite!

[ohio2007]

32. Maybe they should be put on the same MSM 'reliable list' as

Faux news you are saying ?

Where do you get your Syrian stories?
al Jazeera?
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/newsfull.php?newid=41262

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/newsfull.php?newid=46087
just wondering how thik those rose colored glasses are ;)

[FarCenter]

36. Where do you get your Syrian stories?

I occasionally read Al Jazeera, but it is better to read BBC, Guardian, Deutsche Welle, Der Spiegel, Le Monde Diplomatique, Daily Star, Turkish Press, Dawn, and The Hindu.

Just don't get caught up in the trap of thinking that the top US news outlets are the authoritative truth.

[bananas]

68. "aljazeera.com" has no association with the tv station "Al Jazeera"

There is a UK-based radical magazine which registered "aljazeera.com" before the mid-east-based TV station did.
The TV station is aljazeera.net.
Please do not confuse the two, they are completely different.

http://www.aljazeera.com/util/pages.php?pageid=1

About Aljazeera.com

Aljazeera Publishing owns and operates Aljazeera.com, bringing you the world today. Aljazeera Publishing is an independent media organisation established in 1992 in London. Aljazeera.com has a particular focus on events and issues in the Middle East covering major developments presenting facts as they happen.

Important note: Aljazeera Publishing and Aljazeera.com are not associated with any of the below organisations:

1. Al Jazeera Newspaper, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia whose website is al-jazirah.com
2. Al Jazeera Satellite Channel whose website is aljazeera.net.
3. Al Jazeera Information Centre who website is aljazeerah.info

Aljazeera Publishing disassociates itself from the views, opinions and broadcasts of these titles.

[ohio2007]

70. ...and your point is ?

are you against sites that slant news and allow readers to leave comments for many around the world to read ?


http://www.aljazeera.com/

welcome to DU ;)

[bananas]

71. My point is that some trolls pretend they are the same organization

[HuffleClaw]

27. bwahaahahhahhaaaaa

hilarious. yes, by all means, lets everyone believe israeli/american propaganda!

[ohio2007]

33. It does get deep when few sources want to report news

from outside the western MSM world.
talk about ;
hilarious. yes, by all means, lets everyone believe israeli/american propaganda!


what about stories out of pakistans official news cencer site. Shoul we believe outside sources that will translate their news into English ?


Khamenei asks Muslims to boycott ME conference

TEHRAN, Oct 13: Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has urged Muslim nations to boycott a Middle East peace meeting in the US.

“The United States took the initiative for this meeting to save the Zionist regime, which received a beating at the hands of Hezbollah,” he told a crowd of hundreds of thousands at Iran’s Grand Mosque on Saturday.

“Every conference that has been organised in the name of peace has harmed the Palestinians,” he said in his speech on Eidul Fitr.

“As the Palestinians themselves are not participating in this conference, how can the others do so,” he asked, as the crowd chanted ‘Death to America’ and ‘Death to Israel’.

He made no reference to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who will be attending the meeting, expected next month.

Referring to Hamas, which has called for a boycott of the talks, he said the “Palestinian people put in power a government that has made resistance its leading slogan and, despite all pressure, the Palestinian government and people continue to resist. I counsel our Palestinian brothers not to confront each other, because the enemy is in their house.”

snip
http://www.dawn.com/2007/10/14/top10.htm

the world is as irrational as "the leaders" that run other countries and their words seem to slip under the msm quote radar.

Is the current self appointed government of Iran really wanting talks with 'the boogy man' that keeps them in power?

[Zandor]

46. I hope Israel took it out n/t

[ohio2007]

65. U.N. watchdog asks Syria about "undeclared" atom plant

So does the UN but ya think they will be invited to snif around behind closed doors ?


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071015/wl_nm/nuclear_syria_iaea_dc

[Nihil]

73. Syria replies ...

... "Once you start sending inspectors into the Negev desert then we know
that we've only got 45 years before we need to worry about our visit!"

:P

(Strange how those shouting loudest about Syria's alleged research are
those who don't allow any inspections into their own facilities ...)