"What nuclear facility?"
Posted on 10/06/2007 8:22:11 AM PDT by jdm
Last month's strike by Israel on a Syrian facility didn't just resemble their strike on Osirak in 1981 in the nuclear sense. According to ABC News, the American response also struck a familiar chord, with the Bush administration attempting to hold Israel back from its strike -- and offering some very weak tea as an alternative (via Power Line):
The September Israeli airstrike on a suspected nuclear site in Syria had been in the works for months, ABC News has learned, and was delayed only at the strong urging of the United States.
In early July the Israelis presented the United States with satellite imagery that they said showed a nuclear facility in Syria. They had additional evidence that they said showed that some of the technology was supplied by North Korea.
One U.S. official told ABC's Martha Raddatz the material was "jaw dropping" because it raised questions as to why U.S. intelligence had not previously picked up on the facility.
Officials said that the facility had likely been there for months if not years.
Between July and September, weeks of high-level talks took place. The Israelis wanted to destroy the facility immediately, and had some support from the American intelligence community that had managed to miss this development. However, Condoleezza Rice and others did not. They wanted to "confront" the Syrians first -- as the Jerusalem Post puts it, to scold Assad publicly for operating a nuclear facility.
Yes, I'm sure that would have been effective. Publicly scolding them over the Hariri assassination only resulted in five more car-bomb assassinations of anti-Syrian politicians in Lebanon since then. Fingerwagging has done so much to curtail their material support for Hezbollah, too.
The Israelis, who actually originated the "Bush doctrine" decades ago, appear to be the only nation still using it. They probably have concluded that they cannot rely on American will to protect them from Syria and Iran any longer, especially after this episode. The US opposed the raid up to the moment it occurred, afraid of destabilizing the region. Israel, more worried about the consequences of a nuclear Syria -- something that should worry us as well -- simply ignored Washington after weeks of argument and acted in its own self-interest.
And note that Syria has not lifted a finger in retaliation. Assad knows well that Israel would annihilate his forces in a straight-up fight, and the raid confirmed it. They had to know that Israel would attack that facility if they discovered it, and Syria had to have some defense ready against it. In the event, Israel flew unmolested across the widest part of their airspace, devastated their facility, and flew home as if on an El Al jaunt.
I recall the American response to Osirak was a large amount of finger-wagging at the Israelis. We had reason to thank them later for their long view of nukes in the region. We should be thanking them again, and next time should try following their advice.
Brilliant.
ping
About a year and a half ago Bush was asked at a press conference flat out if we would allow Iran to acquire a nuclear bomb. The obvious and correct answer would have simply been "No", and move to the next question. Instead he went into a long spiel about being on "the right track" with Condi Rice working with our European allies to negotiate, and going to the UN if that didn't work, yada, yada, yada. It was obvious right then the adminstration is going to do nothing and hope the Iranians don't get nukes until after they leave office.
"What nuclear facility?"
I can also imagine them getting told, “do what you have to do but we’re going to say that we asked you not to”
I suggest the "unnamed" source for this claim is either rabidly ignorant, lying or simply misinformed
If we listened to the State Dept, we would never take action against anything or anyone. Think about it: the job of the State Dept is diplomacy—they make their bones if they can acheive something through talking. The minute that the discussions end without success is a failure for them. So the solution is....never stop talking—even when it is painfully obvious that talk is totally ineffective. As a result, the national interest is often at odds with the State Dept interests. There are a few exceptions to this (e.g., John Bolton), but they are rare. You will note that Condi Rice used to be a hawk; now that she heads the State Dept, her tune has changed considerably.
BTW—this is not so with the DOD. You rarely see soldiers straining at the leash to go to war. That is because it is their ass on the line when the ballon goes up. While war is a quick way to earn medals and prestigue, it is also a quick way to die and inflict lasting damage on the force. The military will not hesitate to go to war if its in the national interest, but they always do so reluctantly.
Thank God that the Israelis now have their own spy satellites and no longer have to rely on our fickle generosity.
Does anyone believe we didn’t know what the Syrians were doing?
Condi really has turned out to be her mentor’s (Scowcroft) daughter. I have absolutely had it with her. There has absolutely got to be some kind of drug they slip into the building water supply down at Foggy Bottom.
I hear the word “destabilize” one more time...
The best descriptive phrase is Mark Steyn’s “the ‘stability’ of the cesspit.”
"I suggest the "unnamed" source for this claim is either rabidly ignorant, lying or simply misinformed.
This story is U.S. State Department disinformation. They, the permanent government at the State Department and with idiot Condi's blessing, hope to persuade their Arab and Muslim friends that Israel acted 100% on its own. There is no other purpose to this story.
In fact he didn't. I watched it live, and I was fully expecting him to do so, which is why I was shocked that he didn't. He NEVER said no, only that we were working to discourage them from getting them.
They could not allow the attack to go forward, because IT WOULD JEOPARDIZE THEIR APPEASEMENT TALKS WITH PYONGYANG IN BEIJING LED BY CHRIS HILL THIS SUMMER AND THE EVENTUAL US-NORTH KOREA PEACE TREATY THAT WILL BE SIGNED NEXT YEAR BEFORE THE NATIONAL CONVENTIONS.
This no good crowd is almost as bad as KLINTOON when it comes to North Korea and appeasement. State Department is firmly running this quisling show.
The Bush Doctrine is in a shamble, and selling out through phony deals with North Korea go hand in hand with their opposition to Israel behind the scenes to take on Syria (and North Korea) in their own neighborhood.
Things are REALLY rotten in Washington these days. Why dont more Freepers and conservatives and patriots raise a STINK?????
Seriously...Who thought this woman would make a great President?? My God we have a soccer mom has our SoS! Someone nominate her to the PTA instead of public office.
You know how it works there in D.C.
Too bad some people here though, including veterans who should know better and understand the Potomac Two Step, don't have a clue.
Whatever happened to “you’re either with us, or against us” in the rubble of the World Trade Center?
It looks like that is now changed to “it’s only 15 months to President Hillary, so let’s just coast to the finish and let someone else take care of the problem.”
I can’t wait for President Hillary, standing in the rubble of the Sears Tower, saying to the world “if you’re against us, we’re sorry - please don’t hurt us again.”
And then passing a law to allow 100 million illegals in to clean up the mess.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.