News24

Syria chemical weapons worry Nato

2012-10-02 07:03

Brussels - Syria's chemical weapon stockpiles are a "great concern" but the solution to the conflict there remains political, not military, Nato head Anders Fogh Rasmussen said on Monday.

Nato was monitoring the situation closely, Rasmussen told a briefing, but the position remained unchanged and there were no discussions on military options as "the right way forward as regards Syria is a political solution".

Asked if there was a 'red line' for Nato on the chemical weapons issue, Rasmussen reiterated: "We do not see a military solution in Syria."

There has been persistent speculation about Western military intervention to end the bloody conflict in Syria, as in Libya last year, but with the United States facing off against Russia and China at the UN, any such demarche looks blocked.

Washington has consistently warned Damascus against using its chemical weapons, which Syria built up from the 1970s as a strategic counter to Israel.

Earlier on Monday, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem said Washington was stoking fears over chemical weapons so as to create a scenario similar to that which led to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Iraq invasion

"This issue is an invention of the American administration," Muallem told Beirut-based Al-Mayadeen TV in excerpts to be broadcast in full later Monday.

"These chemical weapons in Syria, if they exist - and I emphasise if - how is it possible that we would use them against our own people? It's a joke," he said.

A US-led coalition invaded Iraq in 2003, accusing its president Saddam Hussein of possessing weapons of mass destruction but none were ever found.

Damascus acknowledged for the first time in late July that it possessed chemical weapons and threatened to use them if attacked by outside countries but never against its own people.

US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta said on Friday that Damascus had moved some chemical weapons to safeguard the material but that the main storage sites for its arsenal remained secure.


Comments
  • gerhard.kress.3 - 2012-10-02 09:36

    By Syria's own admittance the chemical weapons are there.

      Shane Loxton - 2012-10-02 09:42

      Same as the US, UK, France, Germany they all have, and please dont say its never going to be used every country that keeps them will use them eventually, why else keep them?

      allcoveredinNinjas - 2012-10-02 10:24

      US, UK ,France and Germany are not embroiled in civil war leaving the danger of those weapons going 'missing' or getting in the hands of less desirable groups . Same reaosn they didn't make mention of them with this concern before the revolution.

      dawood.timol - 2012-10-02 10:35

      the reason other countries will never end the pursuit for these weapons is b'cos western countries have them. Israel, the biggest rogue state is allowed to have them. And remember only the US has ever used them. And that too after the peace accord was signed with Japan. Only states that are aggressors hold on to these forms of mass murderous weapons. And i would never blame the rest of the countries for pursuing them when u have such radical, racist right wing leaders in european countries, irael and the US (yes, dont be fooled- O'Bomber is also a puppet of the right wing. Every state should get rid of them.Why the monopoly for certain states???

      shane.loxton - 2012-10-02 11:43

      My point exactly Dawood

      allcoveredinNinjas - 2012-10-02 12:19

      Unless September comes before August on the calender then Japanese surrender was post atomic drops and to add to that it took two bombs to convince the imperial generals , a macabre vindication of their decision. There have also been numerous cases of the use of chemical and biological weapons , Saddam being one .Making stuff up and adjectives is not a case.

      dawood.timol - 2012-10-02 12:58

      @ AllcoveredinNinjas The US with admittance from its senior retired generals openly admitted that the US nuked Japan after nthe treaty was signed..REASON- no contingency plans on how and where to store these weapons if brought back home, and also to experiment on the effects of the bomb on human life..How irresponsible and cowardice?? And there was no problem when SADDAM nuked his own ppl, with the weapons given to him by the WEST. But the problem came when the OIL was under threat. In Iraq and Kuwait.These are the real terrorists in the world. Control of resources and wealth.WW3 will be over israels arrogance and zionist leaders

      allcoveredinNinjas - 2012-10-02 13:19

      Well you'll need to post evidence that goes against historical dates , we don't know how to get the bombs home is BS. The non-profit American Type Culture Collection and the Centers for Disease Control sold or sent biological samples of anthrax, West Nile virus and botulism to Iraq up until 1989, which Iraq claimed it needed for medical research. Lets see who else gave Saddam weapons : Singapore gave 4,515 tons of precursors for VX, sarin, tabun, and mustard gases to Iraq . Egypt gave 2,400 tons of tabun and sarin precursors to Iraq and 28,500 tons of weapons designed for carrying chemical munitions. India gave 2,343 tons of precursors to VX, tabun, Sarin, and mustard gases. China provided 45,000 munitions designed for chemical warfare.. Niger provided yellowcake in 1981. So what we'll do is leave all these other countries out. Yip , by interupting oil production and putting the entire market under pressure , increasing pricing is really going to put the US in a better position. NWO, jewish cabals, global media control and mass manipulation is all fanasty . Riddle me this , why did the US if its so incredibly sneeky and malicous not just plant a wmd in Iraq instead of all these eloborate plans?

      dawood.timol - 2012-10-02 15:51

      Well then u'll have to post evidence of ur initial statements about all those countries giving biological samples to Saddam. Probably propoganda frm US defence force, hence western media. BUT why didnt western govts intervene in the mid 80's when Saddam and other western puppet leaders in the middle east used chemical and bio weapons on innocent civilians. Problem was there was no hinderance to western interests. Why no intervention when TERRORIST ISRAEL used chemical weapons against an unarmed population 3 years ago in Palestine. Its all about resources and wealth for big business, hence filling the pockets of most politicians. These illegalities have given birth to groups like OWS in western countries. You probably need to contact some of their members to be enlightened. PS : Get your gullible head out of the sand and smell the coffe. These right wing politicians do not have the interests of even their white populations in mind.. They enrich big businesses and banks with their local and foreign policies.Inturn they get their pockets filled.

      dawood.timol - 2012-10-02 16:04

      Sad to see u call western propogandist lies historical dates. The problem with most of our S African whites is that they believe everything they're spoonfed by western govts and media. I guess they think ,like their parents with bi-coloured focals. That makes u guys racists. And racists, we dont need in most free non western countries. You're only at liberty to practise your racism in the west. We will never accept that here. PS : I said most and not all SA whites

  • pages:
  • 1