It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The chemical warfare threat looming over Syria’s civil war and its neighbors has taken an epic turn with the announcement by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov Saturday, Dec. 22, that “the Syrian government has “consolidated its chemical weapons in one or two locations amid a rebel onslaught and they are under control for the time being.”
debkafile’s military and intelligence sources report: The Russian foreign minister’s statement was a message to Washington that the transfer of Syria’s weapons of mass destruction to one or two protected sites was under Russian control. This had removed the danger of them falling into the hands of the al Qaeda-affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra ,which had come ominously close Friday, Dec. 21, when the Islamists spearheaded a Syrian rebel assault for the capture of the al-Safira military complex and Bashar Assad’s chemical and biological stores.
The battle for al Safira has brought US and NATO into direct intervention in Syrian hostilities. Western intelligence services estimate that even if Assad removed some of the banned weapons from this complex, large quantities remain and must be prevented from reaching the wrong hands.
Originally posted by Alien Abduct
Question for all those people that whine about the U.S. always getting into other countries business: If Assad or someone else started using some of these chemical weapons in mass would you want the U.S. (having the power to stop it) to just stand and watch?
-Alien
Originally posted by michael1983l
Russia is doing nothing more than protecting their own interests. They wish to keep their Naval bases in Syria and also wish to keep selling the government arms. Russia is just getting a foothold and a reason to bring ground forces in supoort of Assad. No Asad, no more Navy base and Arms deals.
Originally posted by Alien Abduct
Question for all those people that whine about the U.S. always getting into other countries business: If Assad or someone else started using some of these chemical weapons in mass would you want the U.S. (having the power to stop it) to just stand and watch?
-Alien
Describing the United States as the main cause of insecurity in Syria, Naqavi said, “Washington is not qualified to pass comments on democracy because the Americans are an obstacle to the realization of democracy in Syria.”
“The Americans have failed in Syria and their insistence on spreading insecurity in Syria will certainly lead to the US’s diplomatic isolation.”
Russia, along with Iran, provides Bashar al-Assad's regime with weapons and ammunition, and supports it politically, therefore the citizens of these countries present legitimate targets for militants in Syria.
The opposition coalition rejected Maleh's remarks in a move welcomed by Human Rights Group.
But after the Guardian revealed that Russian military advisers are manning some of Syria's more sophisticated air defences, Maleh, head of the Syrian opposition legal committee, stood by his remarks.
He told the Guardian:
What I said that there are a large number of Russian consultants and experts who are helping the Assad regime even though they might be civilians.
Those are legitimate direct target for the Free Syrian Army according to the Geneva Convention because they are aiding the regime against the Syrian people will.
Russia has contingency plans for evacuating more than 5,000 Russian in Syria.
Russian foreign ministry’s spokesman Alexander Lukashevich has pledged help to Russians wishing to evacuate from Syria and said evacuation routes have already been mapped out.
“As you know, there is a road map for every country that describes how to act in case of an emergency,” Mr. Lukashevich said. “Of course, we’ve drawn up a plan on how to help our citizens in Syria, which will be put in place if they need any assistance, such as an emergency evacuation,” he added.
Originally posted by Alien Abduct
Question for all those people that whine about the U.S. always getting into other countries business: If Assad or someone else started using some of these chemical weapons in mass would you want the U.S. (having the power to stop it) to just stand and watch?
-Alien
Originally posted by ftman
I'd much rather Russia to go in.