Syrian Chemical Weapon Facility?

[Khairul Alam]

It is interesting you mentioned that there was this article that i read

http://www.defense-update.com/analysis/analysis_191007_airdefense.htm

Then again i am not aware of the credibility of the author or the website in defense journalism circle.

This article doesnt seem to be authentic. According to Syrian reports on the air raid, the Syrian forces "kept firing" at the intruders as "they fled". Now the use of "kept firing" suggests that the IAF jets had only stumbled across some AAAs and not the alleged Pantsyr system.

 

[eckherl]

What air defense system do the Israelis have to counter a missile attack?

They are supposed to have the Arrow anti ballistic missile system, Patriot 1 and 2 missile system and they are working with a laser device designed with the capability to take out incoming rounds. I really do not know too much about these systems and surely some of our fellow forum team mates can answer some of the in depth capabilities of these systems and other systems currently fielded by the IDF.

 

[Khairul Alam]

What air defense system do the Israelis have to counter a missile attack?

Well currently Israel has both the Patriot and the Arrow 2. The Arrow 2 was a joint program between the US and Israel. The Patriots were first given to Israel during the 1991 Gulf War to protect it from the Iraqi Scuds. But in a few cases disintegrated munitions managed to land in population centres. So the Israelis planned to develop a better missile themselves and hence, the Arrow.

 

[Sgt.Banes]

I also have another question concerning the arrow 1 or arrow program.

Does it preform better that the U.S. Patriot system?

 

[funtz]

This article doesnt seem to be authentic. According to Syrian reports on the air raid, the Syrian forces "kept firing" at the intruders as "they fled". Now the use of "kept firing" suggests that the IAF jets had only stumbled across some AAAs and not the alleged Pantsyr system.

could be using the guns, independent firing of the 2 30 mm guns on the Pantsyr might be possible, then again no one will tell. If the target was of any significant value to the Syrian authorities a AAA based defense seems careless.

 

[bobac2855]

Yes - this can be deemed as a threat to Isreal but Israel does have the capability to counter it, this is a no win situation for Assad or his buddy in Iran.

Oh Yeah, they can,:nutkick nfloorl:

 

[Rossiman]

I take it all the chemical and biological weapons and of course the missiles that can hit Israeli cities are not a major threat?

I wouldn't say they are not a threat. Any missile is a threat, there are no 100% guaranteed defense systems. Also attacking Israel with chemical agents, could result in Israel striking back with chemical/nuclear weapons of there own.

Israel also has the capability to surgical strike there facilities, like they did to Saddam's. And remember Israel is a very close ally with America, Israel has America wrapped around there fingers, and this could lead to a invasion/air campaign of Syrian. There are hundreds of "Could" happen scenarios.

Just like most of the people have already said. Wind,weather play a crucial role in VX weapons.

Hope i helped clear some stuff up.
Rossiman

 

[radiosilence]

I wouldn't say they are not a threat. Any missile is a threat, there are no 100% guaranteed defense systems. Also attacking Israel with chemical agents, could result in Israel striking back with chemical/nuclear weapons of there own.

Israel also has the capability to surgical strike there facilities, like they did to Saddam's. And remember Israel is a very close ally with America, Israel has America wrapped around there fingers, and this could lead to a invasion/air campaign of Syrian. There are hundreds of "Could" happen scenarios.

Just like most of the people have already said. Wind,weather play a crucial role in VX weapons.

Hope i helped clear some stuff up.
Rossiman

Thanks for clearing some stuff up! It would do you some good to read the whole thread before replying to comments that you take out of context.

 

[Rossiman]

Thanks for clearing some stuff up! It would do you some good to read the whole thread before replying to comments that you take out of context.

First off i did read the thread. Secondly my points are not taking anything out of context. Some of the questions still had not been answered, so i answered them. I explained them haha =)

 

[radiosilence]

First off i did read the thread. Secondly my points are not taking anything out of context. Some of the questions still had not been answered, so i answered them. I explained them haha =)

Apparently you did miss the point of my comment. It had nothing to do with what you wrote in your post.

 

[Rossiman]

Apparently you did miss the point of my comment. It had nothing to do with what you wrote in your post.

When i first read it, it sounded like you where bashing me. Now reading it i see other wise. Thanks for clearing that up haha.

 

[Firehorse]

A Strike in the Dark

What did Israel bomb in Syria?
by Seymour M. Hersh

“What they targeted was a building used for fertilizer and water pumps,” he said—part of a government effort to revitalize farming. “There is a large city”— Dayr az Zawr—“fifty kilometres away. Why would Syria put nuclear material near a city?”

This is an interesting read- it may turn out that what they bombed was similar to that "chem/bio weapons factory" in Sudan, if not less!

Described by senior national security advisers as a secret chemical weapons factory, plant designer Henry R. Jobe from the U.S., British technical manager Tom Carnaffin, who supervised construction from 1992-96, and Jordanian engineer Mohammed Abul Waheed, who supervised plant production in 1997, have all testified that it would have been impossible for this plant to have produced chemical weapons. "State Department and C.I.A. officials argue," reported The New York Times (Sep 21), "that the government cannot justify its actions."
http://www.twf.org/News/Y1998/19981001-BombIsrael.html

 

[Preceptor]

A Strike in the Dark

This is an interesting read- it may turn out that what they bombed was similar to that "chem/bio weapons factory" in Sudan, if not less!

Aside from the opinion that the article was an 'interesting' read, what thoughts or opinions do you have on the issue? Also, please observe the requirements that posts contain more than a single line or sentence as a response, quotations do not count unless one is quoting oneself from a printed source. Failure to abide by this requirement means that posters' own views not being conveyed, thus not contributing to any discussion or debate. Rather, such posts are often viewed as attempts by the poster to increase their post count, assuming that with the number of posts comes a level of credibility. In point of fact, credibility is established by the level and quality of ones information, debate, questions and thinking. Please keep this in mind for future posts, as the forum is for the edification and enjoyment of members. Also, please do not cite wikipedia and similar websites as sources of information, as these sites can be edited by anyone and therefore information is suspect at best without supplimentary citations and sources. If there are any questions, consult the rules or a member of the Mod team.
-Preceptor

 

[Firehorse]

The truth is not important," the ambassador told me. "Israel was able to restore its credibility as a deterrent. That is the whole thing. No one will know what the real story is."

Assad asked rhetorically whether it was a logical move to build a nuclear reactor in the middle of the desert, knowing that satellites had full view of the area. He added that Syria would not pursue nuclear weapons "even if Iran would become nuclear." He said the facility was a military base, but denied any nuclear activity there.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1208870500459&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

"Everything I'm hearing from my own sources in Washington is that what you have now is a kind of push back by Vice-President [Dick] Cheney and his office and other hardliners who are opposed to diplomatic dealings with North Korea," .."[They are] hoping that by making public these allegations of nuclear cooperation it will torpedo the diplomatic process."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/04/25/2227483.htm?section=world

The Syrian Nuclear Puzzle

..the release of the information on the Syrian reactor might well have been an attempt to throw a spoke in the wheel of the Israeli-Syrian negotiations.

Besides the above observations, I also think that the air raid was intended to drive a wedge between Syria & Iran- "see, we can bomb you in any place @ any time, and your Iranian friends can't help you!" IMO, that's also why they didn't use their BMs instead- it would be too easy and wouldn't require AD suppression!

 

[PCShogun]

It was interesting to see this thread and see what the thoughts and opinions were back in 2007 when details of the Israeli attack were not well known, and for obvious reason.

Just to bring this up to date:

Israel launched an air attack against a suspected nuclear facility in the Syrian desert near the Deir ez-Zor region. This action was justified by Israeli intelligence sources in London and within Syria, showing an undeclared nuclear reactor was being built. Israeli agents INSIDE the facility took pictures showing its construction. A North Korean freighter carrying nuclear fuel rods was also intercepted on its way to Syria.

The attack was reported by Syria as the destruction of a agricultural facility designed to assist in the development in the area, however IAEA investigators found evidence of Uranium and graphite in the vicinity leading to the conclusion that this was a Gas Graphite nuclear reactor under construction and of a design used by North Korea.

While all of this was considered speculation by most of the world, the IAEA announced in 2010 that this was in fact an undeclared reactor. I guess Syria was betting on the old "hide it in plain site" plan as their was little in the way of defenses; no barbed wire or SA missile sites, to prevent such an attack. Which is surprising since a Syrian military patrol caught sight of a previous commando raid in August at the site, just one month before the actual raid. I am guessing that they did not expect Israel to overfly Turkey and thus went around the bulk of the Syrian air defense coverage. This doesn't say much for Turkey's air defense radar network either unless Turkey was a covert partner in the attack.

All I can find, so far as photos of the interior of the suspected reactor, are on Wikipedia. I know this is not the favorite of sources. It does show, however, that Israeli agents were able to infiltrate the site prior to the attack and to place commando's in the area again just prior to the strike.

File:SyriaReactorPict38.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
File:SyriaReactorPict34.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[prince99x]

That was anormal site then amerca apache came from iraq put some nuke substances then israel came and bomb it just to un cover syria avanced a/d network and they failled and made the whole story about a sucess to chear up israel pepole"the truth"

 

[RobWilliams]

That was anormal site then amerca apache came from iraq put some nuke substances then israel came and bomb it just to un cover syria avanced a/d network and they failled and made the whole story about a sucess to chear up israel pepole"the truth"

Ok that just sounds absurd, any official links to back that up? I mean i've never heard about anything like that. You don't just "put" some nuclear material into a foreign facility with an Apache, not to mention the fact that the sampling of the facility was 'the cherry on the cake' as the entire construction/layout points to a reactor.

I'm going to take the word of the IAEA over your 'theory'.

You should also note, making claims without substance or evidence is a fast-track to getting a ban from the Mods so i'd advise against your current style of writing.

This makes for interesting reading, its the IAEA report on the Dair Alzour site, section B makes for particularly good reading

http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2011/gov2011-30.pdf

 

[prince99x]

first thanx for reacting over my post wich i feel sorry to the inabilty of getting a good suorce but you can think of it as a logical-personal-anlyse/L.P.A\

 

[RobWilliams]

first thanx for reacting over my post wich i feel sorry to the inabilty of getting a good suorce but you can think of it as a logical-personal-anlyse/L.P.A\

Well then, with respect in my opinion its a false logical-personal-analysis and is completely irrational

B. Assessment of the Dair Alzour Site
11. As further described below, the Agency has assessed that:

• features of the destroyed building are comparable to those of gas cooled graphite moderated reactors of the type and size alleged;
• prior to the bombing, the configuration of the infrastructure at the site, including its connections for cooling and treated water, was able to support the operation of such a reactor and was not consistent with Syria’s claims regarding the purpose of the infrastructure; in addition, a number of other features of the site add to its suitability for the construction and operation of a nuclear reactor;
• analysis of samples from the site indicates a connection to nuclear related activities; and
• the features of the destroyed building and the site could not have served the purpose claimed by Syria.

That is a basic summary of the facility made by the IAEA from the link i posted previously (and it gets much more detailed than that)

To me, your analysis is highly illogical given the facts available. However i would be intrigued to find out exactly why you think that is the case so do you care to explain?

Although you may not have a source that claims that, i'd have thought you have several links that confirm sections which enabled you to make that assumption.

 

[prince99x]

thanx again and ihope we end up friends.any way the report you are talking about is out of reach now because it,s 1 AM in syria and am posting form m.phone .but about my L.P.A dont you it is indeed logical because the we have few~no-A/D east of syria and amerca in iraq ,any heli can fly and lay low under rader <read more about amerca S.F who landed near east syrian border and killed some civllain>how ever do you believe that israel got the ablity to do that and without any reaction of my gov and syria army .Another L.P.A say:it may be acost that syria was ready to pay inexchange for more russian modern arms deals and you saw that happen i think .LATER ihave to sleep for the sick school thanks in advance rob.