What's new

Saudi Arabia behind Syria's Chemical Attacks claims Russia

Mercenary

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Dec 7, 2006
Messages
3,237
Reaction score
1
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
This is within the realm of possibility

Saudi Arabia?s 'Chemical Bandar' behind the Syrian chemical attacks? ? RT Op-Edge

Nothing the US claims about what happened in Syria adds up. We are being asked to believe an illogical story, when it is much more likely that it was Israel and Saudi Arabia who enabled the Obama Administration to threaten Syria with war.

The Obama Administration’s intelligence report on Syria was a rehash of Iraq. “There are lots of things that aren’t spelled out” in the four-page document, according to Richard Guthrie, the former project head of the Chemical and Biological Warfare Project of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. One piece of evidence is the alleged interception of Syrian government communications, but no transcripts were provided.

Just as with the Obama Administration’s speeches which all fall short of conclusively confirming what happened, nothing was categorically confirmed in the intelligence report. Actually it comes across more as a superficial college or university student’s paper put together by wordsmiths instead of genuine experts on the subject.

Going in a circle, the report even depends on “unnamed” social media and accounts as sources of evidence or data. Lacking transparency, it states that “there are accounts from international and Syrian medical personnel, videos, witness accounts, thousands of social media reports from at least 12 different locations in the Damascus area, journalist accounts and reports from highly credible non-governmental organizations.”

Chances are that these unnamed sources are actually foreign-funded insurgents, Israeli media, Saudi media, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights - which includes fighters in the ranks of the insurgency and salutes Saudi Arabia as a model democracy - or the NGO Doctors Without Borders. These are the same sources that have been supporting the insurgency and pushing for regime change and military intervention in Syria.

Moreover, one of the main sources of the intelligence and communication interceptions that are supposed to be a smoking gun is none other than Israel, which is notorious for doctoring and falsifying evidence.

The US intelligence report also claims to have advanced knowledge about the plans to launch a chemical weapons attack several days before it happened. A leading expert on chemical weapons, Jean Pascal Zanders, who until recently was a senior research fellow at the European Union’s Institute for Security Studies, asks why the US government did not tell the world about it and issue warnings about a chemical attack at that time.
An Israeli-Saudi-US conspiracy?

The US-supported anti-government forces fighting inside Syria are the ones that have a track record of using chemical weapons. Yet, Obama and company have said nothing.

Despite the anti-government forces accusations that the Syrian military launched a chemical weapon attack on Homs at Christmas in December 2012, CNN reported that the US military was training anti-government fighters with the securing and handling of chemical weapons. Under the name of the Destructive Wind Chemical Battalion, the insurgents themselves even threatened to use nerve gas and released a video where they killed rabbits as a demonstration of what they planned on doing in Syria.

According to the French newspaper Le Figaro, two brigades of anti-government fighters that were trained by the CIA, Israelis, Saudis, and Jordanians crossed from the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordon into Syria to launch an assault, respectively on August 17 and 19, 2013. The US must have invested quite a lot in training both anti-government brigades. If true, some may argue that their defeat prompted the chemical weapons attack in Damascus as a contingency plan to fall back on.

However, how they came by chemical weapons is another issue, but many trails lead to Saudi Arabia. According to the British Independent, it was Saudi Prince Bandar “that first alerted Western allies to the alleged use of sarin gas by the Syrian regime in February 2013.” Turkey would apprehend Syrian militants in its territory with sarin gas, which these terrorists planned on using inside Syria. On July 22 the insurgents would also overrun Al-Assal and kill all the witnesses as part of a cover-up.

A report by Yahya Ababneh, which was contributed to by Dale Gavlak, has collected the testimonies of witnesses who say that “certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the gas attack.”

The Mint Press News report adds an important dimension to the story, totally contradicting the claims of the US government. It quotes a female insurgent fighter who says things that make a link to Saudi Arabia clear. She says that those who provided them with weapons ‘didn’t tell them what these arms were or how to use them” and that they “didn’t know they were chemical weapons.” “When Saudi Prince Bandar gives such weapons to people, he must give them to those who know how to handle and use them,” she is quoted.

There is also another Saudi link in the report: “Abdel-Moneim said his son and 12 other rebels were killed inside a tunnel used to store weapons provided by a Saudi militant, known as Abu Ayesha, who was leading a fighting battalion. The father described the weapons as having a ‘tube-like structure’ while others were like a ‘huge gas bottle.’”
So it seems that the Saudis enabled the chemical attack while the Israelis provided them cover to ignite a full-scale war, or at the very least enable a bombing campaign against Damascus. Israel and Saudi Arabia have empowered the Obama Administration to threaten war on Syria.
Obama wants to change the balance of power in Syria

The moralistic language coming out of Washington is despicable posturing. The hypocrisy of the US government knows no bounds. It condemns the Syrian military for using cluster bombs while the United States sells them en mass to Saudi Arabia.

The UN inspectors entered Syria in the first place on the invitation of the government in Damascus. The Syrian government warned the UN for weeks that the anti-government militias were trying to use chemical weapons after they gained control of a chlorine factory east of Aleppo. As a precaution, the Syrian military consolidated all its chemical weapons into a handful of heavily guarded compounds to prevent anti-government forces reaching them. Yet, the insurgents launched a chemical weapon attack against the Syrian government’s forces in Khan Al-Assal on March 19, 2013. Turning the truth on its head, the insurgents and their foreign backers, including the US government, would try to blame the Syrian government for the chemical attack, but the UN’s investigator Carla Del Ponte would refute their claims as false in May after extensive work.

Concerning the alleged August attack the Obama Administration has been lying and contradicting itself for days. They say that traces of chemical weapons cannot be eliminated, but that the Syrian government destroyed that same evidence that cannot be eradicated. They want an investigation, but say they already have all the answers.

The claims that the Syrian government used chemical weapons in the suburb of Ghouta defy logic. Why would the Syrian government unnecessarily use chemical weapons in an area that it controls and shoot itself in the foot by presenting the US and its allies with a pretext to intervene? And of all the days it could unnecessarily use chemical weapons, the Obama administration wants us to believe that the Syrian government picked the day when United Nation inspectors arrived in Damascus.

Even the biased and misleading state-run British Broadcasting Corporation admitted that there was something strange about the event. The BBC’s own “Middle East Editor Jeremy Bowen says many will ask why the [Syrian] government would want to use such weapons at a time when [United Nations] inspectors are in the country and the military has been doing well militarily in the area around Damascus.”

The US is deliberately pointing the finger for the use of chemical weapons at the Syrian government.

American officials have a track record of lying to start wars against other countries. This has been the consistent modus operandi of the US from Vietnam to Yugoslavia, and from Iraq to Libya.

It is not Syria that is going against the international community, but the warmongers in Washington, which include the Obama Administration.

Washington is threatening to attack Syria as a means of prolonging the fighting inside Syria. The US government also wants to have a stronger hand in the country’s future negotiations by restoring the balance of power between the Syrian government and America’s anti-government insurgent allies, thus weakening the Syrian military and ending its winning momentum against the insurgency. If not softening Damascus up for the insurgents, America wants to level the equation and undermine the Syrian government before a final negotiation takes place.

Now is the time for the “responsibility to prevent war”—the real R2P—to come into play.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
 
instead of crying like children, Ruskies should go to help their lonely friend in ME

Russia can't do everything on its own. Eventually, they will lose their naval base, and the gas pipeline. This is going to be a huge setback for them!
 
@!eon,

Russian resources are increasingly being diverted to civil defence and underground nuclear survival shelter programs for population survival as there is strong anticipation of major nuclear and biological warfare and russia wants to make sure its casualties be less than 10 million,current civil defense system is large but still there will be 30-40 million deaths in event of nuclear and biological warfare(While West and Arabs who do not have underground shelter nuclear civil defense capability will have losses over 1 billion). At the most there might be a few military divisions in Tartus(rumors of Pskov VDV in Tartus) ,but as of I cannot say.At least the conventional forces with exception of VDV divisions are not prepared for such an undertaking.


To me its a better undertaking that russian federation continues population survival preparations for a nuclear aftermath and hardening of industrial targets.A good part of our military production is already in underground complexes like Yamantau .Syria I see as a lost cause as russia does not have land route and syria is surrounded by hostile nations.By 2015-16, I believe the nationwide civil defence appartus will be ready for undertaking a massive nuclear type war with casualty reduction in magnitude of less than 10 million.Though ,I hope Russia dilutes its population density of major cities It will reduce casualties even further. ,as I feel Moscow is a high risk zone as NATO has targetted over a 1000 nuclear warheads to destroy the underground military command outposts in Moscow.But then we cannot say , as Russia has an active unofficial ABM defense system whose evidence was documented by DIA senior analyst William T. Lee which was proven right when we destroyed the chelyabinsk meteor whose speed was 30 km/second or 108,000 km/h.

If we can do that to a meteor , what will we do to NATO tridents whose terminal phase speed is 10 km/second or 36,000 km/h.
But the coming world war will be one sided and in our favor .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Russia has no rivalry with KSA the only point is Russians do not want Syria to be attacked in a hurry

Except US all other countries feel Russia is cakewalk over in a war and how much this wishful thinking may cost them dearly is any ones guess. Its the internal mess created by Arab countries them selves and it would be better for world peace if they sort out this mess among them selves without involving US and Western powers
 
@!eon,

Russian resources are increasingly being diverted to civil defence and underground nuclear survival shelter programs for population survival as there is strong anticipation of major nuclear and biological warfare and russia wants to make sure its casualties be less than 10 million,current civil defense system is large but still there will be 30-40 million deaths in event of nuclear and biological warfare(While West and Arabs who do not have underground shelter nuclear civil defense capability will have losses over 1 billion). At the most there might be a few military divisions in Tartus(rumors of Pskov VDV in Tartus) ,but as of I cannot say.At least the conventional forces with exception of VDV divisions are not prepared for such an undertaking.


To me its a better undertaking that russian federation continues population survival preparations for a nuclear aftermath and hardening of industrial targets.A good part of our military production is already in underground complexes like Yamantau .Syria I see as a lost cause as russia does not have land route and syria is surrounded by hostile nations.By 2015-16, I believe the nationwide civil defence appartus will be ready for undertaking a massive nuclear type war with casualty reduction in magnitude of less than 10 million.Though ,I hope Russia dilutes its population density of major cities It will reduce casualties even further. ,as I feel Moscow is a high risk zone as NATO has targetted over a 1000 nuclear warheads to destroy the underground military command outposts in Moscow.But then we cannot say , as Russia has an active unofficial ABM defense system whose evidence was documented by DIA senior analyst William T. Lee which was proven right when we destroyed the chelyabinsk meteor whose speed was 30 km/second or 108,000 km/h.

If we can do that to a meteor , what will we do to NATO tridents whose terminal phase speed is 10 km/second or 36,000 km/h.
But the coming world war will be one sided and in our favor .

LOL, so clueless. Then again, you're an Indian who are prone to delusions, yours are probably exacerbated by the potato vodka diet Russians keep feeding you.

Any sources for Chelyabinks interception by ABM? Russian air defense technicians are so inadept they'd blow a mateor over the city of Chelyabinsk injuring hundreds? Or maybe due to friction and stresses the meteor imploded on it's own?

Also, ABM around Moscow are nuclear tipped warheads, and there's nothing unofficial about them. Rest of your post is pointless garbage, sort of like you.

r9iuzl.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I thought Israel did it,what happend to that?
Now we blame KSA instead of Israel,what a change events huh?:omghaha::omghaha::omghaha:
 
Some reports suggesting the chemicals were of Qatari origin, I am sure someone will find some lead pointing the chemicals were shipped to Qatar by the Taliban as diplomatic cargo when the Taliban office was opened in Doha who in turn got it from Pakistani Taliban who in turn got it from ISI. And all this was financed by Al Jazeerah.
 
@!eon,

Russian resources are increasingly being diverted to civil defence and underground nuclear survival shelter programs for population survival as there is strong anticipation of major nuclear and biological warfare and russia wants to make sure its casualties be less than 10 million,current civil defense system is large but still there will be 30-40 million deaths in event of nuclear and biological warfare(While West and Arabs who do not have underground shelter nuclear civil defense capability will have losses over 1 billion). At the most there might be a few military divisions in Tartus(rumors of Pskov VDV in Tartus) ,but as of I cannot say.At least the conventional forces with exception of VDV divisions are not prepared for such an undertaking.


To me its a better undertaking that russian federation continues population survival preparations for a nuclear aftermath and hardening of industrial targets.A good part of our military production is already in underground complexes like Yamantau .Syria I see as a lost cause as russia does not have land route and syria is surrounded by hostile nations.By 2015-16, I believe the nationwide civil defence appartus will be ready for undertaking a massive nuclear type war with casualty reduction in magnitude of less than 10 million.Though ,I hope Russia dilutes its population density of major cities It will reduce casualties even further. ,as I feel Moscow is a high risk zone as NATO has targetted over a 1000 nuclear warheads to destroy the underground military command outposts in Moscow.But then we cannot say , as Russia has an active unofficial ABM defense system whose evidence was documented by DIA senior analyst William T. Lee which was proven right when we destroyed the chelyabinsk meteor whose speed was 30 km/second or 108,000 km/h.

If we can do that to a meteor , what will we do to NATO tridents whose terminal phase speed is 10 km/second or 36,000 km/h.
But the coming world war will be one sided and in our favor .

Dude are you Russian..?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Russia can't do everything on its own. Eventually, they will lose their naval base, and the gas pipeline. This is going to be a huge setback for them!
Failure of their foreign polices. They should rethink about these
World will be rearranging foes and allies in 2014
 
Failure of their foreign polices. They should rethink about these
World will be rearranging foes and allies in 2014
They will miserably fail.

I wish you guys all a bright future :pakistan:
 
Pakistani anchor MUBASHIR LUQMAN exposed SAUDI ARABIA= YAHUDI ARABIA ND SAUDI FAMILY= YAHUDI FAMILY undercover JEWISH FAMILY big time in his program KHARA SUCH ON september 2 2013 he showed the videos of CIA REBELS IN SYRIA loading SAUDI supplied CHEMICAL WEAPONS nd hitting it on SYRIAN POPULATION ND SYRIAN CIVILIANS.
 
LOL, so clueless. Then again, you're an Indian who are prone to delusions, yours are probably exacerbated by the potato vodka diet Russians keep feeding you.

Any sources for Chelyabinks interception by ABM? Russian air defense technicians are so inadept they'd blow a mateor over the city of Chelyabinsk injuring hundreds? Or maybe due to friction and stresses the meteor imploded on it's own?

Also, ABM around Moscow are nuclear tipped warheads, and there's nothing unofficial about them. Rest of your post is pointless garbage, sort of like you.

r9iuzl.jpg

Any sources for Chelyabinks interception by ABM?
----
Urals meteorite allegedly intercepted by Russia’s air defensePhoto: RIA Novosti
A massive meteorite crash shook the Urals region in central Russia early Friday, shattering windows and prompting panic in three major cities. According to some reports, the meteor was intercepted by the air defense complex at the Urzhumka village near the Russian city of Chelyabinsk, when a salvo missile allegedly burst the “shooting star” at an altitude of 20 kilometers.
Read more: Urals meteorite allegedly intercepted by Russia
----

If you were following the initial coverage by local russian newspapers like Znak even RT and almost all major russian news stations were reporting the statements of the aerospacedefense complex commanders in Chelyabinsk,till there was a gag order given by the higher russian authorities and EMERCOM who later started denying any such interception as such events are extremely sensitive for National security reasons and could easily become international issues where official military capablities of Russia would be questioned .


Russian air defense technicians are so inadept they'd blow a mateor over the city of Chelyabinsk injuring hundreds?

Considering that intial reports stated the weight of the meteor at 9000 tons and the blast force was 600 kilotons or 30 times that of hiroshima ,I will say that commanders were extremely skilled in destroying the meteor , so they saved thousands of lives with their prowess.



Also, ABM around Moscow are nuclear tipped warheads, and there's nothing unofficial about them. Rest of your post is pointless garbage, sort of like you.

Who's talking about Moscow ? I am talking about the entire Russian Federation.

We have over 10,000 nuclear ABM according to William T Lee(former senior level DIA analyst who was responsible the ABM capabilities of the Moscow ABM ),Refer to ABM Treaty Illusion and Delusion...

This is on the basis of that work:
according to the new Russian source material, Soviet designers worked around the slow speed of the interceptors by passing target data to them from huge battle-management radars positioned thousands of kilometers away. That gave them enough warning to launch the interceptors in time to kill the incoming warheads. The Russians also made clear that the main ABM system protecting Moscow was just as dependent as the SAMs/ ABMs on receiving target-tracking data from distant battle-management radars.

The Moscow-system missiles, the SA-5 and SA-10/12, were tipped with small nuclear warheads so they didn't require the incredible bullet-hitting-bullet complexity of the U.S. systems developed during the Clinton years. U.S. spy satellites repeatedly identified tactical nuclear-warhead storage sites at the interceptor bases spread across the Soviet empire.

Prior to 1967 there was a consensus that the SA-5 could be a SAM/ABM, with the Hen Houses as the battle-management radars. After 1967, however, the CIA argued that the SA-5 was only a SAM, and that the Hen Houses provided only early warning of a missile attack. By about 1970 the majority agreed. Subsequently only a handful of Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) analysts, plus occasionally the Air Force and a few Department of Defense officials, made the case for Soviet national ABM defenses based on the SA-5/SA-10 SAM/ABMs and the Hen House/LPARs as battle-management radars.

The CIA relied almost exclusively on the "hard evidence" from U.S. technical collection systems despite the fact that such evidence was inconclusive and plagued by major "intelligence gaps." Now Russian sources have filled in most of the intelligence gaps, thus refuting the CIA's analysis on every critical issue.

* * *

From the mid-1950s until 1991 the Soviets followed a two track program: ABM systems designed by Kisun'ko and his successors to protect the apex of the party-state nomenklatura at Moscow with battle-management radars (Dog House, Cat House), from NIIDAR, and SAM/ABM systems designed for nationwide deployment by Raspletin and Bunkin with battle-management radars (Hen House, LPAR) from Mints' RTI, which also designed the Pillbox multi-functional radar in the ABM-3 system for Moscow. Although the SAM/ABMs could be relocated fairly quickly, however, and could be deployed nationally at relatively low cost, the battle-management radars were expensive and fixed.

* * *

Construction of the second-generation LPAR battle-management radars began in 1972 as negotiations on the ABM Treaty were completed. The U.S. delegation's attempt to limit ABM battle-management radars resulted in agreeing to construction of 18 such radars (article III), which was precisely the number the Soviets needed for redundant coverage by both first-generation Hen House and second-generation LPAR battle-management radars. The LPARs provided more precise target tracking to enhance the effectiveness of SA-5/10 SAM/ABMs but did little to improve early warning.

* * *

When the Soviet Empire went out with a whimper in 1991, about 10,000 SA-5/10 interceptor missiles were operational at more than 250 complexes, and 15 of 18 planned battle-management radars--nine Hen House and six LPARs--were operational.


Center for Security Policy | Clinton’s New,‘Broad Interpretation’ of A.B. M. Treaty Designed to Protect Al Gore, Not the American People
It seems clear that Senator McConnell, his colleagues, and the major media have not grasped an essential fact: the Russians already have an ABM system. They already have an advantage over the United States. This explains why they are so opposed to changes in the treaty that would let the United States do the same.

The U.S. position comes down to an offer to help the Russians improve their illegal ABM system if they would change the treaty and let us build one legally. If this sounds incredible, then you are not familiar with the evidence assembled by William T. Lee, a former high-ranking DIA and CIA official who wrote the 1997 book, The ABM Treaty Charade: A Study in Elite Illusion and Delusion. In what Lee calls “one of the major U.S. intelligence failures of the Cold War,” he says that U.S. still doesn?t recognize the existence of a Russian national anti-ballistic missile defense. He says the U.S. intelligence community refuses to recognize the Russian SA-5 interceptor as anything other than an anti-aircraft weapon. In fact, however, some former Russian officials have acknowledged that SA-5s can shoot down ballistic missiles. It is a dual purpose weapon.
Foreign Aid For Russia’s ABM System





A recent body of literature suggests that the Soviet Union actively engaged in ABM research and deployment in violation of the ABM Treaty. As retired CIA analyst William Lee points out, even when the ABM Treaty was signed, National Intelligence Estimates from the 1960s showed that Soviet “Hen House” radars were capable of battle management. That meant they gave the Soviet SA-5 surface-to-air missile the ability to track incoming American missiles and predict where they would go—giving them anti-ballistic missile capability.(4) After the ABM Treaty was signed, the Soviets enhanced this system by building their large phased-array radars (LPARs). The Russians claimed this was simply a defense for their 100 ICBMs based in and around Moscow, hence allowable under the ABM Treaty’s 1974 Protocol. But it was more than that. LPARs are a national, if limited, missile defense system built in violation of the treaty.(5)

Other evidence suggests that the Soviets went beyond building an ABM system. In his 1976 study of Soviet civil defense, Leon Goure described a Soviet strategic view that stands in stark contrast to the spirit of the ABM Treaty and the MAD doctrine. Evidently, the Soviets believed that nuclear war was possible—and winnable. It organized its military and civil administration to maximize its chances of winning, should war ever occur. To that end, the Soviets built massive underground facilities, inherited by Russians today, where military leaders and political elites could survive nuclear attack. They made extensive plans to evacuate civilians, and stockpiled strategic foodstuffs. Goure concluded that the Soviets rejected the idea of mutually assured destruction as inherently unstable. Instead, they worked toward strategic superiority.(6)

Throughout the 1970s the Soviet Union, more extensively than the U.S., engaged in advanced research on anti-ballistic missile systems, especially space-based systems. By 1976 the Soviets had an extensive effort underway at OKB Kometa, the industrial design facility that produced the first Russian anti-satellite system back in the 1960s.(7) After condemning President Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative in 1983, Soviet Premier Yuri Andropov stepped up work on the Soviet space-based ABM program, at the same time initiating a diplomatic mission to ban such weapons and announcing a unilateral moratorium on orbiting any type of anti-satellite interceptor.(8)

The casual observer might dismiss such Cold War Soviet behavior as unrepresentative of the new Russia. Yet despite a faltering economy and ostensible efforts to liberalize politically, Russia possesses and continues to modernize a massive arsenal of ICBMs, sea-launched ballistic missiles, and sea-launched cruise missiles. And on a number of occasions, the Russian military establishment has boasted publicly of its ability to beat any U.S. missile defense.

Looking at Russia today, William Lee points out, “The Russians realize strategic nuclear forces are the only military counter to the U.S. that they can afford. Like the Soviets, the Russians understand that the side with both strategic offensive and defensive forces has a great advantage over the side relying solely on offensive weapons. They also understand that advantage multiplies as offensive arsenals are reduced by START agreements. That’s why the Soviets built strategic defenses to the limits of the ABM Treaty and beyond.”

What is unclear for today is whether at the end of the Cold War the Russians abandoned the earlier Soviet strategy of nuclear superiority or whether they adopted the same policy of mutually assured destruction held by the United States. The Russians continue to build huge, deep underground nuclear command and control facilities near the Ural mountains, suggesting continuity with Soviet doctrine. In any case, such uncertainty calls into question a U.S. nuclear deterrence strategy based on mutually assured destruction.

I guess that will explain to you the nuclear ABM capability of Russia.The same one that destroyed a meteorite having speed of 30 km/second or 108,000 km/h

OL, so clueless. Then again, you're an Indian who are prone to delusions, yours are probably exacerbated by the potato vodka diet Russians keep feeding you.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...ical-attacks-claims-russia.html#ixzz2e67XgDEQ

Clearly , the above evidence indicates you are delusional..why has USA aimed 48 nuclear warheads at Chekhov Underground command outpost in Moscow. Maybe you should why NATO aimed 500 nuclear warheads on Moscow in Cold war and now aims 1000 of them on Moscow.

Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
Russia does follow the above doctrine pretty well.
 
Back
Top Bottom