U.S. says Syrian gov't forces fired Scud missiles at rebels

By ROBERT BURNS

World Dec. 13, 2012 - 10:30AM JST ( 10 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Order by Time Order by Popularity

10 Comments

-1

technosphereDec. 13, 2012 - 12:04PM JST

They did it right.
-3

ubikwitDec. 13, 2012 - 01:23PM JST

“The idea that the Syrian regime would launch missiles, within its borders, at its own people, is stunning, desperate and a completely disproportionate military escalation,” Carney said.

The notion expressed by Carney's statement would seem to imply that the regime shouldn't try to survive and win the conflict. That is rather unfathomable logic, not to mention a bit insipid.

What he skirts mentioning is the real danger of scuds loaded with chemical payloads being launched at neighboring countries that have been arming and otherwise supporting the Sunni rebels.

But the media doesn't want people to be concerned about that, they might call for a more moderate approach than regime change.
1

SuperLibDec. 13, 2012 - 05:16PM JST

ubikwit: The notion expressed by Carney's statement would seem to imply that the regime shouldn't try to survive and win the conflict.

That's an odd statement coming from someone from the West. It would appear that firing missiles on your own people makes some kind of sense to you.
-2

ubikwitDec. 13, 2012 - 05:36PM JST

It would appear that firing missiles on your own people makes some kind of sense to you.

I don't necessarily agree with the statement that they are "his own people". The majority are Sunni Islamists, and a good number are Sunni militants that have infiltrated from other countries with funding from other Sunni countries.

You and all of the other cheerleaders for the rebels have been consistently trying to dumb down this discussion with your repeated cliches from the start of this conflict.

Grow up.
-1

MadvertsDec. 13, 2012 - 08:12PM JST

" don't necessarily agree with the statement that they are "his own people". "

They're Syrians, and Assad is the dictator of Syria so there are no technicalities about calling them his own people.

"The notion expressed by Carney's statement would seem to imply that the regime shouldn't try to survive and win the conflict."

The Scud missile is a tactical ballistic missile, that you would defend its' use by the dictator on his own citizens that have taken up arms to get rid of the Assad dynasty is outrageous, but par for the course I realize. I wonder if you'll stick to that if/when Assad resorts to using WMD - the trend of using heavier weapons the more he loses more ground points to him doing just that....
-1

ubikwitDec. 13, 2012 - 08:23PM JST

I f he uses WMD it won't be on the rebels, but on their backers.

The forces that Assad is fighting include a large percentage of a pan-Islamist movement across the ME and beyond, it is not clear that Syrians even account for a majority. And even if they do, the history of conflict between Assad's Alewites and the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria was well known. Furthermore, the so-called marshal law in Syria was no worse than that in Bahrain or a number of other counties that are US allies, such as Ethiopia.

The way I see it, Westerners that are aware of the overall state of affairs that are calling Assad a dictator are duplicitous hypocrites with ulterior motives.
-1

Thunderbird2Dec. 13, 2012 - 09:47PM JST

Wherever your sympathies lie in this civil war, there's no denying that the rebels are Islamists. Saw an interview with a rebel officer during the week wearing a headband with a Koran line on it... when asked if the rebels were Jihadists he denied it. Another one with a similar headband said Assad must die. Plus there are all those scenes of rebels shouting "Alluha Akbar" as they fire off another volley of shots, a mortar or an RPG.

Just saying...
0

SuperLibDec. 14, 2012 - 12:35AM JST

ubikwit: You and all of the other cheerleaders for the rebels have been consistently trying to dumb down this discussion with your repeated cliches from the start of this conflict. Grow up.

I think most people see the situation for what is it, and that's 3 possible outcomes. One is where Assad keeps killing and stays in power. The second is where the rebels take over the country and install some kind of Islamic state. And a third is some kind of solution where neither Assad or Islam are in power and some kind of movement towards democracy is established.

I think a vast majority of people here support the third outcome and you probably know that. We also know that you support the first. That's the real debate here. You seem highly sensitive to anyone who places any kind of blame on Assad, meanwhile comments about the CIA and Blackwater and French troops fly safely under your radar.

People know an agenda when they see one. Obviously you are here to inject any criticism of the West that's possible. That's your angle. Calling us all supporters of an Islamic state is your way of creating a straw man so you can continue along with your script, a script that includes comments explaining the logic of firing missiles into populated areas. People aren't buying it.
0

MadvertsDec. 14, 2012 - 02:57AM JST

"I f he uses WMD it won't be on the rebels, but on their backers."

Actually, you have no idea what the nasty dictator will do when the last door finally closes. The trend, as I already stated, is erring towards the use of heavier and heavier weapons the further the dictator loses his grip.

"Furthermore, the so-called marshal law in Syria was no worse than that in Bahrain or a number of other counties that are US allies, such as Ethiopia."

Have any of these countries you cite used Scud missiles on their own people? Or were you just bringing in another strawman?

"The way I see it, Westerners that are aware of the overall state of affairs that are calling Assad a dictator are duplicitous hypocrites with ulterior motives."

People are calling Assad a dictator for no other reason than he is one. I find it hilarious that you people take umbridge with Dear Leader's appelation.
-1

ubikwitDec. 14, 2012 - 09:57PM JST

possible outcomes. One is where Assad keeps killing and stays in power. The second is where the rebels take over the country and install some kind of Islamic state. And a third is some kind of solution where neither Assad or Islam are in power and some kind of movement towards democracy is established.

I'd say that there is also a possibility that he might opt to try and split Syria up, if he has the military force to enforce such an option. I don't think that the Alewites or other minorities want to live under a Sunni dominated government.

The people that ignored the sectarian divide in the country before deciding to support one side over the other made a strategic miscalculation, as that divide has been exacerbated, to say the least. Of course, it remains to see what will develop. The coalition supported by the West is not seen as viable by the majority of Syrians, not matter what Obama says about it being inclusive, etc.

Assad is being beset by car bomb attacks, which are difficult to counter, as they are terrorist attacks. Personally, using scuds is not as reprehensible as the car bombs--nor as effective. But those are small, short-range scuds, not much more powerful than conventional artillery, I should imagine. though I'm not very knowledgeable about such weapons.