Destroyed Hezbollah Weapons Depot Reportedly Held Chemical Missiles


#1

Destroyed Hezbollah Weapons Depot Reportedly Held Chemical Missiles
Zach Pontz
December 20th 2012
TheCuttingEdgeNews.com
Algemeiner

Two days after a mysterious explosion at a Hezbollah weapons depot in southern Lebanon, the Kuwaiti website Al Jarida is reporting that Israel bombed the site because Syria had transferred missiles there that were capable of being equipped with chemical warheads. The missiles had been moved into Lebanon from Syria in the last several months and were being held inside warehouses owned by farmers in the area.

The report also claimed that Hezbollah has many additional warehouses across Lebanon that are used for the same purpose. In October another weapons storage facility in the town of Baalbek was destroyed after an explosion. The AFP said that four Syrians were killed in the blast.

Here’s the real face of the Israel-hating Arabs, for those willing to see and acknowledge it.


#2

BUT BUT BUT PETE!! did NBC report it? did CBS, report it? did ABC report it? who reported it? we can find all the weapons and chemical caches in the Arab world, and nobody will acknowledge it. It’s not politically expedient, don’cha know? Even the Liberal face of America will never admit to the growing evidence of WMD’s throughout the Arab terrorist groups. That Iran has a strong and soon ready nuclear weapon program.


#3

And yet the Union of Nitwits (UN), continue to point the finger at Israel while giving Hezbollah and Hamas a pat on the back


#4

I don’t see why this info should be taken at face value, coming from some random Kuwaiti source.


#5

Liberals always unquestioningly believe CCN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, BBC, Al-Jazeera, etc. What makes this source less credible?


#6

Like I said: … for those willing to see and acknowledge it.

Al-Jarida is a Kuwaiti daily newspaper owned by a journalist who has also been a President of the Arab Parliament and the Kuwaiti National Assembly. Not exactly “some random Kuwaiti source”, and probably not exactly friendly to Israel. Since you didn’t bother to learn about Al-Jarida - very easily done, BTW - before denigrating it, Volk, might that be because the information Al-Jarida reported doesn’t fit your views of that part of the world?


#7

It says missiles capable of being equipped with chemical warheads. Not missiles with chemical warheads. The article’s title is a bit misleading.

That being said, it’d be cool if Syria would not give missiles to people that want to kill other people.


#8

Liberals always have to defend those who want to kill others. Apparently it is those evil christians who are to blame for all the killing in the world


#9

I said it’d be cool if Syria DIDN’T give missiles to people who want to kill other people. I’m condemning both the syrians and Hezbollah.


#10

Liberals always have to defend those who want to kill others. Apparently it is those evil christians who are to blame for all the killing in the world

[sarcasm] Wow, sam! You crammed an ad hominem argument, a strawman argument and a non sequitor into two sentences. Being a Viscount of Verbosity I admire your succinctness. [/sarcasm]

Concur that the title is inaccurate, BOP, especially given that the article gives more complete info. “Destroyed Hezbollah Weapons Depot Reportedly Held Chemical Missiles” could instead have been “Destroyed Hezbollah Weapons Depot Reportedly Held Chemical-Capable Missiles**”. I suppose that longer article title might have exceeded some title length limit coded into the site’s SW - e.g., vBulletin, the SW used by RO. does have such a limit for thread titles. I’m inclined to doubt it, though, or if the SW does, I doubt the title I suggested would be too long. As for the way I posted the OP, another news/politics discussion site I frequent has a hard-and-fast requirement that threads based on news articles have the same title as the article. It’s for copyright law compliance, and it can also help reduce duplicate threads. I follow that rule here (unless vBulletin truncates an article title).


#11

Oh, it’s not your fault. I just found it funny that the article title gets debunked by the article itself.

But still, it’s good that it was destroyed. I know that they were worried about illegitimate groups acquiring those chemical weapons.


#12

[quote=“PeteS_in_CA, post:6, topic:37589”]
Like I said: ***… for those willing to see and acknowledge it.***Al-Jarida is a Kuwaiti daily newspaper owned by a journalist who has also been a President of the Arab Parliament and the Kuwaiti National Assembly. Not exactly “some random Kuwaiti source”, and probably not exactly friendly to Israel. Since you didn’t bother to learn about Al-Jarida - very easily done, BTW - before denigrating it, Volk, might that be because the information Al-Jarida reported doesn’t fit your views of that part of the world?
[/quote]Kuwait is a Saudi-aligned country (Saudi, qatar, etc arm the rebels, and not just the ‘moderate’ ones), so of course Kuwaitis with higher up political ties will take an anti Syrian stance. The press from all over the world has been creating the spectre of potential chemical weapons use by Assads forces, I believe this may be just another bit of disinformation on that front.


#13

To be sure, pretty much any/every source of “news” from the ME is fraught with bias. The loonier and otherwise patently false stuff from Arab-Iranian-Muslim sources tends to have Israel as the target rather than each other, however. And outsiders to forget that rivals - Sunni-Shia, Arab-Persian - do band together where common enemies are the focus. That Kuwait and the Saudis take a hostile view of or sees Syria as a regional rival isn’t clear to me. Iraq and Jordan lie between Syria and the Arabian Peninsula.

OTOH, Syria, the Saudis (and possibly Kuwait) have a common object-of-hatred in view in this particular case: Israel, who was the target of those missiles.

If you have serious information that contradicts these missiles having been chemical-capable, please post it, volk. As for the report in the OP article, I don’t see the source having significant bias (except possibly anti-Israel, which would make the report an admission-against-interest). And the report is entirely consistent with the Arab-Palis’ longterm strategy and tactic of promiscuously rocket-attacking civilians. So I see the report as quite credible.


#14

Syria is at odds with the Saudis by proxy their allies, Kuwait. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are US allies, for all political and military purposes they do not have Israel as an “object of hatred”. That is why I find it more likely that they would take measures to further destabilise the Assad regime, which they are actively fighting, than take some actions aimed at an important US ally.

That Kuwait and the Saudis take a hostile view of or sees Syria as a regional rival isn’t clear to me.

The Saudis and their allies have been the main supplier, besides Turkey, of the anti-Assad insurgency since foreign aid started pouring in, this is well known.

Most of the arms shipped at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to supply Syrian rebel groups fighting the government of Bashar al-Assad