Israel could face retaliation for Syrian raids

http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=287015

Syria's President Bashar Al-Assad says his country might retaliate against Israel for an Israeli air strike inside Syria last month.

It is the first time Mr Assad has mentioned the attack which he called a sign of Israel's antipathy towards peace.

Mr Assad has told the BBC that Syria had its means to retaliate, which he has said could be political or by other means.

He said retaliation did not mean bomb for bomb or missile for missile.
more...

tit for tat

folks could have stayed on his good side by ignoring the attempt to move atomic weapons to Hez?

And to punish the west he will continue to try the dirty bomb approach to relations with others, as well as killing MP's in other countries.

Seems Mr Assad has cause - he is indeed the victim.

so what Hezbollah or Assad are going to nuke Tel aviv? That sounds good to those who do not understand the proximity, Syria, or Hezballah in Lebanon nuking Israel is about the equivalent of Delaware nuking Vermont, maybe closer. Damascus and Tel aviv are about 60 miles apart, that presents a problem for either side in using nukes, unless of course along with that claim is also the assumption that all Arab Muslims are suicidal or at least the ones in Syria or Hezballah.

have a major blast or even damage associated with it - it is a terror weapon where folks knowing radiation is in the air from the blast - and that there is no way to avoid that radiation - and folks go into total panic because there was a blast that put the radiation in the air.

Downwind folks are annoyed - see Russian power plant problems - but there is no panic.

I agree a major hydrogen bomb blast will only be used as a good by card by Israel - and only if they are about to be destroyed - and then there are likely to be many such blasts all over the middle east (and I agree that suicidal gestures like this are nuts - but heh - this is the middle east).

The main US atomic worry are "dirty bombs" (meaning the addition of a cover shield or vial of highly radioactive material to the conventional bomb) - as actual atomic small bombs are hard to make and still not that small to transport and near impossible to hide.

For the record we do have "small" "atomic" (atomic is in quotes since while they are referred to as such I doubt there is a real atomic blast - but I could be wrong - as my real info dates back to the revelation that Reagan had leaked the designs to the Chinese and that they had published those designs in 88 - and our CIA admission in 92/03 of the 88 publication event having occurred) bombs as field ammo/artillery that would "take out" a small area (no more than a 5 mile square area) and leave the area around more or less unhurt - Hell - NATO I believe has a supply.

Hamas has but on a much smaller basis, I do not think Syria , Iran , or N, Korea would be supplying these materials however, as you pointed out NATO has these devices too and would use them in such an event.
The repercussions for the bombers and who ever supplied them would be so great that as to prohibit it from ever happening.

:freak:

Sadly, this is the way things work in the Middle East.

Israel would no longer be murdering Palestinians at a 10:1 ratio.