Israel's Strike On Syria: Sets Off A Nuclear Reaction Among the Anti-War Crowd

[photo:Reuters]Whether the Site Was Nuclear or Not, The Anti-War Left's Reaction Was
by Mondoreb

The news that the site the Israeli strike had hit was "nuclear" set off a nuclear reaction on the Left. It sounded like the droning of an air raid siren. First the story from ABC News:

Israeli officials believed that a target their forces bombed inside Syria last month was a nuclear facility, because they had detailed photographs taken by a possible spy inside the complex, ABC News has learned.

Word that Israel may have had a spy inside was nonsense to some. Evil Dick Cheney and his minions had to be involved. Or maybe it was the Bushitler at work again. Both thoughts whipped the Left into a epileptic meringue. From Newshoggers:

So basically these anonymous officials - called David Addington, Steven Hadley and Elliot Abrams - couldn't "assess" jack-sh*t about the building's origins even if it was a fully-functional reactor. But it wasn't - it was a building site that maybe someone should have mentioned their worries about to the IAEA. Nothing more and impossible to assess as anything more. And the Israelis bombed it while the Cheneyites held their glands for them.

This was followed by this confident assessment from American Street:

No nuclear material was present. Despite their claims to know what it was going to someday be, what evidence is there really? None. Speculation. And another government feels it has the right to attack based on a guess. Uh-huh.

To the anti-war crowd, who never met an American interest they'd defend, the attack at Pearl Harbor was a Bush plot.

Several days ago, first it was reported that the site was nuclear. From the Jerusalem Post:

In its first admission by a state official, Syria's ambassador to the UN confirmed that an air raid carried out by Israeli fighter jets deep in Syrian territory on September 6 was, indeed, an attack on a Syrian nuclear facility, Israel Radio reported Wednesday morning.

The Syrian envoy disclosed the nature of the target during a meeting of a UN committee where Israeli envoys were also present.

A senior source in the Foreign Ministry confirmed that the statement was made in New York by the Syrian official.

Then it was denied. From AFP:

"Although the interpreter suggested that the Syrian delegate had referred to an attack on a nuclear facility, what he said was 'like what happened on the 6 of September against my country'," Haq said after UN officials reviewed the Arabic tape of the remarks. "There was no use of the word nuclear".

Of course, first one member of the Syrian government denied the strike altogether in their own media at almost the same time another was confirming it. They were no help.

Whether the strike turns out to be against a nuclear facility or not, the knee-jerking yelp of the anti-war crew is not only mindless, it's predictable. Until mushroom clouds rise over Haifa, they aren't convinced that anything good can come of military options, the state of Israel or any American action or inaction involving either.

Israel struck a nuclear site? Deny it. Military force? Bad. Blogging by the same Evil Dick Cheney formula? Very very good!

One doesn't know for certain the facts relating to the Israeli strike. But the facts of the anti-war Left's reaction to any military actions is known: a droning chorus of those who don't know pretending that they do.



Back to Front Page.