E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSPentagon sources tell NBC News that the Syrian military is awaiting final orders to launch chemical weapons against its own people after precursor chemicals for deadly sarin gas were loaded into aerial bombs. NBC's Jim Miklaszewski reports.
Updated at 8:20 a.m. ET: The Syrian military is prepared to use chemical weapons against its own people and is awaiting final orders from President Bashar Assad, U.S. officials told NBC News on Wednesday.
The military has loaded the precursor chemicals for sarin, a deadly nerve gas, into aerial bombs that could be dropped onto the Syrian people from dozens of fighter-bombers, the officials said.
As recently as Tuesday, officials had said there was as yet no evidence that the process of mixing the "precursor" chemicals had begun. But Wednesday, they said their worst fears had been confirmed: The nerve agents were locked and loaded inside the bombs.
Sarin is an extraordinarily lethal agent. Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's forces killed 5,000 Kurds with a single sarin attack on Halabja in 1988.
U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton reiterated U.S. warnings to Assad not to use chemical weapons, saying he would be crossing "a red line" if he did so.
So far, intelligence sources say, bombs loaded with the components of sarin haven't yet been loaded onto planes. NBC's Jim Miklaszewski reports.
Speaking Wednesday at NATO headquarters in Brussels, Clinton said the Syrian government was on the brink of collapse, raising the prospect that "an increasingly desperate Assad regime" might turn to chemical weapons or that the banned weapons could fall into other hands.
"Ultimately, what we should be thinking about is a political transition in Syria and one that should start as soon as possible," Clinton said. "We believe their fall is inevitable. It is just a question of how many people have to die before that occurs."
Aides told NBC News that Clinton was expected next week to officially recognize the main opposition movement, the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces, with which she is scheduled to meet in Morocco. Britain, France, Turkey and some key Arab leaders have already recognized the opposition.
Fighting intensified Wednesday in the 21-month civil war, which has left 40,000 people dead. The U.N. withdrew its personnel from Damascus, saying conditions were too dangerous.
Kevin Lamarque / AFP - Getty Images
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, speaking Wednesday at NATO headquarters in Brussels, said the fall of Syrian President Bashar Assad's government was "inevitable."
The government said this week that it wouldn't use chemical weapons on its own people after President Barack Obama warned that doing so would be "totally unacceptable."
But U.S. officials said this week that the government had ordered its Chemical Weapons Corps to "be prepared," which Washington interpreted as a directive to begin bringing together the components needed to weaponize Syria's chemical stockpiles.
Watch World News videos on NBCNews.com
U.S. officials had long believed that the Syrian government was stockpiling the banned chemical weapons before it acknowledged possessing them this summer.
NBC News reported in July that U.S. intelligence agencies believed that in addition to sarin, Syria had access to tabun, a chemical nerve agent, as well as traditional chemical weapons like mustard gas and hydrogen cyanide.
Officials told NBC News at the time that the Syrian government was moving the outlawed weapons around the country, leaving foreign intelligence agencies unsure where they might end up.
Syria is one of only seven nations that hasn't ratified the 1992 Chemical Weapons Convention, the arms control agreement that outlaws the production, stockpiling and use of such weapons.
Bombshells filled with chemicals can be carried by Syrian Air Force fighter-bombers, in particular Sukhoi-22/20, MiG-23 and Sukhoi-24 aircraft. In addition, some reports indicate that unguided short-range Frog-7 artillery rockets may be capable of carrying chemical payloads.
In terms of longer-range delivery systems, Syria has a few dozen SS-21 ballistic missiles with a maximum range of 72 miles; 200 Scud-Bs, with a maximum range of 180 miles; and 60 to 120 Scud-Cs, with a maximum range of 300 miles, all of which are mobile and are capable of carrying chemical weapons, according U.S. intelligence officials.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton echoed President Obama's recent vow to take action if Syrian President Bashar Assad uses chemical weapons during the ongoing clashes within his country. U.S. officials are also concerned about the rising influence of extremist groups within Syria. NBC's Andrea Mitchell reports.
More world stories from NBC News:
- Sex mobs target Egypt's women
- Researchers: North America least likely region for terrorism
- Africa's lion population plummets, study finds
- Supporters of Islamist president push Egypt to tipping point
- Bread and expired milk: School lunch scandal sparks outrage in China
- Experts: Antarctica, Greenland ice melting into sea
Leave a Comment:
If they use those weapons we need to light up everyone who ever even smiled at a member of the Assad regime; the world has to know that the horrors of chemical warfare will never be allowed to reenter the world.
Our inaction now would be tantamount to consent and soon these weapons will be used against us.
Never again
U.S. Military: It's coming right for us!
or that the banned weapons could fall into other hands.
Such as the hands of the jihadis fighting Assad, who we are so foolishly supporting. Will we never learn?
IF this is true, and one Sarin bomb is dropped, then Syria will face the wrath of the US military, one that will truly be shock and awe.
Hmmm. Just as in Iraq, this warrants no intervention from the US because Syria has done nothing to the US and this is none of our business... according to the libs in charge.
Don't you read the papers Bronson? "Libs" are the party of compassion. Compassion has no borders.
The story of the gentleman getting hit by the subway, while people stood by and did nothing, made me sick. Were you one of them that was on that platform Bronson? That is what you are saying, right? You want us to stand by while innocent people die?
I would rather die a pauper knowing I did right by people than have all the money in the world with a stick up my...
We should have helped liberate Syria a year ago but unfortunately we had elections to worry about. Enough is enough. It is time to take out Assad. Enough genocide has taken place. And under no circumstances shall we allow these weapons to be used. If Assad uses them, we then go and assassinate him and all of the Syrian regime's leaders. Enough is enough.
So, the red-line for Syria is if Assad uses chemical weapons, but the red-line for Libya was the potential for Qaddafi to kill Libyans?
Isn't it easy for you Democrats to send other Americans children to war over two Muslim factions that are having a war.
You really can't be serious. When either side of the Muslims involved would love to take away your right to live as an American.
When civilians are being slaughtered we do not ask their religion before caring.
Who knows what the truth is. If it's true and they are used, we need to take them out, and take them out hard so the world knows we are serious. Otherwise, don't bother. The white house can shut their traps.
With what? The military that is already involved in 2 fields of action. Not to mention facing downsizing per Obamas plan?
Obama is working with and for the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the organization behind the Militias fighting in Syria, Libya, Tunisia, and Egypt. Obama is HELPING the group from which Al Qaeda spawned, he is arming Al Qaeda. The Muslim Brotherhood wants a caliphate, and Obama is helping them get it. Obama is behind the Arab Spring, and responsible for the murder of tens of thousands of innocent Middle Easterners.
Thanks you IDIOT democrats, you DESERVE what you get, you have blood on your hands too.
Nobody is helping anyone. Arabs are working out their own problems. And whatever happens is up to them. If they want a caliphate, who are we to disagree. We dont own the Middle east.
This is the west not interfering, get used to it. However, if Assad becomes a war criminal, the world will bring him to justice, that im sure of. There wont be a hole deep enough to hide in. (Ask Saddam about that)
Why are we going to be the ones to do anything about this? Shouldn't the surrounding countries put together some kind of plan to deal with this dude...?
Then, after we do something about it, we get blamed for being the Great Satan, coming in and killing "their" people. It's a lose/lose situation, we should not interfere with their crap. Energy Independence is absolutely necessary for our country to survive in the long term.
We're screwed.
Come on Hillary! Try your "We Came, We Saw, He Died....Yuk, Yuk, Yuk" line on him! Perhaps being reminded about your undignified gloating of the execution of Gaddafi by the leaders of so-called democratic country will be just what it takes to scare Bashar Assad into backing down. Yeah....that should work!
It's our job to police the planet, regardless the cost, so guess it's time to nut up or shut up. /sarc
Mr. Frost I expect to see you at the Marine recruiting station in the morning or one of your 18 year old son or daughter. So they get the chance to die for a MUSLIM war.
I did my 4... USMC 1986-1991, gulf war vet... Happy?
Right now, is one of those moments, either the World acts and stops this mad man....or turns it's head and lets tens of thousands die because it's too afraid to cause waves. Plus if Assad is even remotely considering firing some of these weapons at Israel, in one last hoorah..... it's 100% for sure, goodbye Damascus. Months ago he said, if there was outside intervention, he would strike Israel.
why dont some of you clowns on this post have a little respect for the president.you have to be teabaggers or a typical dumbass republican!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You and the president have no respect for the 47% who did not vote for him, let him join the navy seals on this mission. Why should we respect him, or you? What kind of respect did you show the last president or the recent opposition? I know, he won, they/we lost, but that does not mean we surrender. We still think that much of what he wants to do is not good for the country and we have a right and a duty to voice our opinions. Typical dumbass democrat.
Obama deserves a prison cell. Not only do I not respect him, I DO NOT RECOGNIZE HIM AS A VALID POTUS. I do not consent to be governed by a traitor. You are an idiot for voting for the bastard.
So tell us Hillary, when Syria crosses that red line, what are you and Obama going to do? I suspect nothing, just like you did with Benghazi.
Susan Rice will be sent to the UN to blame another obscure video or action for anything that happens. That's what Hillary and this WH will do.
You liberals care so much go enlist your own asses up. I'm sure we can find more guns for you to carry.
I can say this my brother was killed by Afghan military turned Taliban so bite me. Since you want to fight for the Muslims. Matter of fact lets stick Obama in a uniform and drop him in the midst of battle.. After all he killed Osama all by himself.
...If this goes down and Assad muders vast numbers of his own people with gas... he will have "crossed a line..." Just what is that supposed to mean? Will any of the dead be brought back to life? Will we destroy his air force or sit back and wring our hands...
...For many years, one administration after another stated that North Korea would not be permitted to develop nuclear weapons... and then did nothing concrete. Then one day North Korea had nuclear weapons. The past two administrations have been promising that Iran would not be permitted to develop nuclear weapons.
...But nothing real has been done. "Give sanctions a chance..." Rhodesia was a tiny land-locked country with no oil and no coastlines... Fifteen years of sanctions (even with a major guerilla war) did not bring a swift end... Iran has a massive coastline, oil... and above board trading partners (Russia, China) and many under the table business partners.
...In general, sanctions are a way for politicians to pretend that they are doing something. When Iran sets off its first nuke, then the current administration will say, "Well, we can't do anything... they have nukes..." just like they do about North Korea...
...The problem is that Israel is not worried about North Korea, but may take massive measures since they know that we will not take lesser ones... while there is still time. This would be unfortunate in a great many ways... starting with the fact that the majority of the Iranian population is sick to death of the religious fanatics who run their country... But those fanatics had not the slightest hesitation in bleeding an entire generation to death in the Iran-Iraq war... even sending child soldiers into minefields...
...The prognosis is not good...
Before anyone asks the Dumbass question: Where did Syria get WMD from?... IRAQ DUH. Saddam sent all his weaponry/chemical precursors to Syria before the second gulf war. Whole convoys of Materials went over that border.
Why would Saddam send WMD to a country he considered an enemy?
No @!$%# sherlock. The missing stuff from IRAQ.
Liberals go to war with your own son's and daughters to save the MUslim that would kill you as you stand.
I think someone should accidentally drop a Tomahawk Missile on Assad. Opps, my bad.
Assad is a murdering war criminal, and cant be stopped soon enough. We dont need a war, we just need to get rid of Assad. That could be accomplished. If the will to do so existed.
So what so was Saddam Hussein. But Bush was just picking on him right? He killed a few million. BUSH WAS EVIL>>>>>
No one blames Bush for taking out Saddam. They blame him for lying about WMDs. They blame him for not funding the wars. They blame him for playing a fiddle while the US economy burned.
Everyone agrees, getting rid of Saddam was a good thing. They just dont like how Bush lied to everyone to get it happening.
Bush was nothing more than a butt puppet, Cheney was the evil one
So freedom and eric, I guess a lot of democrats were also lying.
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998. "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998. "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998. "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998. "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998. "Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999. "There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, <NOBR>Dec, 5, 2001.</NOBR> "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002. "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002. "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002. "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002. "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002. "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002. "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002, "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past <NOBR>11 years,</NOBR> every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do." Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002. "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including <NOBR>al Qaeda</NOBR> members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ... Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.So right after the United States gets a carrier fleet off the coast of Syria, they decide to ramp up the war and fear mongering to a whole new level. Just like they did with Afghanistan, WMDs in Iraq, and Libya.... the American beast and people that feed it just won't stop, will they?
Well I suppose it is conceivable they may occasionally be right.
Monty Obama is unconstitutional POTUS which makes him a traitor. You frigging moron. Same conditions apply to Rubio, Jindal and Cruz. So STFU with your partisan BS and get friggin educated, YOU VOTED FOR A TRAITOR you idiot.
Nobody voted for a traitor, and it is only "partisan BS" that would claim so.
NO it natural born citizen that says so.. A minor requirement to be president. That requirement was upheld by A DC court September 2012. Basically they said that both parents are required to be US Citizens to be natural born. LINK https://drkatesview.wordpress.com/2012/10/06/court-rules-natural-born-citizenship-required-for-presidency/
Read and educate your self....
Aunt Anna, LET ME EDUCATE YOU A LITTLE. Rubio, Jindal, AND Obama are natural born citizens even if BOTH parents aren't. All of these men were BORN IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Jindal was born in Louisiana, Rubio was born in Florida, and Obama was born in Hawaii. As far as Ted Cruz, well, he is a U.S. citizen even if he was born in Canada because his mother was a US citizen. His father was NOT a citizen at the time of his birth so it is not certain if he would qualify to be president. As to the others, read Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. It says "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." According to this Amendment, ALL persons BORN in the U.S. are CITIZENS of the U.S. It says ALL. It DOES NOT say ONLY those whose parents were citizens. It says ALL!!!
It is hard to believe that anyone could possibly be that stupid, but apparently Assad sees this in terms of absolutes.
Uh oh! President Empty Chair told Syria there would be "consequences" if they use chem warfare....guess more of our blood and treasure (US troops) will be put in harm's way. Only they will feel the consequences. Obama and the U.S. have NO POWER over Syria. Why this WH doesn't get that is beyond me.
@LadyCsharp. We wouldnt put troops on the ground, just bomb them into oblivion like Syria. Waste of bombs really.
Obozo and Hillary will write a really stern memo to Assad.
There is no winning situation in Syria. Either Assad stays or we get another Al-Qaeda backed regime just like we will see in Libya, Tunisia and more than likely Egypt. We have really picked some winners in the last few years. Why do we even care when one is as bad as another.