Why did the Jews attack Syria?

On september 6, 2007 the jews-only state in palestine (hereinafter referred to as the jos) sent a number of fighter aircraft deep into syrian territory. But nobody knows what they hit, or why. The first section of this article looks at what little is known about the raid. The second looks at diplomatic responses to this mystery whilst the final section explores some of the explanations given for this raid.

The Air Raid.
Was anything Hit?
At present, nobody knows what was hit during the raid or even whether anything was hit. "But a European intelligence official said it wasn't certain Israel had struck anything at all." (Dan Ephron and Mark Hosenball ‘The Whispers of War’ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20920341/site/newsweek/ September 24, 2007). A jewish commentator believed he’d found the target but his allegations were later dismissed as lies. "The Arab Center for the Studies of Arid Zones and Dry Lands (ACSAD) in Syria called the reports of an Israeli attack on its facility in Dir a-Zour completely "made-up" and claimed that it only learned of the purported attack after seeing satellite images of its property and reading about the attack in the news. Last weekend, in a Ynet special report, Ron Ben-Yishai took pictures and interviewed eyewitnesses living in the small town of Dir A-Zour located next to the research center." (Syrian 'research station' says shocked to hear of attack on its facility’ http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3454940,00.html September 30, 2007).

The latest news is that: "Israel has confirmed that it carried out a strike on a Syrian military installation last month. On Monday, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad told the BBC that a Syrian military construction site was hit in the Israeli air strike on 6 September. It is still not known why Israel carried out the strike or what exactly was hit." (‘Israel admits air strike on Syria’ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7024287.stm October 02, 2007).

Scale of the Attack
Some commentators believe the raid was much bigger than was first thought. "They were sketchy, but one thing was absolutely clear. Far from being a minor incursion, the Israeli overflight of Syrian airspace through its ally, Turkey, was a far more major affair involving as many as eight aircraft, including Israel's most ultra-modern F-15s and F-16s equipped with Maverick missiles and 500lb bombs. Flying among the Israeli fighters at great height, The Observer can reveal, was an ELINT - an electronic intelligence gathering aircraft." (Peter Beaumont ‘Was Israeli raid a dry run for attack on Iran?’ http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2170188,00.html September 16, 2007). "From the leaks so far, it seems that more than half a dozen Israeli warplanes violated Syrian airspace to drop munitions on a site close to the border with Turkey. It was at this point, with tensions simmeringly hot (between the jos and syria), that Israel launched its strike, sending several fighter planes into Syria on a lightning mission to hit a site near Dayr a-Zawr. As Syria itself broke the news of the attack, Israeli generals were shown on TV toasting in the Jewish new year but refusing to comment." (Jonathan Cook ‘Why Did Israel Attack Syria?’ http://www.antiwar.com/orig/cook.php?articleid=11678 September 28, 2007).

Global Silence about the Attack
Virtually no government condemned the jos’s attack on syria. The americans supported it but there were no condemnations from arab countries. A syrian official complained, "Arab states have not exactly rallied in our support." (Quoted in ‘Syrian official: After IAF raid, Israel can forget about peace’ http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/906830.html September 24, 2007); "It is interesting to note, by the way, the resounding lack of condemnation, either in Europe or even in the Arab world, to Israel's alleged attack." (Herb Keinon ‘There's a reason world is quiet on alleged IAF strike’ http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1189411422882&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull September 18, 2007). There was no condemnation from turkey, "Third, if a Syrian nuclear installation can be targeted by Israel without any international outcry, and with the tacit backing of allies in the US and Turkey, Iran's nuclear facilities are looking more likely than ever to be next." (Ilene R. Prusher ‘Israel sends Middle East a message with Syrian airstrike’ http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0919/p06s02-wome.html September 19, 2007). Nor russia. "Even Moscow, a strong backer of Syria in the days of the Soviet Union, did not directly condemn the Israeli action, in which Syria says planes bombed an empty area after air defence systems confronted them. Israel has not disclosed the target." (‘Syrian official: After IAF raid, Israel can forget about peace’ http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/906830.html September 24, 2007). It is as if the world is disinterested in any acts of aggression carried out by the jos and unconcerned about the outbreak of war in the middle east. As assad rightly concluded. ""The failure of the international community, including the (UN) Security Council, to condemn this act of aggression would encourage Israel to persist in this hostile pursuit, and lead to an exacerbation of tensions in the region," Moallem (Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem) said." (Yoav Stern ‘Assad: Syria won't attend fall summit if issue of Golan not addressed’ http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/908674.html October 02, 2007).

More intriguing than the global silence was syria’s silence. It has admitted that a military construction site was hit but has said nothing about what was being constructed which might help to explain why it was attacked. Syria’s refusal to provide any details discourages the global community from condemning the attack.

Rationales for the Attack.
1. Did the Jos try and destroy Saddam’s WMDs?
It is unfortunate but many seemingly sane, and highly respected, jewish commentators believe that saddam sent his wmds to syria before the american invasion of iraq. "This pathological condition was recently reconfirmed by Johann Hari's account of a National Review-sponsored cruise to Puerto Vallarta featuring Norman Podhoretz and Bill Buckley, along with a boatload of neocons and well-heeled red-state-fascist types on board. The Pod Man and Buckley nearly came to blows over the war question, when Buckley asked Poddy if it didn't bother him that the famed "weapons of mass destruction" were nowhere to be found in Iraq. "There were WMD, and they were shipped to Syria," snapped the Pod Man. Syria? Is he serious? I'm afraid he is… Continuing his rant, the Pod Man avers: "This picture of a country in total chaos with no security is false. It has been a triumph. It couldn't have gone better."" (Justin Raimondo ‘Tom Lantos, Warmonger’ http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=11204 June 27, 2007). If likudnik lunatics like poddy really believe saddam transported his wmds to syria before the americans could get their hands on them, then logically these weapons should still be in the country and need to be destroyed.

Was it possible then that the jos’s warmongering leaders were trying to destroy saddam’s non-existent weapons hidden in syria? Perhaps mossad had intelligence the wmds were being stored in a syrian warehouse so the jos thought it had better blow up the building just in case? Perhaps poddy had had an old testamentary vision pinpointing the exact location of the wmds?

To any normal person the idea of saddam giving wmds to his enemy who would be willing to look after them whilst the american military launched its shock and awe campaign on iraq, might seem insane. But, to hysterical, paranoid jewish warmongers forever fretting about their existential survival in the midst of a world of potential adolf hitler’s, such an idea seems all too sensible. No wonder the jos doesn’t want to talk about the raid since the absence of any radioactive material in the atmosphere after the attack would make it, and its likudnik allies in america, the world’s laughing stock.

2. Targeting weapons destined for Hezbollah.
"Others reported that the jets had hit either a Hizbollah convoy, a missile facility or a terrorist camp." (Peter Beaumont ‘Was Israeli raid a dry run for attack on Iran?’ http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2170188,00.html September 16, 2007); "Did the air strike seek to disrupt arms shipments to Lebanon's Hezbollah?" (Khody Akhavi ‘Neocons Tie N. Korea to Israeli Strike on Syria’ http://www.antiwar.com/ips/akhavi.php?articleid=11641 September 19, 2007).

3. Attacking a secret Syrian Nuclear Weapons site.
It was rumoured that three days before the jos raid into syria, a north korean ship had docked in the country and unloaded nuclear components for a secret syrian nuclear weapons’ programme. "The New York Times described the target of the raid as a nuclear site being run in collaboration with North Korean technicians." (Peter Beaumont ‘Was Israeli raid a dry run for attack on Iran?’ http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2170188,00.html September 16, 2007); "Feeding the speculation, a familiar clutch of George W. Bush administration hawks appears to be suggesting that Israel's apparent air strike may have targeted a joint North Korea-Syria nuclear venture." (Khody Akhavi ‘Neocons Tie N. Korea to Israeli Strike on Syria’ http://www.antiwar.com/ips/akhavi.php?articleid=11641 September 19, 2007); "The North Korea-Syria story started when Andrew Semmel of the US State Department claimed that Syria "might have" obtained nuclear equipment from "secret suppliers", adding that "there are North Korean people there [in Syria]. There is no question about that." There were reports that three days before the Israeli attack, a ship carrying North Korean material labeled as "cement" unloaded its cargo in Syria. That material, the reports said, was believed to be nuclear equipment. As mentioned above, the North Korea story is not new. It started in 2004 when Bolton, then under secretary for arms control, accused Syria of harboring nuclear ambitions. This was part of the stream of accusations against Syria after the invasion of Iraq in 2003." (Sami Moubayed ‘Shots in the dark over Syria's skies’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/II22Ak06.html September 22, 2007); "Official silence has prompted a broad range of speculation as to what exactly took place. One former U.S. official, who like others quoted in this article declined to be identified discussing sensitive matters, says several months ago Israel presented the Bush administration with reconnaissance images and information from secret agents alleging North Korea had begun to supply nuclear-related material to Syria. Some U.S. intelligence reporting, including electronic signal intercepts, appeared to support the Israeli claims. But other U.S. officials remain skeptical about any nuclear link between Syria and North Korea." (Dan Ephron and Mark Hosenball ‘The Whispers of War’ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20920341/site/newsweek/ September 24, 2007).

4. Attack designed to stop the further Spread of Nuclear Weapons in the Middle East.
"First of all, if indeed the alleged IAF sortie over Syria had to do with a nuclear shipment from Pyongyang, then Israel's stock has to go up because it will be seen in a few key capitals as the force that will not allow nuclear proliferation in the region. The alleged Syrian-North Korean connection could move Syria from being just an unpopular state to being a pariah regime. And Damascus doesn't want pariah state status. Syria, which has shown that it does want contact with the outside world, has no desire to be quarantined and ostracized as North Korea has been." (Herb Keinon ‘There's a reason world is quiet on alleged IAF strike’ http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1189411422882&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull September 18, 2007); "Second, Israel might take steps to fulfill one of its ultimate security objectives, which is to prevent other countries in the Middle East from obtaining nuclear capability, especially those overtly hostile to Israel." (Ilene R. Prusher ‘Israel sends Middle East a message with Syrian airstrike’ http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0919/p06s02-wome.html September 19, 2007).

Jonathan cook disputes the accusation that north korea has been helping syria to develop nuclear weapons. "The nuclear claims against Damascus were discounted so quickly by experts of the region that Washington was soon downgrading the accusation to claims that Syria was only hiding the material on North Korea's behalf. But why would Syria, already hounded by Israel and the US, provide such a ready-made pretext for still harsher treatment? Why, equally, would North Korea undermine its hard-won disarmament deal with the US? And why, if Syria were covertly engaging in nuclear mischief, did it alert the world to the fact by revealing the Israeli air strike?" (Jonathan Cook ‘Why Did Israel Attack Syria?’ http://www.antiwar.com/orig/cook.php?articleid=11678 September 28, 2007).

It’s interesting that whenever the jos carries out a pre-emptive strike and is then condemned by many countries around the world, it almost invariably responds by saying that america was told about, and thus sanctioned, the attack. The jos uses america as a shield to protect it from global criticisms despite the fact that this undermines america’s international prestige and reputation. The americans seem willing to absorb any global condemnations to protect the jos from any adverse consequences that might otherwise have ensued from the jos’s illegal and belligerent military actions. "Israel's decision to attack Syria on Sept. 6, bombing a suspected nuclear site set up in apparent collaboration with North Korea, came after Israel shared intelligence with President Bush this summer indicating that North Korean nuclear personnel were in Syria, U.S. government sources said. The Bush administration has not commented on the Israeli raid or the underlying intelligence." (Glenn Kessler and Robin Wright ‘Israel, U.S. Shared Data On Suspected Nuclear Site’ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/20/AR2007092002701_pf.html September 21, 2007).

Hillary clinton supported the jos’s attack on syria even though she knew nothing more about it than anyone else. "New York Senator Hillary Clinton said on Wednesday evening that she supports what she said was the Israel Air Force's "apparent" action against a nuclear facility in Syria. However, she went on to say, "We don't have as much information as we wish we did. But what we think we know is that with North Korean help, both financial and technical and material, the Syrians apparently were putting together, and perhaps over some period of years, a nuclear facility, and the Israelis took it out. I strongly support that." The senator from New York also backed up reports, first exposed by The Washington Post two weeks ago, that that the IAF targeted a North Korean shipment of nuclear material that arrived in Syria three days before the strike. "There was evidence of a North Korea freighter coming in with supplies. There was intelligence and other kinds of verification," Clinton said. She went on to emphasize that she had no other information on the incident because of its "highly classified" nature." (‘Hillary Clinton says she supports 'apparent' IAF action in Syria’ http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/907662.html September 28, 2007). It is extraordinary that clinton, a leading presidential contender, could give the jos such open-ended support to the jos even though she knew nothing about its possible impact on america’s foreign policies. It is as if she’s saying that it doesn’t matter what damage might be done to american interests. Her priority is supporting whatever the jos does, not protecting america from the adverse consequences of the jos’s warmongering.

5. Undermining a peace agreement between America and North Korea.
Joseph cirincione believes the jos’s air raid had less to do with syria than with north korea. He argues the neocons exploited the attack in order to undermine negotiations between america and north korea. "Some U.S. analysts have been very dubious of an actual Syrian nuclear threat, describing the speculation surrounding the incident as a manufactured stunt aimed at advancing a neoconservative agenda. "This story is nonsense. The Washington Post story should have been headlined 'White House Officials Try to Push North Korea-Syria Connection.' This is a political story, not a threat story," said Joseph Cirincione, director for nuclear policy at the Washington-based Center for American Progress, according to an interview with Foreign Policy. "Once again, this appears to be the work of a small group of officials leaking cherry-picked, unvetted 'intelligence' to key reporters in order to promote a preexisting political agenda. If this sounds like the run-up to the war in Iraq, it should. This time it appears aimed at derailing the U.S.-North Korean agreement that administration hardliners think is appeasement. Some Israelis want to thwart any dialogue between the U.S. and Syria," he said." (Khody Akhavi ‘Neocons Tie N. Korea to Israeli Strike on Syria’ http://www.antiwar.com/ips/akhavi.php?articleid=11641 September 19, 2007).

Cirincione makes no comment about whether the neocons instigated the jos’s attack on syria in order to acquire ammunition to undermine american-north korean negotiations. But such a conspiracy was possible given that the neocons were stovepiping jewish intelligence directly to the bush regime without america’s own intelligence services being consulted – just as was done in the run up to the invasion of iraq. "JTA also noted the week-earlier Washington Post report that within the preceding month the Israelis had provided Stephen Hadley, President Bush's National Security Advisor, "dramatic satellite imagery" of a facility under construction in Syria which led "some" of the very few administration officials allowed to see the imagery "to believe the facility could be used to produce material for nuclear weapons." Here we go again! Raw foreign "intelligence," withheld from our zillion-dollar multi-agency intelligence community, chock-full of skilled professionals who evaluate satellite imagery for a living, stovepiped directly to the White House where "some" members of the Cheney Cabal, proven neophytes when it comes to evaluation of satellite imagery of any industrial process, have concluded the facility under construction could be used to produce material for nuclear weapons." (Gordon Prather ‘Israel's Right of Self-Defense’ http://www.antiwar.com/prather/?articleid=11655 September 22, 2007).

6. A North Korean Military Shipment through Syria to Iran.
These days, the zionist dominated media throughout the western world takes whatever opportunity presents itself to blame iran. "One European security source told NEWSWEEK the target might have been a North Korean military shipment to Iran that was transiting Syria." (Dan Ephron and Mark Hosenball ‘The Whispers of War’ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20920341/site/newsweek/page/0/ September 29, 2007).

7. Attacking a Syrian Facility installing Chemical Weapons on Missiles.
Larisa alexandrovna hypothesized that the jos attack was more likely to have been on a site where syria was attempting to install chemical weapons on north korean missiles. "Vincent Cannistraro, Director of Intelligence Programs for the National Security Council under President Ronald Reagan and Chief of Operations at the Central Intelligence Agency's Counterterrorism Center under President George H. W. Bush, said Sunday that .. "Syria has a chemical weapons capability and has been trying to chemically weaponize war heads on their existing stocks of North Korean originated missiles," Cannistraro added. According to intelligence sources familiar with the events leading up to the raid, an explosion on July 20 at a Syrian facility near the city of Halab, in the Northern part of Syria, caused Israel's retaliatory strike on Sept. 6. North Korean scientists working with Syrian military and intelligence officials attempted to load a chemical warhead onto one of the North Korean missiles, likely the No-dong 1 model, according to intelligence current and former intelligence officers interviewed for this article. The result was an explosion that killed a few of those present and, according to some official reports of the blast, as many as 50 civilians." (Larisa Alexandrovna ‘Israeli air strike did not hit nuclear facility, intelligence officials say’ http://rawstory.com//news/2007/Intelligence_officials_say_Israel_received_flawed_0924.html September 24, 2007).

Alexandrovna wonders why the jos’s raid was suspected to be about syria’s non-existent nuclear ambitions. "By most accounts of intelligence officials, both former and current, Israel and the US both were well aware of the activities of North Korea and Syria and their attempts to chemically weaponize the No-Dong missile (above right). It therefore remains unclear why an intricate story involving evidence of a Syrian nuclear weapons program and/or enriched uranium was put out to press organizations." (Larisa Alexandrovna ‘Israeli air strike did not hit nuclear facility, intelligence officials say’ http://rawstory.com//news/2007/Intelligence_officials_say_Israel_received_flawed_0924.html September 24, 2007).

8. An attack on a Syrian-Iranian Chemical Weapon Missile site.
Jane's defence weekly provides another opportunity to condemn iran. It believes iranian technicians were helping the syrians install chemical weapons on their north korean missiles. "Proof of cooperation between Iran and Syria in the proliferation and development of weapons of mass destruction was brought to light Monday in Jane's Defence Weekly, which reported that dozens of Iranian engineers and 15 Syrian officers were killed in a July 23 accident in Syria. According to the report, cited by Channel 10, the joint Syrian-Iranian team was attempting to mount a chemical warhead on a Scud missile when the explosion occurred, spreading lethal chemical agents, including sarin nerve gas." ('Dozens died in Syria-Iran missile test' http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411428847&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull September 19, 2007).

9. Testing Syria’s Defences.
Syria recently bought an air defence system from russia so perhaps the jos wanted to know how effective it was or perhaps even neutralize it. "Imad Fawzi Shoaibi, a Syrian political analyst, speculated that Israel may have been probing Syria's new air defense systems, provided by Russia, at a time when tension was running high between the two countries." (Yaakov Katz and Herb Keinon ‘Israel 'prepared' for possibility of conflict after Syria alleges IAF violated its airspace’ http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1188392553869&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull September 06, 2007); "An anonymous Israeli source reportedly told the Arab daily Al Arabiya Saturday morning that Israeli fighter jets that flew over Syria on Thursday were on a mission to neutralize Russian-made surface-to-air missile (SAM) anti-aircraft batteries recently deployed by Syria along its Mediterranean coast." (‘Jets were on mission to destroy Russian SAM batteries’ http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1188392563184&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull September 07, 2007).

10. Testing Syria’s Defences for an attack on Iran: Sending a message to Iran.
"Former United Nations ambassador John Bolton said Sunday that Israel's reported military operation inside Syria earlier this month should be regarded as a 'clear message to Iran' that its nuclear efforts will not be ignored by the international community." (Barak Ravid, Avi Issacharoff and Amos Harel ‘Ex-UN envoy: IAF action in Syria is 'message to Iran' over nukes’ http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/903949.html September 16, 2007); "Was it a dress rehearsal for a possible future strike on Iranian nuclear facilities?" (Khody Akhavi ‘Neocons Tie N. Korea to Israeli Strike on Syria’ http://www.antiwar.com/ips/akhavi.php?articleid=11641 September 19, 2007).

Jonathan cook suggests this is not plausible. "Speculation that Israel was testing Syria's antiaircraft defenses in preparation for an attack on Iran ignores the fact that the Israeli air force would almost certainly choose a flightpath through friendlier Jordanian airspace." (Jonathan Cook ‘Why Did Israel Attack Syria?’ http://www.antiwar.com/orig/cook.php?articleid=11678 September 28, 2007).

11. Re-establishing Jewish Dominance in the Middle East.
Merely by sending aircraft into syria no matter whether they attacked a real target, a mock target, or even no target at all, the jos restored its military dominance over syria. "Either way, Israel's chief of military intelligence announced that Israel's deterrence had "been restored."" (Ilene R. Prusher ‘Israel sends Middle East a message with Syrian airstrike’ http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0919/p06s02-wome.html September 19, 2007). The syrian vice president farouq al-shara believed it was just a jewish morale booster. "According to Al-Shara, this attack was meant to raise the morale of the Israeli army after it failed in its attempt to destroy Hizbullah in the Second Lebanon War." (Syrian 'research station' says shocked to hear of attack on its facility’ http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3454940,00.html September 30, 2007).

12. Jos Undermines peace with Syria – Jewish Hypocrisy.
President assad has been making efforts to pursue peace with the jews for a number of years but then finds his country being attacked yet again by the jos. "All of this comes at a time when there seemed to be increased signs of hope for an Israeli-Syrian rapprochement. The possibility of the two countries revisiting the negotiating table, abandoned more than seven years ago, has been in the offing in recent months, though the Bush administration has been encouraging Israel to focus on the Palestinian peace track instead." (Ilene R. Prusher ‘Israel sends Middle East a message with Syrian airstrike’ http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0919/p06s02-wome.html September 19, 2007).

The jos bombs syria and then says it wants to start peace negotiations. "But whatever happened in the early hours of Sept. 6 does not appear to have soured Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's efforts to restart negotiations with his adversary. Olmert announced on Monday that Israel was prepared to hold negotiations with Damascus, without preconditions and without ultimatums, according to the Jerusalem Post." (Khody Akhavi ‘Neocons Tie N. Korea to Israeli Strike on Syria’ http://www.antiwar.com/ips/akhavi.php?articleid=11641 September 19, 2007); "Olmert made a similar offer during an interview with the Saudi satellite TV channel Al-Arabiyya on July 11. "I am ready to sit with you and talk about peace, not war. I will be happy if I could make peace with Syria. I do not want to wage war against Syria," Olmert said." (Sami Moubayed ‘Shots in the dark over Syria's skies’ http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/II22Ak06.html September 22, 2007).

The jos has often carried out acts of aggression to scupper any chances for peace negotiations and then sought to undermine global criticisms for such attacks by saying it wants to start peace negotiations. The syrian reaction is not surprising. "An Israeli raid on Syria has all but finished off chances for resuming peace talks between the two foes, Syrian officials said on Monday. "After this raid, you can forget about peace. It is no secret that our forces have been on alert for some time, but Syria will not be the first to start a war," said one of the Syrian officials, who asked not to be named." (Syrian official: After IAF raid, Israel can forget about peace’ http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/906830.html September 24, 2007).

13. Using the attack to Impose Political Conditions on Syria.
A jerusalem post wag suggested. "The allegations of a North Korean-Syrian connection could make the time ripe, therefore, for Israel to push the world to place certain conditions on Syria's being accepted back into the international fold. The conditions are obvious, and ones that Israel has been demanding, without any success at all, for years: kicking the terrorist organizations out of Damascus, first and foremost Hamas and its leader Khaled Mashaal, and an end to the support and the supply of weapons to Hizbullah. In the past Syria has just ignored these calls. But now, in order to avoid being seen as North Korea's kid brother, it may have no choice but to pay a little attention. The alleged connection to North Korea makes Syria vulnerable. The question is whether the world will seize the moment." (Herb Keinon ‘There's a reason world is quiet on alleged IAF strike’ http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1189411422882&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull September 18, 2007).

14. Publicity Stunt: Olmert wanted to boost his Poll Ratings.
Jewish people in palestine do not know why olmert ordered the attack on syria even though it could have led to war between the two countries causing mass casualties on both sides. Nevertheless, they supported his warmongering anyway. "A reported Sept. 6 airstrike in northern Syria that Israel has not acknowledged has led to a big boost in Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's approval rating, a new opinion poll shows." (Mysterious airstrike in northern Syria boosts Olmert's popularity: Poll’ http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/09/18/africa/ME-GEN-Israel-Olmert-Poll.php September 18, 2007); "The idea of a pre-emptive strike also has popular support. When Prime Minister Ehud Olmert ordered the raid on Syria earlier this month, his approval rating was in the teens. Since then, it has jumped to nearly 30 percent." (Dan Ephron and Mark Hosenball ‘The Whispers of War’ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20920341/site/newsweek/ September 24, 2007); "But the Israeli domestic political equation is worrying: Olmert has seen his own approval ratings climb out of the toilet as a result of having bombed something in Syria a couple of weeks ago. Nobody knows what he bombed, but his numbers have climbed from about 3% a few months ago to over 35% today. That’s why the scoundrels to the left and right of him, Ehud Barak and Bibi Netanyahu, have been scrambling to claim some paternity over the mysterious Syria raid." (Tony Karon ‘Iran: Chronicle of a War Foretold?’ http://tonykaron.com/2007/09/26/iran-chronicle-of-a-war-foretold/ September 26, 2007).

15. Neocon Plot to demonize Iran.
Jonathan cook dismisses the idea that the jos attack was against weapons being transported to hezbollah or syrian nuclear facilities. But he believes likudnik propaganda around these two issues is important for boosting belligerence towards iran. Cook is suggesting the jos was conspiring with its likudnik allies in america to pressure bush into launching an attack against iran. "Nonetheless, the political significance of the justifications for the Israeli air strike is that both neatly tie together various strands of an argument needed by the neocons and Israel in making their case for an attack on Iran before Bush leaves office in early 2009. Each scenario suggests a Shi'ite "axis of evil," coordinated by Iran, that is actively plotting Israel's destruction. And each story offers the pretext for an attack on Syria as a prelude to a preemptive strike against Tehran, launched either by Washington or Tel Aviv, to save Israel. That these stories appear to have been planted in the American media by neocon masters of spin like John Bolton is warning enough, as is the admission that the only evidence for Syrian malfeasance is Israeli "intelligence," the basis of which cannot be questioned as Israel is not officially admitting the attack." (Jonathan Cook ‘Why Did Israel Attack Syria?’ http://www.antiwar.com/orig/cook.php?articleid=11678 September 28, 2007).

16. Jos pressuring Bush into War against Iran.
Another speculation is that the jos raided syria in order to pressurize bush into attacking iran. "While the Bush administration appears to have given tacit support to the Syria raid, Israel and the United States are not in lockstep on Iran. For Israel, the next three months may be decisive: either Tehran succumbs to sanctions and stops enriching uranium or it must be dealt with militarily. (Iran says its program is for peaceful purposes only.) "Two thousand seven is the year you determine whether diplomatic efforts will stop Iran," says a well-placed Israeli source, who did not want to be named because he is not authorized to speak for the government. "If by the end of the year that's not working, 2008 becomes the year you take action."" (Dan Ephron and Mark Hosenball ‘The Whispers of War’ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20920341/site/newsweek/ September 24, 2007). The assumption here is that bush is reluctant to attack iran either because of the vulnerability of its military or because there is no urgency to do so. "In Washington, on the other hand, the consensus against a strike is firmer than most people realize. The Pentagon worries that another war will break America's already overstretched military, while the intelligence community believes Iran is not yet on the verge of a nuclear breakthrough." (Dan Ephron and Mark Hosenball ‘The Whispers of War’ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20920341/site/newsweek/ September 24, 2007).

17. Cheney testing out his "End Run Strategy"
Whilst bush is supposedly hesitant about an attack on iran, dick cheney is not. Indeed, in may 2007, steven clemons argued that cheney was pursuing an "end run strategy" to manipulate bush into a war with iran. He wanted the jos to attack iran’s nuclear facilities in order to provoke an iranian retaliation which would automatically bring america into the war. From this perspective the jos’s september attack on syria could have been a trial run for this strategy to assess the military and political contribution it makes towards pushing bush into war against iran. "Some believe that the Office of the Vice President is continuing to battle any attempts at diplomacy made by the US State Department in an effort to ensure no alternative but a military solution to destabilize and strike Iran, using Syria's alleged nuclear weapons program and close relations with Iran as a possible pretext." (Larisa Alexandrovna ‘Israeli air strike did not hit nuclear facility, intelligence officials say’ http://rawstory.com//news/2007/Intelligence_officials_say_Israel_received_flawed_0924.html September 24, 2007).

18. The Jos Blackmailing Bush into War he does not want. It’s the Jos which is deciding whether America will go to War against Iran. The Jos is willing to sacrifice the American Military in Afghanistan and Iraq in order to bring about Jewish Supremacism in the Middle East
The final explanation explored here is that the jos was sending bush the message that it transgressed into syria but could easily have gone to iran. If this had happened then america would inevitably have ended up in a war with iran. The jos is thus blackmailing america into a war – whether bush wants one or not. In effect, the jos decides on who america’s enemies are and when america will go to war. America’s proxy zionist wars against afghanistan and iraq have benefited the jos but have proved to be an economic and military catastrophe for america. The jos is now pushing bush into a war which will boost jewish supremacism in the middle east but prove to be an even greater military and economic catastrophe for america and the western world than their two previous illegal invasions. What this reveals is that even though the jos knows that the american military in iraq and afghanistan would be highly vulnerable to iranian retaliation, it is willing to sacrifice american treasure and lives solely for the sake of boosting jewish supremacism. "Alternatively, Israel might count on Tehran to retaliate against American targets as well, drawing in the superpower. To avoid that outcome, Gardiner believes, Washington must prevent Israel from attacking in the first place. "The United States does not want to turn the possibility of a general war in the Middle East over to the decision making in Israel," he says. Does not want to, certainly, but might not have a choice." (Dan Ephron and Mark Hosenball ‘The Whispers of War’ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20920341/site/newsweek/ September 24, 2007).