Syria watch...

Mr. Fox · Post by **Mr. Fox** » 13 Apr 2018, 22:42

"Russia's foreign minister claims chemical attack was staged by UK foreign secret services"

Russiaâ€™s military has claimed to have evidence that Britain had â€œdirect involvementâ€� in staging a suspected chemical attack in Syria, a charge quickly condemned as "grotesque" by the UK

Britain's ambassador to the UN has described the Russian military's claims that Britain orchestrated the chemical attack in Syria as "a blatant lie".

"This is grotesque, it is a blatant lie, it is the worst piece of fake news we've yet seen from the Russian propaganda machine," Karen Pierce told reporters as she left an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council.

She added wanted to "state categorically" that "Britain has no involvement and would never have any involvement in the use of a chemical weapon".

What utter horse shit. Pierce clearly isn't the brightest button in the box, but still...

The Russians have not claimed "Britain orchestrated the chemical attack in Syria".

They have claimed that Britain - specifically the 'White Helmets', an organisation that receives millions in funding from Britain - staged a fake chemical attack.

The OPCW are apparently on the ground right now.

Post by **adam2** » 14 Apr 2018, 02:30

Breaking news, USA and allies including UK launch air strikes against Syria, in the last few minutes.

Updates from news media of your choice.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-43762251

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 14 Apr 2018, 06:55

British diplomacy can do better. The UK has some of the finest schools, educating some of the finest men in all the world. After all, they produced Boris Johnsonâ€¦

PS_RalphW · Post by **PS_RalphW** » 14 Apr 2018, 07:12

So, more symbolic strikes against what are called chemicals weapons production and storage sites. I hope thejntelligence a d targeting were good. This is the smallest imaginable military response. I suspect Putin and Assad will be trembling in their boots, with laughter at Trump's bluster.

raspberry-blower · Post by **raspberry-blower** » 14 Apr 2018, 08:15

PS_RalphW wrote:So, more symbolic strikes against what are called chemicals weapons production and storage sites. I hope thejntelligence a d targeting were good. This is the smallest imaginable military response. I suspect Putin and Assad will be trembling in their boots, with laughter at Trump's bluster.

This is just a "face saving" exercise which is militarily meaningless.

In fact, if this Twitter feed is anything to go by, it would appear that the strikes are rapidly turning into an epic fail. One tweet claims that all British Storm Shadow missiles were jammed and shot down.

The Syrians have been able to negate the effectiveness of Israeli missile strikes now they have demonstrated it against NATO.

PS_RalphW · Post by **PS_RalphW** » 14 Apr 2018, 11:03

I no more believe Russian or Syrian tweets than I do Trumps. The truth will never be known by us, but it is probably somewhere in the middle.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 14 Apr 2018, 13:44

Doubtless there will be satellite imagery somewhere to either prove or disprove the accuracy of the strikes. Maybe we will get to see some of it.

raspberry-blower · Post by **raspberry-blower** » 14 Apr 2018, 17:56

kenneal - lagger wrote:Doubtless there will be satellite imagery somewhere to either prove or disprove the accuracy of the strikes. Maybe we will get to see some of it.

It's what we DON'T SEE that is more important Ken. That's how propaganda works - by omission.

Meanwhile, Jonathan Cook: Five thoughts on air strikes against Syria

Jonathan Cook wrote: It looks suspiciously like the strikes were timed to pre-empt, and foil, the UN investigation. That has to raise concerns that we are being hoodwinked by our leaders, as we were in Iraq and Libya, as they seek to actively stoke yet another â€œhumanitarian warâ€� whose only beneficiaries will be the westâ€™s military-industrial-security-media elites.

raspberry-blower · Post by **raspberry-blower** » 14 Apr 2018, 18:20

PS_RalphW wrote:I no more believe Russian or Syrian tweets than I do Trumps. The truth will never be known by us, but it is probably somewhere in the middle.

Trump has tweeted that it was job done in Syria. If the job in hand was to make the US, UK and France seem militarily impotent, then yes, job indeed done.

All it has done is to put the respective leaders of these countries in an increasingly difficult position. Trump has got the Stormy Daniels shenanigans, Macron appears to have angered the French unions who have gone on strike while Theresa May's position is quite possibly the most precarious of the lot.

The Within Syria twitter feed linked up a bit earlier has re-tweeted a post from Paul Mason saying that May pushed for early strikes "to avoid having to get Parliamentary consent" - which is, in fact, accredited to Jon Sopel. This is going to come back and haunt her.

This could well be the US's Suez moment - it appears both France and the UK forgot about it and are going to be reminded again of its consequences.

PS_RalphW · Post by **PS_RalphW** » 14 Apr 2018, 20:24

Suez was an attempt at an illegal invasion of a foreign power, with troops on the ground, and was the last gasp of British military imperialism. We were rightly condemned by our western allies and slunk home with our tail between our legs when economic sanctions were imposed. All that before we managed to kill too many people on the ground.

Syria is far from such a black and white situation. When Russia came in to back Assad with troops on the ground, the west could either have confronted Putin there and then and risked further escalation, or accept that the war was lost and Assad would eventually win regardless. The US and its minor allies chose in stead to pretend that there were two parallel and independent wars going on, and Russia would play fair and let Syria be carved up like Germany after the war.

Putin punishes such weakness.

Potemkin Villager · Post by **Potemkin Villager** » 14 Apr 2018, 20:51

Can someone explain to me what the strategic aim of this missile attack is. What is it meant to achieve as an outcome?

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 14 Apr 2018, 21:15

I think it was meant to show what strong, decisive, resolute, and humanitarian leaders we have in the west. As a result, it has failed IMO.

raspberry-blower · Post by **raspberry-blower** » 14 Apr 2018, 21:25

PS_RalphW wrote:Suez was an attempt at an illegal invasion of a foreign power, with troops on the ground, and was the last gasp of British military imperialism. We were rightly condemned by our western allies and slunk home with our tail between our legs when economic sanctions were imposed. All that before we managed to kill too many people on the ground.

Syria is far from such a black and white situation. When Russia came in to back Assad with troops on the ground, the west could either have confronted Putin there and then and risked further escalation, or accept that the war was lost and Assad would eventually win regardless. The US and its minor allies chose in stead to pretend that there were two parallel and independent wars going on, and Russia would play fair and let Syria be carved up like Germany after the war.

Putin punishes such weakness.

You are missing my point here, Ralph. You should not be concentrating on Russia and what Putin does per se - rather this more about the decline of American and Western powers. This is a watershed moment - particularly in the Middle East. Trump's bluff has been called - as has May's and Macron's.
NATO weaponry has been shown up to be highly overrated. All this just to prove "how macho we are" and ignore whether there was any chemical attack at all. This action is illegal under International law.

As for the carving up of a Sovereign State - namely Syria - well Assad has always maintained that his forces would take back every inch. There are still large swathes that are under the control of various al Qaeda style jihadist groups along with the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Force. There are also up to 20 US bases in Syria - these will now be considered "fair game".

These attacks may well have emboldened Syria and weakened the hands of UK France and the US. As LJ has pointed out - and I set up another thread about it - the dollar denominated empire is in decline. Slowly at first, then all at once.

Post by **clv101** » 14 Apr 2018, 21:29

Following our attack on Syria, I've seen very little said about Syrian reprisal. Might we expect the Syrian government to launch/facilitate attacks on British interests?

raspberry-blower · Post by **raspberry-blower** » 14 Apr 2018, 21:35

Potemkin Villager wrote:Can someone explain to me what the strategic aim of this missile attack is. What is it meant to achieve as an outcome?

Strategic aim? To show the world how ineffective some of NATO's weapon systems really are.

Outcome? Macron, May and Trump are all having their issues so this is an attempt to deflect the critics and try to push things such as national strikes, floundering Brexit negotiations and Stormy Daniels aside for a moment. It may well come back to bite all 3 hard.