US bombing of Syria did not begin on April 7

April 7, 2017 at 7:49 pm (Human rights, internationalism, Middle East, posted by JD, Syria, terror, Trump, war)

Chemical massacre in Syria

by Michael Karadjis, at Syrian Revolution Commentary and Analysis

US bombing of Syria did not begin on April 7, it began in September 2014, two and a half years ago. Nearly 8000 US air strikes have been launched, thousands of civilians have been killed, including hundreds just in recent weeks in some horrific strikes, like the slaughter of some 57 worshippers in a mosque in western Aleppo – which Trump’s Russian friends defended as aimed at “terrorists” – and the massacre soon after of dozens of displaced people in a school in Raqqa. Not to mention the mass killing of 200 civilians in Mosul in Iraq, just a few of the thousands killed in recent months in the joint US, Iranian and Iraqi regime (ie, the US-Iran joint-venture regime) offensive in that city.

No “anti”-war movement has protested all this US bombing. No “anti”-imperialists have ever cared less about any of this. Because all these years of US bombing have been of opponents of Assad, have often been in direct collaboration with Assad, and have had the tacit support of the Syrian regime.

Then in recent months, under both the late Obama administration and Trump, this US role had become even clearer. From December, the US launched a more intense bombing campaign against Jabhat Fatah al-Sham in Idlib and western Aleppo, thus joining the Assadist and Russian slaughter from the skies in that region. Hundreds of JFS cadre were killed, and the bombings also hit other rebel groups at times. The US role alongside Assad, Russia and Iran in the latest reconquest of Palmyra was widely reported on. Calculating all US bombings in February from the US CentCom site (ie, the site of the US-led Coalition bombing Syria) shows that while 60 percent of US bombings were carried out in alliance with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF, mainly the Kurdish People’s Protection Units, YPG), most of the other 40 percent was in alliance with Assad in Deir Ezzor, Palmyra and Idlib, some 195 strikes of the 548 in total (). And that was in a month when the bombing of Idlib was minimal, compared to January and March. Even in SDF-controlled Manbij, the US landed forces to patrol the region with Russian and Assad troops to block the Turkish-led FSA Euphrates Shield forces from advancing.

Despite countless assertions that Trump’s Syria policy was “unclear,” everything Trump has said was very clear: for many months, he insisted the US must ally with Russia and Assad to “fight ISIS,” as he believed Russia and Assad were doing; and that the US should cut off whatever remaining fragments of “aid” he believed were still going to some vetted Syrian rebels. Even Defence Secretary James Mattis, who many have mistakenly seen as more anti-Assad than Trump, has always opposed “no fly zone” plans and announced several years ago that “the time to support Syrian rebels against both Assad and ISIS is over,” ie, he agreed with the Obama-Kerry line that the US would only support rebels who fought ISIS and Nusra only, not the regime.

Then In the very days just before Assad’s monstrous chemical attack on Khan Sheikhoun, three prominent US leaders made Trump’s US policy even clearer, announcing that Assad should be allowed to stay. US UN representative Nikki Haley announced that the US was “no longer” (sic) focused on removing Assad; the Russia-connected US Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, used Assad’s very words that it is up to “the Syrian people” whether Assad ruled or not – an obvious statement, of course, if one assumed Syrian people could hold a democratic election under a tyrannical dictatorship; and White House spokesman Sean Spicer talked about how “silly” it would be to not accept the “political reality” of Assad. Of course this had long been unofficial US policy; and had even become partly official under Obama and Kerry when they agreed that Assad could continue to rule in an allegedly “transitional” regime following a political process. But the Trump team made this clear.

Then Assad goes and blows it by throwing sarin in their faces! The interesting issue is why Assad was stupid enough to do this, just days after he received so much explicit US support. Presumably, he was encouraged precisely by all this US verbal and actual military support, and so he decided to test the waters, to see if this meant that even sarin could now be re-normalised. But that just highlights the arrogance of power. The US was giving him everything; Obama’s “red line” against chemical weapons in 2013, and then his withdrawal from action, in the US-Russia-Israel deal that saw Assad’s chemical weapons removed, was saying to Assad you can use everything else except chemical weapons; and thus Assad did use everything else in the four years since, in unbelievable quantities, with complete US indifference, if not support. For Assad to then go and use the very weapons that the deal supposedly removed, and show off that he still has them, was simply impossible for the US to ignore in terms of its “credibility.” Assad was reading the messages correctly from this last week, that US leaders were encouraging him; he just read it wrongly that this could include sarin. Look at Nikki Haley, fuming in the UN; she had to fume, because three days earlier the same Nikki Haley had made the official announcement about Assad being good to continue ruling. Assad should have been more gracious about being kissed like that.

The US thus had no choice but to respond in some way for the sake of its alleged “credibility.” Many are claiming Trump is “taking advantage” of Assad’s action to launch a war, just because he likes war, to show what he is made of, to show that he did what Obama didn’t have the spine to do and so on, or alternatively that the strike aims to cover up Trump’s Russia connections that are under investigation at home, by showing he can stand up to the Russians, and so on. This is all a misunderstanding. Certainly, these may well be useful by-products of “taking action” for Trump. But they do not explain the action at all. No, Trump sent a bunch of missiles against the Assadist military facility responsible for the chemical attack, going against everything he wanted to do, and that his entire team wanted to do, as seen by their declarations in the very days beforehand, because Assad’s use of sarin had put US “credibility” at stake.

That is all from the point of view of US imperialism. But from the point of view of supporters of the Syrian revolution, and of liberation and humanity in general, can I ask in all honesty, what is the big deal? Why are 8000 strikes on opponents of Assad (and not only on ISIS), killing thousands of civilians, not “intervention,” yet when you finally get one strike against the biggest, most heavily armed and most highly dangerous terrorist group in Syria, the one currently occupying Damascus, after it slaughters dozens of children with chemical weapons, only that is considered “intervention,” that is supposedly something more significant, that is something we should protest. Really, what is the difference? Surely, if we oppose all US intervention on principle, then this particular bombing is nothing worse than all the other bombings against Anyone But Assad the last two and a half years; and if the left, on the whole, has not been actively demanding the end of US bombing of Syria – far from it – then surely we can say in as much as the US is already there, at least this particular bombing hit the most appropriate target to date.

Frankly, whoever has not been protesting the US bombing of Syria all along the last two and a half years, and who now suddenly protests this US “intervention” today, cannot in any sense be considered anti-war, or anti-imperialist, but simply an apologist for the Assad genocide-regime. As Joey Husseini wrote, “For those who care, this is 7,899th US airstrikes in Syria since 2014. I don’t remember 7,898 waves of outrage or concern.”

And that is only noting the absence of protest against US bombings before this one. One might rightly criticise my post for focusing on these US crimes, terrible as they are, rather than the truly massive crimes against humanity that have been carried out by the Assadist regime, its airforce and torture chambers, and the Russian imperialist invader that backs it, the crimes that have left at least half a million dead and turned the entire country to rubble, even before this latest horrific atrocity. That is simply because I have been focusing on the issue of the inconsistency of those allegedly “opposing US imperialism,” indicating that this is entirely fake. But from the point of view of humanity, from the perspective of the part of the left that still believes in the politics of liberation, the malignancy of those “anti-imperialists” who only protest bombing now, but who have never protested the Assadist and Russian bombing, or in fact support this genocide, is far worse.

Meanwhile, while launching a singular “punishment” strike may have the potential to escalate beyond its purpose, this seems almost certainly not the intention of any wing of the Trump regime. As State Secretary Rex Tillerson explains, this punishment strike should not be confused with a US change of line on Syria:

“US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the attack showed the President “is willing to take decisive action when called for. ‘I would not in any way attempt to extrapolate that to a change in our policy or posture relative to our military activities in Syria today’, he said. ‘There has been no change in that status. I think it does demonstrate that President Trump is willing to act when governments and actors cross the line and cross the line on violating commitments they’ve made and cross the line in the most heinous of ways’.”


  1. Glasgow Working Class said,

    This was a well planned in advance attack. The USA and their pals decided to get rid of Assad 2011 and have failed. How the West love to change regimes that do not suit them. Chemical attack or conventional we should let the natives decide which preference they have in killing them.

  2. Mick said,

    This proves the spectrum of the left actually won’t let the US and the West win. We bomb, we don’t bomb. We depose dictators, we don’t depose dictators. We negotiate with punk states, we roll over punk states. Whatever happens, the noisy Left has plenty of sniping to do, even when we actually keep out of things. (When Obama neglected the Middle East, only for Russia to fill the vacuum, there was much harumphing about Obama needing to be more involved.)

    The Left are naked again when it comes to international entaglements, which are usually way more complicated than first appears. Indeed, if the Left say that it’s all about oil, then nobody’s even stolen so much as a barrel yet for all this trouble of going there!

    • Dave said,

      I’m on the Left and there are plenty more
      on the Left who support the attack on
      Assad’s airforce. Like the the trots
      themselves you choose to define the
      ‘hard left’ CPGB’s, SWP, CP, SP etc, etc,
      etc as ‘the Left’. The trots do it because
      it confirms their sense of relevance in
      their delusional universe. You do it because
      you can kid yourself that ‘the left’ is
      restricted to hard left trot nincompoops
      and do offer no threat. Well the mainstream
      left do offer a threat to shitty Tory
      politics. Maybe not at the moment but
      we will reassert ourselves. Also the
      Labour Party (the Left) have been
      traditionally pro NATO and multi-lateral. So
      decidedly not anti western democracies.

      • Mick said,

        Brilliant news. But where are you to stop the orthodox Left when, across the US and UK, anti-Tory riots happen, university burnings happen, no-platforming happens, white shame and safe space doctrine spreads, pro-Islamic segregation and crime coverups happen in Labour, public scapegoating about racism over Brexit happens, West-blaming for terrorism happens, when beatings of Trump voters happen, or simply when left wing answers to society’s problems is infinite taxation and everybody on welfare to the tune of a basic wage.

        There are no shortage of mainstream journalists and bloggers justifying such nonsense, particularly the riots.

        These issues are by no means fringe. The last Labour government denying towns government contracts only because there were too many whites there is just typical of a normalised loony left. They don’t even realise they are doing it.

      • Dave said,

        Mick: You clearly inhabit your own hard right delusional universe. My I pressed a button there didn’t I. Sure you find it cosy.

      • Mick said,

        As you can see, I’m quite calm.

        All of this happens in the mainstream left and you seem to live in denial of it. You’re nailed on this one.

        It’s common in the left. Just like when communists say all the bad things about their religion of peace was just Stalin misbehaving!

      • Dave said,

        I didn’t say you weren’t calm I said you were delusional. Your ability to ‘mishear’ and your vulnerability to delusion gives you more in common with hard left crazies than you would imagine.

      • Mick said,

        You know what pressing the bezerk button means! Again, you’re changing lanes.

        Still, it gives you legroom to presume people crazy to dodge tackling the issues.

        I ask again, where are the mainstream ‘moderate’ left when the crazies go crazy? Until they stop the crazies, you have a bigger question than me to deal with.

  3. rotzeichen said,

    This is a real perspective on the whole affair, from one Britain’s ex ambassadors to Syria.

    You can also see a video of his interview here:

  4. Rilke said,

    Quite amusing reading Mick’s and Glesga garbled musings. They decry ‘leftists’ and ‘socialists’ for proposing potential solutions and political models because, they say, ‘leftists’ and ‘socialists’ do not understand society and have no true wisdom or experience and so on. Yet both hold forth on all and every subject; from international strategic relations, the work of a recognised poet, the relationship between labour and captial to the history of plantation slavery. The intellectual basis and conceptual ground of their assertions is? Mick ‘worked in retail’ for a few years and Glesga woked in the lower clerk class for a while. Note the past tense. It sounds as if both are chronically unemployed or semi-retired parasites as well as clearly being only semi-educated.
    Are you a sponger Mick? Glesga are you a ponce living on your spouse or partner? There is dignity in work and in learning, please take note.

    • Mick said,

      Aaaaah, there we have it! Way to validate the statements of those you decry!

      Socialists bang on about the little guy, and lowliest person not being left behind, being valuable, having as valid a perspective as the man in Whitehall. If not more so.

      But look what happens when we little people do and think what the Left don’t like – such as voting for Brexit. We’re all a bunch of ignorant, bigoted women then!

    • Mick said,

      And accusations of being unemployed being used as an insult!

      I’m surprised we haven’t been accused of being gay, too!

    • Glasgow Working Class said,

      I am a street corner boy bum boy ponce who has only ever bent over to make a living. And what a living. Vaseline is tax deductible. No pain no gain. And what a treat to read your comments in my free time.

  5. prianikoff said,

    18 years ago, Karadjis employed similar arguments to defend the KLA in Kosovo.

    Writing in “Green Left Weekly”, he argued that NATO’s bombing in Yugoslavia had “delegated to Milošević the covert aim of destroying the KLA-led ‘liberation movement.’ Washington, he said, was ‘implacably opposed’ to Kosovar separatism.”

    Karadjis has never acknowledged that this was patent rubbish, but continues to churn out equally misleading analyses of Syria from his Australian university.

    He is now one of the main proponents of the idea that the US, Russia and the Assad government have formed a common alliance to defeat the “Syrian Revolution”.

    According to him, this “revolution” is being led by the Free Syrian Army (even though many of its units are controlled by Turkey and are frequently involved in a military united front with the reactionary al-Qaeda groups, such as those which now control Idlib.

    Strangely, Karadjis distances himself from the secular left wing Kurdish party the PYD & its YPG militia, which have established organs of revolutionary self-government in Rojava.

    Instead of welcoming this, Karadjis accuses them of ethnic cleansing, repeating propaganda emanating from ENKS, an organisation funded and hosted by Barzani’s government in the KRG.

    ENKS is being promoted by Barzani (who is backed by Turkey) as a bourgeois alternative leadership for a hypothetical Kurdish state – much the same role the KLA played in Kosovo.

    The prognosis Karadjis made for Kosovo was proven to be utterly wrong when it declared independence in 2008.
    Far from being opposed to it, the USA and most of the EU states supported the move.

    Hashim Thaçi a central leader of the KLA became Kosovo’s first Prime Minister in 2014.

    Despite allegations of extortion and drug-trafficking, he was welcomed as the “voice of reason” by Western politicians.
    In 2010 Thaci met Recep Tayyip Erdogan who was a strong supporter of Kosovo’s independence.

    Not only was Turkey one of the first states to recognise Kosovo independence, Turkish firms have bought up important privatized economic assets in Kosovo, including the energy distribution network and the airport.

    Last December, following the attempted coup in Turkey, Thaci travelled to Ankara to offer his support to Erdogan.
    Erdogan has recently argued that “Kosovo is Turkey” and called on Thaci, who is still deputy PM to close down Gulenist Schools.

    Karadjis has been shown to be equally wrong over Syria, where he failed to predict the attack on Assad’s government Trump administration.
    Far from being an isolated one-off, this is part of a consistent policy being pursued by the Pentagon and CIA.
    As was shown by the recent statements of Rex Tillerson and Nikki Halley, the US will continue to bomb government assets in Syria.

    This will embolden the al-Qaeda linked groups and pose a real political problem for the Kurds in Afrin and Sheikh Masoud, who were given protection after the al-Qaeda gangs were driven out, in a deal with the Syrian government brokered by Russia.

    • prianikoff said,

      Thaci is actually now President of Kosovo (installed April 2016)

  6. Rilke said,

    The Dr is not available. Please call again later.
    You can obtain medication by repeat prescription at the pharmacy counter.

  7. SteveH said,

    “No “anti”-war movement has protested all this US bombing. No “anti”-imperialists have ever cared less about any of this”

    You are still the most dishonest piece of shit on the internet I see, well apart from those claiming that Assad actually used chemical weapons. Oh wait a minute, you also claim that!

    If you think this article is in any way clever you are wrong.

    Anyone who is thinking, hang on a minute this fucking scoundrel Denham with his endless and servile support of one imperialist intervention after another in his own small way helped create the hell we are now seeing, and helped create a reactionary carnival in Europe and his endless and servile displays of grovelling support for imperialism not only led to countless mass graves, destroyed nations, a mass refugee crisis but also Britains exit from the EU would be entirely correct.

    Now I have been intellectually raped and emotionally violated by visiting this cesspit I leave for a long shower.

  8. Rilke said,

    I posted some time ago here, that the expansive forces of higher capital and strategic interests in Anglo-US and in fact in European contexts were united in one thing: their desire to exploit the resources, and labour of Russia and to enforce a military subjugation upon Russia. In other words, the ‘West’ has been angling for a war with Russia that would simultaneously enforce its strategic interests in the Middle East, the Gulf d the Ukriane. An ex-major UN general was touting a book in the last two years entitled ‘The Coming War with Russia’. This is now a concrete rather than abstract possibility. It is pitiful to see members of the ‘left’ parroting simple-minded Russophobic hysteria. The crimes of Assad backed by Putin are deplorable, but no better or no worse than those of say, Saudia Arabia in Yemen backed by US and UK interests. The UK government that now so loudly proclaims its humanitarian outrage blocked a UN inquiry into Saudi war crimes in Yemen. It is sad to see those of a Trotskyist inclination unable to throw off their ‘Stalinist reflex’ in which every action of the Russian state is really Stalinism by proxy and therefor somehow worse that any other crime. Trotskyists have allowed their previous anti Stalinism to become simple-minded Russophobia. It is a sorry, but also quite laughable, spectacle.

    • rotzeichen said,

      People seem oblivious to the fact that the UK and US are taking us to the brink of war, the US has a ring of Nuclear missiles stretching from Japan all the way round to the Baltic sea. and they say Russians are the aggressors, just like the US has been involved in over 152 wars since 1945, when are people going to wake up? And no just because we can see the bigger picture, doesn’t mean we are supporters of Putin.

      • Mick said,

        The USA and UK have needed to fight so many battles, for example when Gadaffi needed a spanking in 1986. The Left howled.

        Or when Kennedy tried to check the armed advance of undemocratic socialism in South East Asia. the left howled. Or when the Falklands needed liberating. Again, the left howled. Or when Saddam Hussein boasted (and was backed up by intelligence) that he had copious WMDs and would use them any time, so apparently needed a kicking. Again, the left howled, even though they accidentally had a point this time.

        It isn’t so clear cut. And if the US and UK didn’t stand up to communism, we would probably have become satellite states long ago.

      • rotzeichen said,

        Are you being serious, do you have the faintest idea of what you are talking about?

        Either you are too young to know or have been sleep walking through life.

        What I will say, I do hope your ilk never get their way, because we might not see the other side of it.

      • Mick said,

        It’s true, we did have a cold war. Lots of missiles lined up and left wing forces stoking wars in Africa.

        Castro packed the island he nicked with missiles, to the gunnels. He nearly gave us world war 3!

        And all this while beardo-weirdos clamoured for unilateral disarmament, to downgrade us in the face of bullies. Even Bevan knew that was folly, telling fellow left wing purists not to send him ‘naked into the conference chamber’

        Oh yes, we know.

      • rotzeichen said,

        I listen carefully to your ranting imbecilities and note that there appears to be an agenda behind all your comments, yes not just the absurd right wing banalities but that you are playing a game of war mongering.

        Well you might like fighting other peoples wars, so perhaps you could do us all a favour and join up for front line duty in Afghanistan, I’m sure this country would breath a little easier knowing you are protecting us. Oh and take the fake Glaswegian working class lad with you for the same reason.

      • Mick said,

        And BINGO! Leftists resort to insults and non-sequitur.

        Though I’ll do a deal with you. I’ll sign up to fight in Afghanistan – in a war which closed 3 years ago for us anyway – if you’re my human shield.

        Lefties enjoyed a bit of that, didn’t they. The ‘peace lovers’ flocked out to Saddam’s side, didn’t they. They love themselves a brutal dictator, perhaps for murky sexual reasons they are always obsessed with.


  9. Rilke said,

    Please ignore poor deluded and neurotic Mick, he is the kind of sadistic cretin who always says that his crimes are ‘necessary and good’ and every other crime is ‘bad and deplorable’. A moral imbecile. If he steals it is ‘good’ and therefore not theft, if others steal it is ‘bad’ and a crime; an utter moron and degenerate.

    • Glasgow Working Class said,

      You and your pal as thick as a shithoose wa.

    • Mick said,

      Ah, yes, the thought crimes. It’s a good job the Left are here, as everyone else needs to be punished!

      And socialists are the experts on theft. In their dark pasts, collectivisation or financial restrictions or a 98% tax rate emptied other peoples’ pockets nicely enough.

      Oh, Left! Oh, you!

  10. Glasgow Working Class said,

    Aye Mick remember all those sad women holding hands around Greenham Common while the Soviets were hiding their Nukes. Unilateral disarmament they called for. And the Soviet defeat along with the Wall coming down must have scunnered the left who claimed the Gulag was an invention of the West. The lefties do talk the talk however it is strange they are failures at the ballot box! It must leave those leftie intellectuals stunned.

    • Mick said,

      Yup, the loony left do wonder how their policies lead to Tory victories or Trump being elected.

      Ah well, the Greenham sillies do have strong, dependable, sensible descendents. They’re the ones with their faces, singing how their vaginas make them proud.

      • Mick said,

        They’re the ones with their faces??

        Either one of them is covered in the girl’s own genital blood, I should have added!

  11. Rilke said,

    Hee hee hee! The tune is hilarious and the words almost, but not quite, a joke. Mick and Glesga warbling along endlessly about ‘lefties’ like a talentless music-hall duo who have run out of cheap tricks. They just rattle out the words ‘leftie’ or ‘lefties’ as if they were enunciating propositional concepts or describing an anthropological entity. It would make for a fairly interesting insight into their befuddled minds if one could inquire as to what they actually mean when they use such words.
    There are thickos who trot out the words ‘Pentagon’ or ‘US imperialism’ to account for all and every political occurrence. There are degenerates who chant the word ‘Jew’ or ‘Muslim’ to explain every and all human catastrophe. Now we have comical morons who endlessly burble the words ‘liberal’ or ‘leftie’ to justify their vague, semi-educated conspiracy theory notions. I do hope one or the other can play the piano. That would top it nicely. Mind you, my guess is that they are too philistine and simple-minded to know anything of music proper. Oh well, at least the show is midly entertaining. Glesga sounds as if he is pretending to have a stroke. Most amusing I must say.

    • Mick said,

      Liberals and lefties are all too real. They’re the ones popping out of the woodwork to complain when they recognise themselves in my descriptions, like their behaviour is somehow foolhardy in bright sunlight.

      Hmmm…. perhaps there is some self-awareness in them after all. They don’t actually rebut anything!

    • Glasgow Working Class said,

      You must be a mouth organist.

    • Mick said,

      “There are thickos who trot out the words ‘Pentagon’ or ‘US imperialism’ to account for all and every political occurrence.”

      You mean people in the Left, your own compadres and fellow travellers, and blood brothers in the existential struggle against the wacists and the bigots.

      Those thickos. Just to clear it up, Left.

  12. Rilke said,

    The Dr is not available. Please collect your medication by repeat prescription from the pharmacy counter.

    • Glasgow Working Class said,

      I get ma medicine delivered here in socialist Scotland. We get everything here for nothing thanks tae the English mugs.

      • Mick said,

        The Left will never change and I’m glad – for now – that they won’t.

        The more they insult, shame and try to punish the heretics, the more voters will back ‘reactionaries’.

        The Left can’t stop themselves. So they more they themselves will be punished at the polls.

  13. prianikoff said,

    Theodore Postol is Professor of Science, Technology, and National Security policy at MIT.
    His expertise is in ballistic missile technologies.
    Prior to coming to MIT, he worked as an analyst at the Office of Technology Assessment and as a science and policy adviser to the chief of naval operations.
    In 2001, he received the Norbert Wiener Prize from Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility for uncovering numerous false claims about missile defenses.

    Postol has criticized the unclassified intelligence assessment released by the Trump White House blaming the air forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for the April 2017 Khan Shaykhun chemical attack.
    Postol concluded that the assessment “contains absolutely no evidence that this attack was the result of a munition being dropped from an aircraft” .
    He says that the photographic evidence used in the assessment points to an attack by people on the ground using a 122mm artillery rocket tube filled with a chemical agent and detonated by an explosive charge laid on top of it.

    • rotzeichen said,

      Thank you for the link: I have tweeted it as we must pass this information as widely as possible, clearly the canister was compressed by an explosion not as you would presume split asunder by a bomb, which fragments into pieces on explosion.

      I don’t believe you need to be a rocket scientist to see from the photographs that the cylinder suffered a compressive force on it, rather than an internal explosion.

      Well done for locating this report.

    • Jim Denham said,

      The Guardian’s Kareem Shaheen was the first reporter on the scene of the attack, and found no evidence whatsoever to back the conspiracy theories being peddled by Putin, Peter Ford and other Assad apologists:

      • rotzeichen said,

        Sorry Jim but you need to read the evidence yourself to see that they are not apologising for Assad.

        Try explaining how a bomb implodes on explosion, but can be compressed by an explosion. That is a bomb dropped from a plane explodes into pieces of shrapnel, it doesn’t end up being squashed like a pancake, but if a charge was placed over it, would be an external force that could compress it.

        As the article said any amateur could explain that from the photographic evidence itself.

        Try not to shoot the messenger because you don’t like the message, these people make sense, they have no truck with Assad but make rational judgements based on the fact that Assad is winning against American backed rebel forces.

        It has also been pointed out by a retired Colonel who has served in this field, that the Americans were notified of every bombing target in advance so that planes are not shot down by mistake. So they knew in advance where the area of the bomb target was located.

      • Jim Denham said,

        The evidence against Assad is overwhelming: now, only conspiracy-theory nuts and pro-Assad/Putin apologists (eg Peter Ford, Breitbart, etc) can deny it:

        Russia, Syria and their apologists (and conspiracy-theory nuts) have claimed the sarin came from rebel stockpiles hit accidentally by government bombs, an argument dismissed by chemical weapons experts and inconsistent with evidence at the site of the attack:The Assad/Putin/apologists claim does not fit with facts on the ground. An airstrike on a weapons depot with

        high explosives would have destroyed much of the sarin immediately, and distributed any that survived over a much smaller area.

        “The pattern of casualties isn’t right for the distribution of materials that you would get if you had a location with toxic materials breached by an airstrike. It’s more consistent with canisters that have distributed [chemical weapons] over a wider population,” one expert (Richard Guthrie) told the Guardian.

        While it is impossible to assess the exact amount of chemical agent used immediately, the extent and distribution of the casualties are consistent with the use of hundreds of kilos.

        Sarin is too complicated and expensive for rebels to have manufactured themselves, and while they might potentially have obtained some supplies of stolen nerve agents or other gas, it is very unlikely to be more than a few kilos.

        “If they have [sarin], it would be in minute quantities, maybe a kilo or so,” said De Bretton Gordon. The high numbers of woman and children among the casualties was not consistent with a military depot, he added.

        Finally, the Syrian manufacturing process for sarin involves creating and storing two key components, both far more stable than the nerve agent itself. They are mixed to create sarin hours – or at most days – before it is used, said Dan Kaszeta, a chemical weapons expert and former officer in the US Army’s chemical corps.

        So an airstrike on a storage facility would be unlikely to release sarin itself. And because one of the two components is highly flammable isopropyl alcohol, or rubbing alcohol, you would expect a fireball, which has not been observed.

      • rotzeichen said,

        Look up this site and see who already has Sarin Bombs:

        Under Chemical Weapons.

      • Jim Denham said,

        You’re in denial and clutching at straws. No serious, objective expert seriously doubts the overwhelming likelihood that Styria was responsible. Only nut-job conspiracy theorists doubt this.

        Even the pro-Putin, pro-Assad Stop The War Coalition (possibly concerned about their credibility amongst rational people) has accepted this.

      • rotzeichen said,

        I think you are doing an excellent job on denial, could you then explain how a bomb from a plane ends up crushed from an explosion?

        The evidence is clear enough for any amateur let alone an expert.

  14. Marko said,

    The actual evidence is pointing to one of 2 things,

    Either no chemical attack took place at all or

    It was carried out as a false flag operation.

    The Russians have asked for an independent inquiry, the USA have refused, I think the truth is becoming more and more obvious.

    The greatest conspiracy is to believe no one at any point in either Syria or Russia said, hang on maybe this isn’t a good idea. Saying Assad dropped chemicals weapons when it served him no purpose is the mother of all conspiracy theories.

    Those espousing this nutjob conspiracy are nothing but apologists for US supremacism and the US military-industrial complex.

    But we already knew that about Jim Denham.g

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: