Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Planned Attack on Syria


President Obama is reportedly considering a range of limited military actions against Syria. But the White House said today that the goal of any future strikes would not be regime change in Syria.

“I want to make clear that the options that we are considering are not about regime change,” White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters today. “They are about responding to a clear violation of an international standard that prohibits the use of chemical weapons,” he added. (AP, 27 August)

Carney continued that although the “firm conviction” of the U.S. is that “Syria’s future cannot include Assad in power,” but the impending strikes are not designed to facilitate a regime change in Damascus.

The New York Times reported earlier today that the
attacks would not be on chemical weapons storage sites in order to avoid the risks of an environmental and humanitarian disaster. Instead, the U.S. strikes would be limited to military units thought to have carried out chemical attacks, air bases where attack helicopters are deployed, and the headquarters overseeing the effort, fewer than 50 sites. (The New York Times, 27 August)

Photo credit: White House Press Secretary Jay Carney. August 27, 2013. (AP)

21 comments:

Mark Pyruz said...

The lack of UN authorization for such a strike makes the UN looking more and more like it is going the way of the League of Nations.

Anonymous said...

UN was always an irrelevant sideshow. They have passed dozens of "Resolutions" against Zionist occupation of Palestine but got diddly squat response. Now since the US is no longer a major power, and Russia and China assert themselves it is more of a joke. In any case, the UNSC composition is nonsensical based on the imperialist model as it does not represent today's demographic or power structures. Two poodles UK and France are on the UNSC while the world's largest economies like India, Brazil or even Indonesia are not on it. It is a neo-imperialist model intended to continue US/Zionist hegemony and is already dead.

The US and its poodles in tow will perhaps strike Syria with stand-off weapons and that is not going to make an iota of difference on the ground as the Takfiri cannibals simply can not uproot President Assad without US boots on the ground. And that is not going to happen considering the deadbeat US economy. If Russia does not show some overt military signs like airlifting S300/400 to Syria and honoring the S300 sale to Iran, then the US and its Anglo-French poodles may lunch some Tomahawk missiles at Syria and claim victory. The US in its infinite idiocy is unleashing massive turmoil in the region which will not stay contained for long.

Anonymous said...

And the are planning to strike mostly at sites not related to chemical weapons, in order to weaken or maybe kill B. Assad and his commanders before the "planned GENEVA conference"....

A-F

Anonymous said...

Question: do you guys think syria used chemical? The 5 days is what gets me...why didn't they let inspectors in right away?

Awaiting the so called further evidence. I hope the have dna samples...

Anonymous said...

it's looking more and more like the Assad dictatorship is going the way of the dodo long before the UN.

Carney is, or course, lying and the US isn't going to attack Syria unless there are commitments in hand from other nations, both from European NATO members and the NATO nation bordering Syria that are aimed at pushing the Assads either out or into graves.

Anonymous said...

I don't think they will be able to do much. Syrians are not Iraqis and have planned for many contingencies including NBC. They even have nuke proof bunkers in the hills around Damascus. President Assad is not going to sit on his front lawn with a bulls eye painted on his head. Syrians have dispersed their strategic assets and will easily absorb a few Tomahawks and the US and its poodles are not going to use manned aircraft due to the fear of being shot down. The Pantsir S1 and S-300 are very capable systems and may even down a few cruise missiles. These stand-off weapons will be fired from the Mediterranean and Cyprus which itself may become a target of Syrian retaliation.

Anonymous said...

Why would Syria use chemical weapons while it is winning anyway? It has the tafiri cannibals on the run. The timing while the UN inspectors were visiting is also TOO CONVENIENT. US and the Zionists control the UN and it was a set-up job so that they can fabricate a caucus belli and attack Syria to support their losing alCIAda takfiri buddies. The ramifications will be long lasting and not benefit either the US. Zionists or Jordan. Eventually, the Saudis will cop it too. This is the beginning of a century of regional destabilization and Muslim fratricide and US agenda.

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:31PM
In supplementation of your valuable conclussions and assumptions, I would like to add that Russia has planned large military exercises for a second part of the September, close to the Black and Caspian Seas.

Like I have commented earlier, Russia has decided to bring her first newly built Mistral class assult warship to Russia from France..
They have planned to bring it this November for a continuation of installations of their equipment and an armament on that ship.
Everything is still in the air, because France may block delivery in reaction to the probability that Syria situation will spill over...
Anyway, those Russian plans point to their expectation that the international situation will inflame during the second half of this year.

In addition, two Russian warships are currently in Venezuela, after visiting Nicaragua and Cuba. Those two warships, which include the cruiser Moskva from the Black Sea Fleet and another large destroyer, are slated to depart on August 29 from Venezuela and sail toward the Mediterranean Sea...
Those visits of Russian warships in the Central America countries as well as an recent visit of the Russian Chief of Staff to the same area, last April, have been pointing that Russia is preparing its new strategy to counter the future tension with the West.
There is a probability that new Russian naval bases are going to be established in some countries of that region in the coming future and Cuba was mentioned as a possible refueling base for Russian airplanes.

There is another issue with the recent conflict in Syria, that Russia will want to examine a profficiency of their newly commissioned weaponries.

A-F

Anonymous said...

Cyprus would be an excellent target for syrian retaliation,you have the nato airbase of Akrotiri that is well within range of syrias ballistic missile forces and would probably be used as part of any attack on syria.Hopefully the syrian military is drawing up plans for a strike even as we speak

Anonymous said...

America Planned to attack Syria, Iran 15 years ago.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha1rEhovONU

Anonymous said...

I talked to many Iranian friends, NONE of them thinks it was Assad. The Rebels did it to invite foreign intervention.

Anonymous said...

The US and the "Zionists" will kick Assad's teeth in! The Islamic losers barking in Tehran can't do a damn thing about it! LOL!

Anonymous said...

There is also a French Rafale base near Abu Dhabi in the puppet Emirates and that is also an excellent target for Syrian retaliation. The UAE pimps have never been hit before and only one missile would set of a camel stampede of these cowards who are fanning Tafiri cannibalism in the Muslim world. These Arab puppets have no conscience and would sell their mothers and do.

Anonymous said...

If anyone used chemical weapons, it would be the cannibal wahabis of the so called fsa. They have already demonstrated that they have them.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, sure http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/286/870/cf7.jpg

Anonymous said...

AnonymousAugust 28, 2013 at 7:52 AM
Do you actually realise just how many nato targets are in range of irans weapons?

Anonymous said...

AnonymousAugust 28, 2013 at 12:13 PM--- do you actually realize that every inch of Iran is in range of NATO weapons?

and that NATO has far more and far more powerful weaponry than does Iran?

have a care.

Anonymous said...

AnonymousAugust 27, 2013 at 11:29 PM
In case you havent noticed assads forces are winning,its the fsa/al qaida who are most likely going the way of the dodo

Anonymous said...

Do you actually realize that every nato facility within 2000km of irans borders is in range of iranian weapons?,iran can inflict a great deal of damage on the nato forces in the region,iran has the largest ballistic missile arsenal in the region and the most capable naval force in the gulf,certainly nato could retaliate but then so can iran,nato is already pretty stretched in afghanistan as it is the last thing it wants is a conflict with iran.Iran is far from helpless and nato isnt invincible

Anonymous said...

Nice!
US secretary of "war," Hagel and state secretary, Kerry, were supposed to provide Iran with the best arrangement in the US cabinet for direct negotiations — as ostensibly they were both against war and pro peace.
Obama's resumé looks darker that W Bush's.
I hope Iran never talks to these war criminals.

Read on Democracy Now today: "The U.S. government has now admitted its troops used white phosphorus as an incendiary weapon against Iraqis during the assault on Fallujah a year ago." And yet, they are self-righteous enough to ask for Syria to be punished.

It is so unbelievable, so ludicrous.

KM

Anonymous said...

Iran has far fewer weapons and inferior ones and NATO targets within Iran's range are not vital to NATO while Iran itself will suffer orders of magnitude greater damage and Iran replace what it will lose in a war with NATO.
you can exhibit bravery but you will bring nothing other than misery onto the nation if you try to back up typical bluster with action.

Iran can't win any military confrontation.