No doubt fearing the grave risk of killing Russian military personnel on the ground in Syria, the United States military gave Russia advance notice before launching cruise missile strikes overnight on a Syrian air base that is used to store chemical weapons, according to a U.S. intelligence assessment.
Defense official: there were Russians stationed at the base the US struck in Syria tonight, but US informed them beforehand @ForeignPolicy
— paul mcleary (@paulmcleary) April 7, 2017
A Pentagon spokesman, Capt. Jeff Davis, said in a statement that a pre-exiting “deconfliction” channel, set up to keep American and Russian jets from crossing paths in the skies over Syria, was used to disclose the planned attack to Russia. “U.S. military planners took precautions to minimize risk to Russian or Syrian personnel located at the airfield,” Davis said.
(After the strikes hit, the Russians announced that they were withdrawing from the agreement to share information about their movements over Syria.)
Putin: US strikes against Syria are act of aggression against sovereign state. US-Russia relations will deteriorate further. pic.twitter.com/j6cC5iTCUf
— Russian Embassy, UK (@RussianEmbassy) April 7, 2017
According to Davis, the strikes were aimed not at Syrian soldiers but the “aircraft and support infrastructure and equipment at Shayrat Airfield,” with the intention of “reducing the Syrian Government’s ability to deliver chemical weapons.” In his statement announcing the strikes on the airfield, President Donald Trump said that the base in central Syria had been used on Tuesday to launch a chemical attack that killed dozens of men, women and children in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib Province.
Evidence of the damage caused by the strikes is incomplete, but images of the base broadcast on Russian state television on Friday suggested that significant parts of it remain intact.
More images from Sharyat AB showing more of SyAAF SU-22s undamaged after #UnitedStates strikes. #Syria #Homs pic.twitter.com/2tNRe5unGD
— Aldin ???????? (@CT_operative) April 7, 2017
Battle damage assessment: limited #Syria #Trump https://t.co/re3hF5WBPP
— Yaroslav Trofimov (@yarotrof) April 7, 2017
Evgeny Poddubnyy, a Russian war correspondent, posted more images of the damaged airfield on Instagram, showing a bunker reduced to rubble and what might have been a jet, but another plane that looked unscathed.
Video posted on YouTube by a news site in St. Petersburg, Federal News Agency, also appeared to show an air defense battery at the perimeter of the base had escaped the bombing.
First footage from the vicinity of Sha'erat airbase, 2K12 Kub (SA-6) can be seen intact, also an #SAA T-62 tank. #Syria #Homs pic.twitter.com/KDE1DUYWrW
— Raphael Babikian (@RafaelBabikian) April 7, 2017
It is not yet clear how far ahead of time the Russians were warned, but a witness told Riam Dalati of the BBC that a convoy of Russian military vehicles left the base at some stage yesterday.
Eyewitness tells BBC's @Dalatrm that a convoy of Russian vehicles left targetted Syrian airbase yesterday.
— Quentin Sommerville (@sommervillebbc) April 7, 2017
Although at least six Syrian airmen died in the attack, according to a Syrian military spokesman, it seems inconceivable that the Russian military personnel fleeing the base would not have alerted their allies to what was coming.
Emerging photos eulogising #Shoayrat KIA #Syria soldiers seem 2 cnfrm early tstimonies of Air Defence Brigade bearing brunt of #SyriaStrikes pic.twitter.com/QJbDEQlcGr
— Riam Dalati (@Dalatrm) April 7, 2017
Video recorded by a Russian military drone over the base suggested to some observers that the Syrians might have moved some of their jets out of their bunkers in anticipation of the strikes.
Russian video suggests SyAF had moved its aircraft into the open to evade US Tomahawk attack https://t.co/AfQ05hEJlt
— Vijainder K Thakur (@vkthakur) April 7, 2017
While it was no doubt prudent to take steps to minimize the number of people killed in the attack, letting Syria know that the strike was coming represents a significant departure from Trump’s own campaign rhetoric. At rally after rally before he was president, and in debates against Hillary Clinton, Trump repeatedly called for surprise attacks and mocked the U.S. military and its Iraqi allies for giving advance notice of a planned offensive against Islamic State fighters to retake the city of Mosul in Iraq.
“Whatever happened to the element of surprise?” Trump asked in a September debate. “Douglas MacArthur, George Patton, spinning in their graves when they see the stupidity of our country.”
“Why don’t we just go in quietly, right?” Mr. Trump told supporters in Wisconsin at one campaign rally in late October. “They used to call it a sneak attack.”
Pressed on the idea that he did not understand military strategy in an interview just before the election, Trump vowed to teach military experts a thing or two.
Trump says he'll teach military expert 'a couple of things' about Mosul. “Why can't they win first and talk later?” https://t.co/dJ3W33zgVw pic.twitter.com/zvHtFZITxN
— ABC News (@ABC) October 27, 2016
In a video statement on the impact of Trump’s non-surprise attack in the Syrian air base, a Russian military spokesman mocked it as ineffective, saying that just six MIG-23 jets were destroyed, while the runways and bulk of the Syrian jets were unharmed.
A screenshot from a video statement released by Russia’s defense ministry on Friday.
The Russian spokesman also scoffed at the notion that Syria’s government was responsible for the chemical attack this week — reiterating his government’s claim that Islamist rebels were producing their own nerve agents — and suggested that Trump had staged the incident purely for reasons of domestic politics.
Setting aside their feelings about Trump, Syrian activists who want to see President Bashar al-Assad forced from power largely welcomed the strikes.
Even if this is a symbolic strike, destroying the Shuayrat airfield means one less place for Assad's airforce to kill people from.
— Maysaloon (@Maysaloon) April 7, 2017
WHEN TRUMP TELLS THE TRUTH pic.twitter.com/ts1AIysg5j
— Rami Jarrah (@RamiJarrah) April 7, 2017
Some, however, expressed their dismay that Trump’s message seemed to imply that Assad would be punished only for killing civilians with chemical weapons.
Another common sentiment among anti-regime Syrians today. ~99.993% of civilians killed by the regime were killed with conventional weapons pic.twitter.com/rJZIsMrqP0
— Elizabeth Tsurkov (@Elizrael) April 7, 2017
6) The question I get over and over from Syrians is, why is it ok to kill us with bombs but not with gas? What's the difference?
— Clarissa Ward (@clarissaward) April 7, 2017
The strikes were also welcomed in rebel-held northern Syria, according to Quentin Sommerville of the BBC and Clarissa Ward of CNN.
Syrian rebel groups we are speaking to are jubilant at US action is Syria. Nusra (HTS) quiet.
— Quentin Sommerville (@sommervillebbc) April 7, 2017
One Syrian tells me the new nom de guerre for President Trump on the ground in Northern Syria is Abu Ivanka al Amriki. #syria
— Clarissa Ward (@clarissaward) April 7, 2017
One Syrian blogger, who writes under the pen name Edward Dark, noted bitterly that Trump’s strikes had thrilled the Islamic extremists he has vowed to defeat, while potentially exacerbating the refugee crisis whose victims he has treated with such disdain.
Isis, Al Qaeda and all the other jihadi groups are celebrating and happy today thanks to the Americans #Syria
— Edward Dark (@edwardedark) April 7, 2017
America: ban Syrian refugees, then bomb #Syria because you're "concerned" about Syrians....
— Edward Dark (@edwardedark) April 7, 2017
This show was for the Chinese (dining with Trump at the time) and the Koreans , domestic Russia/Trump conspiracy nutjobs, the Iranians, the Russians, the Turks and only finally the Syrians.
Sarin? Not with protocol failure by the White Al Queda Helmets. White Phosphurous or Phosgene maybe. Either way neither the UN, Iran or Russia are responsible for US backed terrorist false flag attacks.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/04/we-all-love-the-tomahawk-a-brief-history-of-uss-favorite-robotic-killer/
The Russians were given advance notice to vanish. No top intel people (including Pompeo) were at the meeting approving the strike. The bombs understandably failed to take out a hardened airfield in use the next day and their disbursal pattern speaks to the age of the weapons the incompetence of personnel or even the deliberate intent of the personnel targeting those weapons to minimize damage to both the facilities, equipment and personnel (Russian to be sure due as they WERE notified). Big bright explosions. Wall to wall coverage. The story most of you saw about Iranian and Russian warning the US about their own red lines in Syria…False.
I wonder how all of this will effect representative Conawsy and Gowdys investigation into Rice, Clapper and Brennan’s unmasking Project Dragnets US PERSONS 1 2 3 4 5 6 to the press and on Obamas final executive order GOVERNMENT WIDE REGARDLESS OF SECURITY CLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS.
I wish I could help those people, its just so heartbreaking.
Does it occur to anyone here that this was mere a show by Trump to do something decisive before the McCains and Hillarys and Adam Shiffs and Grahams of the world would have demanded that and much more all day?
So he targeted some airbase, minimized casualties and scored some points at home.
Not that I support attacking a sovereign country, but it might have been the best option given the circumstances. And Russia and Syria with their S300 and S400 didn’t fire one shot at those tomahawks. Spot something here?
Geopolitics is 4d-chess and rarely are things what they seem at the surface.
The wild card is, how long it will take McCain and the likes to stage the next false flag operation to again drag Trump into action. McCain frequently flies into the region – koordinating “moderate rebels” (i.e. terrorists) is apparently a top-priority nowadays for a senator from Arizona.
The Russian/Iranian warning of responding militarily to any future attack seem likepart of the game and at the same time a decent hint not to repeat anything like that. Of course, the neocon war faction may be all too happy to try and see how capable Russia/iran really are. Make no mistake if the US along with Israel and Turkey and Saudi Arabia (and of course their European lapdogs) were to intervene with ground troups and/or massive air attacks, there is only so much Russia can really do.
Dangerous times, for sure.
That is what I am hoping. I did not vote for Hillary because she is just as much of a warmonger as McCain and right now so are about 95% of the Democrats in Congress who want to go to war with Syria and ,stupid as they are, with Russia as well. Only Rand Paul, Tulsi Gabbard (who was attacked by Howard Dean) and Ro Khanna seem to have any sanity. I am really hoping that Trump will stick to his campaign promises and improve relations with Russia and work on the Middle east problems jointly.
Look at the scenario in Syria past the MSM war propaganda. Not easy to do, because the war propaganda is by FAR the dominant narrative. This is by design, obviously, and effective.
The Syrian government, (relabeled “The Assad Regime” for propaganda effect) which is secular and democratic (by middle east standards, anyway), and has protected Christians and other religious minorities for decades, is being attacked by various factions of Wahhabi Sunni Islamists, from ISIS and al Nusra (al Qaeda) to the supposedly more “moderate” Wahhabis who we back, who chop off kids’ heads on camera.
People will criticize the Syrian government for both valid and less valid reasons, but this is a sovereign government being attacked MASSIVELY by terrorists. Much, much worse than we in the US have been attacked, which we think gives us license for geographically unlimited aggressive war. But if the Syrian government fights back, we demonize them. Apparently they should make sure not to kill anyone and just step down and let the jihadis take over and impart Sharia law like they want and everything will be better!
Our allies in this fight against the Syrian government include governments like Saudi Arabia, which are very, very clearly worse than “the Assad regime”, without even the illusion of democratic or secular values.
If you want to be able to see beyond the propaganda, don’t look the the media, as it is a propaganda conduit. Look instead at what the foreign policy strategists have said before this post 9/11 series of conflicts even started. People like Zbigniew Brezinski and Henry Kissinger have written lots of books on what really drives US foreign policy.
We have been “intervening” in Syrian policy since at least the 1950s. This has little to do with “beautiful babies” dying in an attack that killed dozens. The death toll of this war is in the hundreds of thousands. Trump’s strike was to send a message that our policy has changed and we are no longer the ineffectual wusses that he thinks Obama’s “red line” waffling made us appear.
Criticizing Trump but not the war crime of agression.
Mackey, your what’s wrong in the media.
WHAT and WHOSE chemical weapons? Syria surrendered its chemical weapons to the U.S. military in 2013. Al Nusra, however, is capable of making its own chemical weapons. This is known. Why do you, in your opening paragraph, do you refer to a Syrian airbase “where chemical weapons are stored”?
I agree with your comment about….”….where chemical weapons are stored.”
This is the opening gambit of journalistic privilege about a “fact” existing when so much evidence is lacking.
Poor writing.
But, indicative of our declining information age being legitimate.
Raise your hand if you actually read the article or if you are basing your opinion on the headline alone?
Dear Robert , get a clue, what, is diplomacy off your misinformed playbook? do you realize that even tho we have a broken process – that warnings of this sort are needed to prevent accidents and the danger of triggering a nuclear attack? Case you were not aware, the Ruskies posses half of the nuclear weapons on the planet….Hello, why would the Intercept have you write on the topic might be to prove just how out of touch the average American is….Why do’t you report on celebrities or some such, there you might shine bright….
Great comment.
@Casey
Let’s break down your obscenely glib recklessness:
Yes, I’ve said that often.
If you think the United States military can make Assad “go,” without almost certainly risking war with Russia, please tell us all how that happens? Or does only a “Quisling” and “dupe” point out reality?
“Trump Surrenders Element of Surprise …” That only means when Trump was taking his attack instructions from Bibi, he didn’t hear the “surprise” part.
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201704071052388059-daesh-us-strike-syria/
if it makes you feel better, ISIS was warned as well. well, not so much “warned” as “prepared”.
you’re in great company. hope that helps you enjoy a guilt-free “dead muslim kids boner”.
According to Sputnik link:c
“……..”Is it a coincidence that the IS [Daesh] fighters attacked one of the defensive positions of the Homs-Palmyra route simultaneously with the US attack on Sha’irat?” the source said…….”
Good, fact-based journalism from state-operated Sputnik.
There’s no such thing as “fact-based journalism” from a Russian state organization. But thanks for playing.
Seeing Robert Mackey’s on the article prepared me for it to suck. The Intercept has done well in picking journalists and informed writers. Please re-assess.
Very diplomatic version of what I was going to say. I second this.
I hope Mackey doesn’t get paid for these analysis free articles, the bulk of which consist of Twitter and Instagram embedded posts.
Intercept, you can /surely/ do better than this, please?
it is kinda sad to see all the unpaid journalists out in the field picking cotton for aggregate plantation owners when this guy cashes regular checks. it’s almost as if “meritocracy” is a myth.
mr mackey, conventional explosives give our enemies too much of a heads up
why not go “full psycho” with a nuclear attack on the Kremlin … after all they messed with our election on twitter
Mr. Mackey
This really is a minor issue on which to mock President Trump. A much more important issue is that Trump campaigned on a foreign policy of non-intervention. He lied about opposing the war in Iraq. None the less, he opposed intervention like in Iraq during the campaign. This was a big selling point for antiwar libertarians and radical leftists over the liberal interventionist hawk, Hillary Clinton. HRC challenged Russia in Ukraine and Syria. Some considered her to be a threat to get us into WWIII with Russia. Russia detested her so much that they intervened to elect Trump – according to US intelligence. Then suddenly, virtually everything changed overnight. Trump in one swift decisive move turned his campaign rhetoric on its head.
There was a chemical weapons attack a couple of days ago in Syria – allegedly – by Assad forces killing 80 civilians (a paltry number by his standards). That apparently crossed Trump’s red line. Trump decided to punish the Syrian dictator. In a very quick action directed at Assad on (unsubstantiated) chemical weapons charges, Trump intervened in Syria negating his campaign rhetoric. He launched 59 cruise missiles at the airfield which harbored the aircraft used for the chemical attack (allegedly). Last week, Secretary of State Tillerson indicated that the removal of Assad was no longer a prerequisite for a political solution in Syria. But that was last week. Today in a complete about face, Tillerson is saying Assad must go! The Russians are livid, and détente is a thing of the past.
The attack not only sent a message to Assad, but Trump may have also been alerting North Korea – a far more dangerous potential conflict for civilian deaths in a short period of time. Trump seemed to be sending a message to Obama as well – or at least how Obama should have reacted to the Ghouta massacre. Trump has relentlessly criticized Obama for his handling of Syria (especially the red line). The most notable part of the attack was the swiftness that Trump reached a decision to attack – and his hair trigger.
jesus christ this is retarded even for you. yes…we all wish we’d had the “surprise” of dead russians and WWIII to wake up to this morning. because the strikes just didn’t happen fast enough for general mackey of the 101st chairborne.
it’s fine that you’re stupid. it’s not even a big deal that you’re a sociopath or a yuppie. but if you want war so bad, boot up and get over there. go ahead, tough guy. i can’t wait to see how many SECONDS you’d last when confronted with actual destruction instead of your overcompensating faux macho fantasies.
otherwise shut your effete spineless piehole. we’ve had enough of your fact-free, unedited streams of brainless consciousness.
Good…GOOD…Let the hate flow THROUGH you! Seriously, solidrant.
so…warning Russia is a good thing….yet NONE of the defense systems like the s-300 and s-400 which could easily have handled these missiles were used to do what they are there to be used for!
America especially the politicians LOVE dropping bombs so the puppet over night becomes everything his propagandists have lied about telling you he is.
Amazing how these things work.
Syria which cant tie its shoes without permission from Putin suddenly gets the “it’s OK” to use chemical weapons because they were having to much fun winning and needed to take on the worlds criticism.
MAKES PERFECT sense to me.
greenwald already 10 moves ahead of everyone else makes sure ANY idea this was anything more then what the puppet says it was…doesnt see the light of possibility.
how nice of him to over look the criminality of for the poor son in law who just forgot the 25 times he took money from Russian banks.
o well…..what does 50-75 coincidences have to do with truth anyway?
is it illiterate and mentally unstable in here or is it just you?
the “russiagate” types (mackey included) have blown past “bizarre performance art” into full-on “writing on the wall in their own feces” mode.
Robert Mackey’s hatred of Trump has made him illogical on any issue where Trump is involved. Why would anyone make an issue of warning Russia ahead of the illegal attack (no congressional authorization and totally illegal internationally, as Syria did not attack or threaten to attack the U.S.)? Would Mackey prefer a nuclear war?
This idiotic article should never have been published. The idea of launching this attack without informing Russia ahead of time would have been psycopathically dangerous.
>The idea of launching this attack without informing Russia ahead of time would have been psycopathically dangerous.
Mackay agrees with you:
>No doubt fearing the grave risk of killing Russian military personnel on the ground in Syria, the United States military gave Russia advance notice […]
and
>While it was no doubt prudent to take steps to minimize the number of people killed in the attack, letting Syria know that the strike was coming represents a significant departure from Trump’s own campaign rhetoric.
The point of this article seems to be that Trump had no idea what he was talking about during his campaign when he said giving advance warning of an attack was stupid. When faced with the actual threat of killing Russians (and the likely escalation of events following the attack) Trump took prudent advice from more experienced military personnel. Bottom line, Trump’s stated foreign policy was uniformed BS and he seems to have chucked it without a second thought.
On the one hand, that’s good: it demonstrates that he can be talked out of his horrifying, uninformed approach to foreign intervention. On the other hand, it’s alarming: it demonstrates that he has a hair trigger and uses “dead babies” as pretext for a show of force–a dangerous foray into matters he probably doesn’t comprehend or even care to understand.
All this matters because it means we cannot use any of Trump’s previous rhetoric to predict his future actions.
None of this means that the article matters or, at least, matters to the extent that Greenwald’s article matters. I just don’t understand why posters are writing that Mackay wanted a surprise attack. It’s obvious he did not want a surprise attack.
I totally disagree. Your analysis is very myopic and reductionist. Taken in the context of Mackey’s blind hatred of Trump — I hate the guy too, but you still have to think critically — and considering the tone of the article, the portions you quoted were far more like crumbs thrown to the realization that it would have been insane to launch the missiles without warning than what the article means.
The tone of this idiotic article is that Russia should not have been warned, despite Mackey’s realization that they should have been. As I said, Mackey hates Trump so much that he can’t think clearly regarding anything that Trump does or says.
You need to update your lousy article.
Syrians jets are already using that same airstrip to launch attacks. I think our Tomahawks are just as bad and ineffective as our media.
peak mackey:
meeting the precise job description
of “the most obsessive Democratic conspiracists”
provided by Glenn Greenwald today,
and doing it IN the Intercept.
WHY. IS. MACKEY. STILL. HERE. ???
It would be one thing if he were this brave guy taking
a brave stand, but actually the only thing brave about
him is taking utterly mediocre mainstream media stands
and putting them on this site.
I mean, his lazy-ass screenshot
articles barely attract any comment, and almost
no positive comments at that. What does he bring?
I’d add: Who hired him and on what basis?
i agree. the guy is worthless. the only reasons I even visit the Intercept anymore are for Greenwald, Intercepted podcast, and the environmental articles by Sharon Lerner (those are very good articles, btw. Read her stuff if you haven’t.).
Mackey, however…ugh. No one embeds more tweets and instagram crap while providing less substantive analysis! LOSER!
OF-FRIGGING -COURSE WE NOTIFIED RUSSIA THAT WE WERE GOING TO BOMB THE AIRBASE THAT THEY HAD PERSONNEL STATIONED AT, WE HAVE BEEN KEEPING THEM IN THE LOOP THE WHOLE TIME. That is what a professional, competent military does, and it puts lie to all of the slippery-slope concern-trolls that framed any military intervention in Syria as immediately leading to World War III and nuclear exchange. It’s not a matter of the deep state, or being pals with Putin, it’s what happens when the military is staffed by politicians who believe in the efficacy of state power.
“Already, the most obsessive Democratic conspiracists have cited the fact that the U.S. military advised Russia in advanced of the strikes – something they would have been incredibly reckless not to do – as innuendo showing that Trump serves Putin.” – Glenn Greenwald.
But the real issue is that there’s a serious lack of evidence that the Syrian government used chemical weapons at all. The entire basis of these articles is fundamentally flawed. You don’t have any proof at all, do you? No conclusive evidence, not even a rational argument as to why the Syria government would use chemical weapons at this point even if they had them.
YEP “fearing the grave risk of killing Russian military personnel on the ground in Syria, the United States military gave Russia advance notice” — as a result, so far, there were only six reported killed. AND, Russia cannot bitch about their people being hurt.
But 59 Tomahawks pounded the position — we still need the damage pix to see how good are shooting was.
Yep “Trump’s strikes had thrilled the Islamic extremists” — let them be thrilled… and with luck, come out of hiding so their heads can be blown off.
Trump has shown he is willing to use force to achieve a moral end — stopping the murder of innocents which is a clear violation of the Koran and so defines “the Islamic extremists” as agents of evil.
Evangelicals should be cheering, it’s another step in the timely fulfillment of their prophecy — which was dated in the march 2014 book, “Biblical Prophecy: Are we in the Revelation Era”. As many already know, the test of the dating system was also published in March 2014, and it provided Trump’s America has fallen, “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN” slogan and the Republican victory.
We are NOT going to war with Russia, and Russia is going to sit on Assad — or lose the link to the Middle East it needs… it doesn’t want another Afganistan … it wants prosperity and to use “soft power” with the civilized world. Terrorist areas only understand suicidal violence.
Chemical weapons really do seem worth worrying about a bit. To begin with, nerve gas is innately pretty nasty stuff and a threat to whoever – but when chemical weapons are *used* the entire stockpile becomes much more dangerous. This is because nobody wants to be rounded up for war crimes someday, so they all want everything plausibly-deniable. If the stockpile was just sitting there it would be possible to tell if a single round was missing … but if it’s used, under cover of secrecy, then who knows how much is consumed vs. sitting in someone’s basement waiting to be auctioned off? And the people who have that authority are maximally protected by secrecy. What all that adds up to is not being particularly sure if a few drums of VX are going to turn up on a truck in New York next month … and that’s a valid thing to worry about even under Trump’s alleged noninterventionist position.
Of course, bombing the crap out of an airfield where the weapons might have been stored doesn’t really help track them down much, and being an enemy of a Syria you intend to let stand doesn’t do much to decrease the odds of them turning up in New York. And if ISIS wins the civil war, well, we know they could think of something to do with a chemical weapons cache.
Why is on here and why the hell would anyone trust a Pentagon spokesman?
Intercept is tainted.
Why is this* on here…grr.
It really looks that way.
i’m wondering if mackey is the alan colmes of this site: a laughable dissenting voice who fills the spot of “token brainless establishment warmonger” in some bizzare mirror image of the token anti-war people at various MSM outlets.
it’s easy to brush off and mock until you realize he gets PAID for this garbage.
Trump is not smart enough to think about warning Russia. This had to come from the general in charge of the NSC, someone with experience, and common sense.
mackey next to greenwald is weird, to say the least
Mackey never suggested this attack should have been a surprise attack. He’s just pointing out that Trump’s campaign rhetoric fell victim to reality (in a good way). That matters because we no longer have any reasonable expectations of his future decisions based upon his past statements. For example, should be grant any predictive credence to his statements about NATO?
As for whether this attack was legal, Constitutional, or even wise… well, that’s a different question. And one that The Intercept should be answering.
All you ever need from Mackey is the headline. I guess it’s all that twitter work.
I am pretty flabbergasted that anyone can be surprised Russia was warned. That´s why we are still admiring the view from the edge of the cliff. Were any Russians been killed we could well be a big step further.
It was Turkey, thank you very much, who stated that Sarin was used in the attack. Turkey…!…of all countries -the most believable. Remember Can Dündar reported on weapon deliveries to Syrian “rebels” by Turks (MIT) and what happened next? He wasn´t awarded a Pulitzer that´s for sure. Excuse me very much, but as soon as your new president is involved I don´t believe the attack was initiated for anything else than some sort of financial gain. And I am not the only one over here in old Europe who is sick of Russia being blamed for every bloody stunt and shall not be surprised should some inexplicable major accident miraculously happen in Iran.
it should be mentioned that previous REBEL use of chemical weapons traced back to turkey. as did ISIS’ black market oil sales.
see also:
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/04/syria-us-creates-new-air-support-request-scheme-for-al-qaeda.html
Typical partisan hack crap from Mackey. So you’d like to goad Trump into surprise attacks and escalation towards all out war? Is that the plan?
The UN and groups like Human Rights Watch have already proven Syria gassed its own people and have killed the vast majority of Syrians, using cluster bombs and other mass killing tools.
Putin and Assad, two sociopaths and proven liars, have been responsible for the deaths and destruction of the vast majority of Syrian Civil war, close to 400,000 dead civilians.
From Human Rights Watch:
Based on the available evidence, Human Rights Watch finds that Syrian government forces were almost certainly responsible for the August 21 attacks, and that a weapons-grade nerve agent was delivered during the attack using specially designed rocket delivery systems. The scale and coordinated nature of the two attacks; against opposition-held areas; the presence of government-controlled potential launching sites within range of the targets; the pattern of other recent alleged chemical weapon attacks against opposition-held areas using the same 330mm rocket delivery system; and the documented possession of the 140mm and 330mm rocket systems able to deliver chemical weapons in the government arsenal—all point towards Syrian government responsibility for the attacks.
Seriously you’re probably not going to win anyone over here…
Don’t be silly. I have read numerous posters who agree Assad is a monster and needs to go here. Just peruse the threads. Not everyone is an Assad Quisling or dupe here.
That report was discredited 3 years ago by MIT, in case you missed it in the other thread:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1006045/possible-implications-of-bad-intelligence.pdf
Trump is crying crocodile tears. We have been killing children but naming then bad people. I wonder if it was the U.S. that sold some of the chemical weapons to Asad , before the war, just like we helped the Taliban during the Afghan war to push out Russia. Bush was shaking hands with Bin Laden when he was in the CIA. This is all about MONEY and supporting our stooge.
Hillary Clinton, ignoring the element of surprise, announced it prior to president Trump, bob. .. maybe the Republicans should launch another independent investigation.
*otherwise, although Twitter is not always my go-to source for news, this report is generally well-balanced and informative.
How can you use the term “syrian activitists”. They simply don’t exist anymore – the people you refer to as Syrian activists are terror groups comprised of al nusra and isis.
Most Syrians are not ISIS or Al Nusra, they are people who wanted democracy and were shot down like dogs, murdered and gassed by Assad and Putin.
Establishing a no-fly zone in Syria is the first step to stopping their genocide against Sunnis.
This is exactly correct.
According to former Sec. of State Kerry, US and other nation’s inspectors stated as fact all chemical weapons possessed by Assad regime had been removed.
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/850181884386607104
But now we’re supposed to believe Assad held some back, and then used them (to what end–both unnecessary and makes his Russian backers who brokered deal and verified results look like jerks), I say let’s see the proof these purported chemical weapons were Assad’s and used by his regime. I seriously doubt they were, absent verifiable proof that they were.
Clearly Pres. Donnie Dampnut warned Russians (and they the Syrians) that this ineffectual missile attack was coming, and that will probably go down as the smartest decision Pres. Dampnut makes his entire presidency.
So what the Russian military spokesman stated is likely 100% accurate–“Trump staged the incident purely for reasons of domestic politics.” And most of Trump’s backers, a significant number of Democratic party partisans, and the nearly the entire mainstream media will lap it up like hungry kittens over a saucer of fresh cream.
Just happy whoever pulled the trigger on this stupid idea was smart enough to warn the Russians and Syrians so they could remove their personnel from the area.
The UN and groups like Human Rights Watch have already proven Syria gassed its own people and have killed the vast majority of Syrians, using cluster bombs and other mass killing tools.
From Human Rights Watch:
Based on the available evidence, Human Rights Watch finds that Syrian government forces were almost certainly responsible for the August 21 attacks, and that a weapons-grade nerve agent was delivered during the attack using specially designed rocket delivery systems. The scale and coordinated nature of the two attacks; against opposition-held areas; the presence of government-controlled potential launching sites within range of the targets; the pattern of other recent alleged chemical weapon attacks against opposition-held areas using the same 330mm rocket delivery system; and the documented possession of the 140mm and 330mm rocket systems able to deliver chemical weapons in the government arsenal—all point towards Syrian government responsibility for the attacks.
That’s not “proof”. At best it’s an assessment or analysis. HRW is hardly unbiased. It’s a US-based organization whose funding comes from western corporations and NGOs.
If you’re going to accuse someone of a serious crime, you better have indisputable evidence. That’s the more true if you intend to kill people as a result of the accusations you’re making.
I don’t think “proven” means what you think it means, nor what “point towards” means as a matter of demonstrability or certainty. And even if it is definitively proved that chemical weapons were used by Assad, so what?
As far as I’m concerned, I don’t think there is a meaningful moral distinction to be drawn (thus there should be no difference in the amount of outrage) between killing men, women and children with chemical weapons, a barrel bomb, a Tomahawk Missile, thousands of 30mm rounds delivered from an A-10, a Hellfire Missile, a bullet from an M-16, a 50 cal sniper round . . . .
Dead is dead. There is no “more humane” or “more moral” way to destroy the human body and end human life. Having a giant hole ripped out of your body from a bullet or piece of shrapnel and bleeding out, choking to death from gas, or being incinerated or disintegrated by a bomb, or having your head cut off with a knife or sword makes the victim no less dead.
So as soon as the America people get their tiny collective brains wrapped around that reality, and that moral truth, the sooner we can start being a little less hypocritical in our denunciations of how “the other guy kills human beings” as some sort of reason to engage in more killing in the name of “humanitarianism”.
“Dead is dead. There is no “more humane” or “more moral” way to destroy the human body and end human life. Having a giant hole ripped out of your body from a bullet or piece of shrapnel and bleeding out, choking to death from gas, or being incinerated or disintegrated by a bomb, or having your head cut off with a knife or sword makes the victim no less dead.”
THANK YOU. *applauds*
Chemical weapons are particularly horrifying in that they lead to a slow and torturous death often in fits of agony, which is why it results in more emotional reactions than a typical building razing ala Assad or errant U.S. bomb.
But I totally agree with you about the mode of death being basically unimportant in terms of criminal behaviour. If you read my other posts you’d see that the totality of Assad’s and Putin’s mass murder in Syria — close to 400,000 dead at their hands — is what outrages me and judges so harshly against the Assad regime.
Has the US conducted immoral wars? Certainly, Iraq was a flat-out war crime and pulled the pin on the mideast and now the EU. I condemned Bush and voted for Obama precisely for that reason. And that does not excuse Assad murdering his own people for wanting a peaceful transition to democracy for a milisecodn however.
And the noble but utterly foolish idea that you cannot shoot and bomb your way to peace is put paid by the clear example of defeating Hitler in WWII. If we had relied on well-meaning peaceniks telling us there was no way a violent invasion could bring peace to the world, we’d still have a Nazi regime but with nukes today.
One of the great noble but ludicrous fantasies of the hard core anti-war left is that somehow never fighting or intervening leads to peace. But there are endless examples of war ending mass violence and genocide. It would be nice if you simple minded rhetoric matched reality.
But in fact, your do-nothing advocacy in the face of mass murder by people like Assad is morally utterly evil and leads to mass death sand suffering while you pontificate and ignore real death and violence abroad behind the peaceful wall the U.S. or EU military provides you.
Sorry, to think otherwise is to be a utter child.
There is no way to get peace in those circ
If only some 40% of the Tomahawks fired into Syria even reached their targets – why would the US Government ever buy more , except to pad Grumbags’ profit margins? That’s an unreliable weapons system. And if civilians died from those errant cruise missiles you can pretty much bet it’ll be ignored by most Western media.
One cruise missile into Al-Assad’s palace would do more to get his attention than 59 spent blowing up a desert field. Remember Khadafi and Sadam’s sons seeking shelter in a hole in the sand? To kill the snake, first cut off its head.
Targeting the Syrian military HQ would be better. Hitting Assad personally would be too petty and a long shot anyway.
But, Assad has to go. He has killed 400,000 Syrian and sent 5 million refugees out to destabilize the world.
Assad and Putin have killed the vast majority of the 400,000 civilians who have died in Syria according to the UN and groups like Human Rights Watch. Putin and Assad lie about that endlessly and are not to be believed for a second. It needs to end.
The mass murders Assad and Putin were rightly humiliated last night and exposed for their weakness in the face of U.S. power when used for protecting civilians. There was no need to kill Russians, that would have been counterproductive. Having the Russians and Syrians run away in terror from the base achieved an ever great humiliation and diminution of Putin.
The next steps are to establish a no fly zone in Syria where neither Russian or Syrian air forces can operate and where civilians can remain in Syria and find safety and UN support.
This is the right step to take and more will be needed before these rogue killers are brought to book. To think a clown like Trump is doing what should have been done three years ago is stomach-turning and a sad indictment of the world and many on the left’s criminal and evil neglect and indifference to the horror and genocide in Syria for far, far too long.
Yeah, sure. That will work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwlNPhn64TA
If this is all purely for moral reasons to punish those who commit human rights abuses, why aren’t we bombing Saudi Arabia into oblivion?
Do you also feel outrage about the genocide they’re committing and support military action there?
Obviously, it’s not. If Assad were an ally/client of the US, you wouldn’t hear a peep about Syria.
*puts on tin foil hat* The fact that the Russians were pre-warned and there wasn’t significant damage to the base, makes me wonder if this was set-up with the Russians in order to slap Assad’s hands for using chemical weapons by proxy. Trump and the Russians aren’t done yet, their ultimate business deal: elimination of sanctions which would make the $500 billion Exxon/Russian deal to go through. Please remember throughout history where governments use military action to take focus off bigger problems.
Are you arguing it ‘should’ have been a surprise attack? It seems at least somewhat rational to not kill a bunch of Russians. What is the Intercept coming to? “Oh, you didn’t follow your campaign rhetoric!” What?
This is an illegal war strike, as people below have noticed. Who is Robert Mackey? Former NYT social media reporter!
For a long time now I have wondered why the Intercept features Robert Mackey. It makes no sense.
I’m stunned that your outrage is not over Drumpf having violated the Constitution and the War Powers Act as Obama did when he attacked Libya, but over his warning the Russians about it so they could withdraw their personnel and potentially avoid open war with that nation. Unbelievable.
So much for tRump’s claims of “non-intervention”…
But then, I don’t think he actually remembers (or cares) what he claims (or tweets) from one minute to the next. Nor does he give a shit about potential consequences of his actions. He’s a pea-brained, narcissistic moron.
I have to say that after watching the Russian spokesman linked by Mackey, that he (the Russian not Mackey) seems far more credible that Trump.
The Trump statement about Assad killing children was nauseating to watch.
Q is still climate; Putin now a denialist; Tillerson will visit Russia; “cooperation” will ensue; sanctions will be lifted #ArcticExtraction
Russians denied that they were ever informed before or after theattack that was nothing but a monumental failure making Americans laughing stock. The base can be operative in few days. In fact Russians suspended safe sky agreement because US attacked while there was civilian and military air traffic going on endengering Russians, in open violation of the agreement. US did the same last year by attacking SAA to help ISIS by mistake and refuse to follow the protocol. The US and Saudis have repeatidly proven themselves as ISIS supporting terrorist states.
The best interpretation is that Trump is setting the stage for negotiations using political judo. The NeoAxis (neocons plus neoliberals hereafter known as the NAX) were pushing hard, so Trump gave them what they wanted, a strike on Syria. This puts Trump in a stronger position to negotiate with Russia, Iran and Assad.
A less charitable interpretation is that Trumpzilla has been re-purposed by the Deep State. This scenario leads back to Jared Kushner and Israel and the NAX.
i don’t know about re-purposed. the neos turned the screws and he responded. but he’s still the same loose cannon, and that’s exactly why they get behind people with last names like Clinton or Bush. having that guy “in your corner” is almost as dangerous as opposing him, and that’s exactly why it took so long for the Republican establishment to publicly accept him.
i believe they all still want to get rid of him, they’re just waiting for the right moment. i suspect it’ll be right about the time the new front(s) they open begin to turn into complete and utter fiascos.
Bannon’s out, off the NSC.
Devin Nunes is off the intelligence committee investigation.
Jeff session has recused himself from any DOJ investigations.
Schumer is stalling Trump appointments to keep Obama appointees in power.
Flynn is out.
Looks like the Deep State is winning.
… and Trump has finally recognized the error of his ways, i’m sure.
Would you rather Trump take the Saakashvili option and target the Russians directly?
As for me, I not only trust Russia more than Clinton, I trust Russia more than Trump. There has been no evidence proving that the attack was carried out by Syria. We should have stayed out or sent those missiles at IS and their allies, not those fighting them.
We should have stayed out or sent those missiles at IS and their allies, …
That would be suicide.
As shown in this article, al-Qaeda is constantly rebranding itself, making it nearly impossible for the United States to assure that it is not still funding its operations in Syria and Iraq:
http://viableopposition.blogspot.ca/2017/02/tracking-al-qaeda.html
Apparently, Washington is unable to learn from the mistakes that it made in Afghanistan during the Soviet era.
What are you whining about?
All Democrats, including Schumer and Pelosi, are happy that Trump is now a bona fide member of the killer club.
I bet they swap wives, tonight.
People should be more careful about what they tweet. Consider Trump’s old 2013 Tweet that’s circulating now:
Granted, he never expected to be POTUS. But everyone should be aware that the truth you tweet today may reveal your own duplicity tomorrow.
Another embarrassing Trump Tweet, this one from 2012:
Yes. I was thinking that too.
Much as I despise Trump – This is an absurd equivalency to his comments during the debates, where he was strictly speaking about ISIS.
There are no Russians fighting alongside ISIS, and the Syrian Soldiers are by in large pretty moderate – Even if Assad did commit this crime there’s still no reason to maximise casualties, whereas with ISIS you’re probably less inclined to spare and suicidal jihadists.