Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Tue Dec 11 12:58:36 PST 2018

Utopia Talk / Politics / Syria: Clusterfuck #2...
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Mon Apr 16 08:16:09

Syria: Clusterfuck ..

swordtail
Anarchist Prime Fri Apr 13 18:24:19

Sky News cut off the former commander of British Armed Forces Jonathan Shaw over Syria

Hot Rod
Revved Up
Mon Apr 16 08:17:14

jergul
large member Mon Apr 16 03:02:17

HR
There is a fundamental law against attacking other countries. "Members shall refrain from the use of force, or the threat of force against other members" The UN charter.

Nevermind an attack based on social media imagery release by parties that had hopes of gaining big time from an attack.

Hot Rod
Revved Up
Mon Apr 16 08:41:53

There is also a fundamental law enacted by, I believe, The League of Nations in 1924.

I may be wrong about the details there, but it has been against International Law since the 1920's.


Unfortunately, a single veto in the Security Council can prevent a United Nations-sanctioned response which was done by one of the bad actors in the scenario.

This being the case a collation of three of the West's Security Council Members decided to give the nation that breached this law a punishment by attacking their ability to make further chemical attacks in the future. Not counting the chemicals that were prepared and survived the attack.

BTW, the intelligence agencies of all three of those countries were convinced their intel was solid.


It is times like this that I recall one of my hairbrained ideas from a few years ago.

It would be nice if The United Nations had at their disposal seven mobile infantry divisions, three armored divisions, an air wing, and a couple of Carrier Groups to be used against countries that violate such International Laws such as using chemical weapons.


As I said, a hairbrained scheme. :)

Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon Apr 16 11:06:52
Cluster fuck. Hehe
Flustered cuck ahahahahaha

Genius!
Paramount
Member
Mon Apr 16 11:23:41
”Unfortunately, a single veto in the Security Council can prevent a United Nations-sanctioned response which was done by one of the bad actors in the scenario. ”

That may be unfortunate. But the SC is working as intended. Or should I say, it worked until some members decided to violate the veto, the UN charter, and internarional law by making a military attack.

This just means that other countries does not need to respect US vetos in the future. Like, if USA vetos actions against Israel, everyone can just say fkck you and attack Israel or punish it with sanctions.
Paramount
Member
Mon Apr 16 11:48:54
”by attacking their ability to make further chemical attacks in the future.” - Himmler Rod


At destroyed Syria lab, workers say they produce antidotes to snake venom not toxic weapons

“The building had three storeys: a basement, ground floor, and second floor,” said Said Said, an engineer who identified himself as head of the centre’s paint and plastics department.

“It had labs and departments that were unfortunately completely destroyed, with all their equipment and furniture. Thank God, no one was here,” he told AFP.

The site, according to Western powers, was part of the Syrian government’s “chemical weapons infrastructure.”

But Said told AFP only non-lethal research and development was under way at the centre.

“As we work in civilian pharmaceutical and chemical research, we did not expect that we would be hit,” he said.

Instead, the centre had been producing antidotes to scorpion and snake venom while running tests on chemical products used in making food, medicine and children’s toys, according to Said.

“If there were chemical weapons, we would not be able to stand here. I’ve been here since 5:30 am in full health -- I’m not coughing,” he added.

Said said the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons had visited the site in Barzeh in recent years and had declared it free of any toxic weapons.

“The OPCW used to stay in the two upper rooms, and use the labs, and we would cooperate with them completely,” he said.

“The OPCW has proven in two reports that this building and the centre as a whole are empty and do not produce any chemical weapons.”

http://www...ry-e2OIzVf2RqPMMuRK0XdK0H.html


Why does the USA always lie and fail? Always.

USA, France and Britain needs to stand trial for war crimes.
jergul
large member
Mon Apr 16 12:10:54
MOSCOW, April 16. /TASS/.The US and its allies sought to hit Syrian military targets, including airfields, during their missile strike, Russian Defense Ministry Spokesman Major-General Igor Konashenkov said on Monday.

"The true targets of the strike delivered by the US, the UK and France on April 14 were both facilities in Barzeh and Jaramani and Syrian military facilities, including airfields," he said.

According to Konashenkov, a photo of a facility located in the Barzeh area shows that "the destruction caused by the missile strike does not correspond to the scale of destruction from the use of three dozen cruise missiles." "Moreover, the survey of this and other facilities revealed neither this number of ammunition fragments nor the corresponding number of craters," he added.

Read also
Syrian air defenses intercept 70% of US cruise missiles

A mere thirty missiles would be more than enough for destroying the facilities the Air Forces of the US, UK and France chose as targets for last Saturday’s missile strike, Konashenkov added.

"One can see perfectly well from the satellite photos circulated by the Western media these are ordinary buildings on the surface," he said.

"I’d like to recall that the Tomahawk missile warhead is equivalent of 500 kg of the TNT depending on its type."

"That’s why, whatever the method of computation, a mere ten missiles would be enough to destroy each of the three facilities even with account of a three-fold margin," Gen Konashenkov pointed out.
Syria's air defense

As many as 112 surface-to-air missiles, including 25 Pansir missiles, were used by Syria’s air defense forces to repel the strike delivered by the United States, France and the United Kingdom, Russian Defense Ministry spokesman said.

"A total of 112 surface-to-air guided missiles were used to repel the strike," he said, adding that 23 out of 25 missiles fired from the Pansir-S1 system had hit their targets.

"Twenty-nine missile were fired from the Buk system, with 24 of them hitting targets. Eleven missiles were fire from the Osa system. Five of them hit the targets. Thirteen missiles were fired from the S-125 system, five hit the targets. Five missiles were fired from the Strela-10 system, three hit the targets, Twenty-one missiles were fired from the Kvadrat system, eleven hit the targets. Eight missiles were fired from the S-200 systems, none hit the targets," he said, adding that such poor performance of the S-200 system could be explained by the fact that it was meant to hit aircraft. Moreover, in his words, a missile fire from this system hit a fighter jet of one of the neighboring countries not long ago.

Read also
Expert highlights threat of new strikes against Syria

According to the ministry spokesman, facilities protected by air defense systems suffered practically no damages. "All of the four missiles fired at the Dumayr aerodrome were shot down; 18 missiles were fired at the Blei airfield, all were shot down; 12 missiles were fired at the Shairat aerodrome, all were shot down; two missiles were fired at the T-4 aerodrome, all were shot down; five of the nine missiles fired at the Mezze airfield were shot down; 13 out of the 16 missiles fired at the Homs aerodrome were shot down," he said.

However only five out of the 30 missiles and guided air bombs fired at research facilities at Barze and Djaramani were shot down by Syrian air defense systems.

On April 14, the United States, France and the United Kingdom delivered a massive strike on Syrian targets in bypassing of the United Nations Security Council. According to the Russian defense ministry, the missile strike was in the small hours on Saturday. The ministry reported that a total of 103 cruise and air-to-surface missiles had been fired, 71 of them were shot down by Syria’s air defense units. Three civilians were wounded. Neither of the missiles appeared in the zone of responsibility of Russian air defense systems in Tartus and Hmeymim. Russian missile defense systems were not used.

The United States, the UK and France said the strikes had been a response to an alleged chemical attack in Syria’s Douma.


More:
http://tass.com/defense/1000148
Sam Adams
Member
Mon Apr 16 12:20:51
"Twenty-nine missile were fired from the Buk system, with 24 of them hitting targets."

Any civilian 777s this time?

Lol@dishonorable russians.
jergul
large member
Mon Apr 16 12:23:01
rofl@subsonic missiles?
Sam Adams
Member
Mon Apr 16 12:29:27
The only proof russia can offer that there weapons work is the shooting down of a large, fat, slow airliner with no stealthing flying in a straight line at 30,000 feet. And they lied about that too. Do russians ever tell the truth?
jergul
large member
Mon Apr 16 12:37:51
I think the US claim that 70 missiles were fired at 3 buildings to be pretty ludicrous myself.

The Russian claim sort of matches what I would have expected.

Air Defenses work under optimal conditions (and conditions could not have been better saturday morning).

I expected airfields to be targetted. Part of degrading capability. See the strike last year for details on US reasoning for that.

Very few missiles survived entry into missile kill zones at airports. Most survived hitting targets without dedicated air defense assets.

Moral of story: Don't give air defenses optimal conditions.
Sam Adams
Member
Mon Apr 16 12:47:54
Jergul trusting russian state sponsored media statements. Lol.
jergul
large member
Mon Apr 16 12:51:26
Sammy
The Russian claim matches what I would have expected.

rofl@subsonic missiles.

I have said that for years.

Anyways, don't give air defenses optimal conditions next time. Its not something you are forced to do.
jergul
large member
Mon Apr 16 12:55:40
The only way the US story could be true is if you assume trump was fixating on the number of missiles and the DoD really, really did not want to risk hitting Russians.

DoD: "Fuck it, we still have block III Tomahawks in some of the tubes, right? Just fire them all at that building so we can make the magic 100+ launch number the Prez wants".
Sam Adams
Member
Mon Apr 16 13:17:44
"The Russian claim matches what I would have expected. "

Exactly. Lol. When two perpetually wrong sources line up, the opposite of their claims is likely the true case.
jergul
large member
Mon Apr 16 13:32:20
Sammy
Now you are just being sad.

The transition from analogue to digital simply renders sub-sonic munitions obsolete in certain scenarios.

Pick your poison. Either the US did in fact fire 70 cruise missiles into 3 buildings, or firing at protected airports does not work too well when air defenses have optimal conditions.

70 cruise missiles into 3 building suggest something is really broken in your military (including its CoC).

I gave you the "Fuck it" scenario that has to be true if the US story is true.
Sam Adams
Member
Mon Apr 16 17:40:55
According to international observers, russia has been lying nonstop, changing their position multiple times, issuing mutually exclusive statements, and blocking access to the latest chemical weapons site.

Havent been able to clean it up in time, eh?
jergul
large member
Mon Apr 16 17:48:29
Sammy
I honestly have no idea what you are talking about.

I frankly do not even get the issue. Syria is most certainly producing and storing chlorine.

Weaponizing it consists of putting chlorine into a barrel according to the western narrative.

Using it consists of rolling a barrel out of a helicopter door.

So what are you saying? A barrel factory has been bombed?
jergul
large member
Mon Apr 16 17:49:45
Clean up was funny. Given the material in question. Everything would obviously be very clean by definition if a chlorine store as bombed and the dust allowed to settle.
jergul
large member
Mon Apr 16 17:57:12
Anyway, the disconnect between what the US is saying and what Russia is saying is too large currently.

70 missiles into a 3 buildings beggars belief. I think that is the first question that needs clarification.

The "fuck it" scenario is the best I can come up with.
Sam Adams
Member
Mon Apr 16 18:15:05
Lol a confused russian troll. Russia should buy better trolls.
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Mon Apr 16 19:31:08
Al-Masdar News‏Verified account @TheArabSource · 1h1 hour ago


 More

Israeli missiles target military base allegedly filled with Russian soldiers: unconfirmed https://aml.ink/mC6xA #Israel #Russia #Syria

swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Mon Apr 16 20:24:12

Amichai Stein‏Verified account @AmichaiStein1


Follow Follow @AmichaiStein1



 More

#BREAKING: Syria: 6 missiles targeted Shayrat #Damascus airbase and 3 were aimed at Dumair military airport outside Homs on Monday "were intercepted"; Pentagon: “There are no US or Coalition operations in that area"


http://twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/status/986039838343385088
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Mon Apr 16 20:39:41

Looks like someone else decided to join the fun.

jergul
large member
Tue Apr 17 02:28:00
HR
The fun of having all missiles targeting defended airbases shot down?

The only thing that alleged attack did was increase Russian claim credibility and decrease US claim credibility.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Apr 17 02:31:48

No airbases were targeted.

jergul
large member
Tue Apr 17 02:50:54
HR
Or airbases where targeted and successfully defended.

Listen, your president has been tweeting since he took office. There are two problems with that. 1. The truth is not a factor. Not that Trump always lies, its just that the truth is not a consideration when he posts. 2. The "Mission Accomplished" tweet was made before the DoD gave its briefing. Making it very difficult to impossible for the DoD to admit it had targeted, but failed to hit, military airbases.

What we do know is that sending 70 missiles into 3 buildings in a matter of minutes is crazy. This is what the DoD is saying it did.

Your military has bigger problems than air defenses if cartering to Trump's need for volume makes the DoD do stupid crap like that.



Seb
Member
Tue Apr 17 03:03:46
Jergul has a point.

It seems highly unlikely that many missiles go into that many buildings unless the Pentagon was just trying to make the rubble bounce. A lot.

Either there was a number of missiles in mind - which would not be inconsistent with Trump who likes to measure things "twice as big as last time", or the rest were shot down.

That said they might have been testing air defences or effectiveness of means of disrupting them.

Clearly if so the results were not great.


Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Apr 17 04:37:48

Or maybe Trump and the others just wanted to show the world what can happen when an irresistible force meets a specific target.

Someone is still firing missiles at Syrian air bases. Maybe some of their missiles were shot down.


I will believe Trump, despite his penchant for exaggeration, before I believe a pack of nasty bad guys.

jergul
large member
Tue Apr 17 05:13:55
HR
How nice that you have found religious faith at your age!

The US could easily prove its claim by showing us footage of that "irresistable force" It would probably look quite neat with a few minutes of detonations every few seconds. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof.

Why are we not seeing that? The US is usually quite fond of showing video footage of strikes.
jergul
large member
Tue Apr 17 05:15:46
poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof.

One poof for each missile the US claimed hit one of those 3 buildings.

It seems rather...outlandish?
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Apr 17 05:25:33

Tell you what. Next time you run down there with a camera and take the pictures. If you ask Trump real nice he might let you ride one of the missiles since the planes we use do not get close enough to the targets to film the

poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof. poof poof...poof poof poof...poof poof poof poof.

jergul
large member
Tue Apr 17 05:31:43
HR
Wow. Your claim is that the US has no surveilance assets over Syria?

The only thing you are doing now is proving a person has to be really, really stupid to take US claims at face value.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Apr 17 05:50:13

Of course, we have surveillance satellites, but I would much rather see you riding one of those missiles.

Not sure why they didn't use them. Why don't you write The President and ask him?

Russia should have some video too. Where is it?

jergul
large member
Tue Apr 17 06:01:58
HR
Footage of a missile hitting a missile could be from anywhere. It would not prove anything. Case in point: video footage of missiles hitting missiles are available on the internet.

If I found one, would you accept that it shows a missile hitting a missile, and that debunks the US claim that none of the missiles fired were shot down?

Or would you say: "that could be anything"?

jergul
large member
Tue Apr 17 06:02:56
But like I said. I am glad you found a belief system. Saint Trump is prone to exageration like you said, but you believe him.
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Tue Apr 17 06:46:56
Lord West

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BROMV0nJvyE
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Apr 17 07:09:30
"Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight"
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Apr 17 07:21:00

He is a much better belief system than yours.

He wants the world to be a better place while your system wants to tear down freedom and replace it with global socialism.


Let me suggest a book for you that you will enjoy.

'DO IT!: Scenarios of the Revolution by Jerry Rubin.' Rubin was one of the Chicago Seven.

It's a small book that you can probably read in an hour or two, but it is interesting and I think you will like it. That is just my impression of the book. It's been over 30 years since I read it so I have forgotten the details.

Enjoy.

swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Tue Apr 17 08:40:59
Max Abrahms‏Verified account @MaxAbrahms · 1h1 hour ago

 More

Syrian state media on Tuesday retracted reports of an overnight missile attack on the central province of Homs, saying a "false alarm" had activated its air defences.

murder
Member
Tue Apr 17 08:41:48

It probably would have been useful to point out earlier that chlorine gas is NOT included in the Chemical Weapons Convention.

Seb
Member
Tue Apr 17 09:23:58
Murder:

Actually it is.

https://www.opcw.org/about-chemical-weapons/what-is-a-chemical-weapon/
Sam Adams
Member
Tue Apr 17 10:09:01

"Syrian state media on Tuesday retracted reports of an overnight missile attack on the central province of Homs, saying a "false alarm" had activated its air defences. "

Lol jerguls vaunted soviet air defense. Shooting at birds.
jergul
large member
Tue Apr 17 10:28:49
Sammy
You mean something with a similar radar cross section as a stealth aircraft?

Yah, it is consievable that the air defenses locked on to that.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Apr 17 11:02:15

jergul, did you see my last post?

swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Tue Apr 17 11:26:21
Israel tries to dissociate itself from claim of responsibility for Syria raid

Hours after NYTimes' Tom Friedman quotes Israeli official acknowledging attack on 'Iranian targets' last week, columnist updates article with IDF objection

http://www...responsibility-for-syria-raid/
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Apr 17 12:11:10
"Seb
Member Tue Apr 17 09:23:58
Murder:

Actually it is."

Chlorine isn't listed as a chemical weapon. The link isn't a guiding document and just meant to be informative and in general.

Here are the listed chemicals.

http://www...on/annexes/annex-on-chemicals/
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Apr 17 12:17:44
Chlorine is tricky. It is widely available and used. Together with the fact that the Government was already crushing the rebels. Highly doubtful.
Seb
Member
Tue Apr 17 13:09:58
Nim:

That just means it's exempt from verification measures (which is fine as it's so widely used legitimately). It's still a chemical weapon if it is used as a weapon and all that entails.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Apr 17 13:19:36
Sure, it makes it more difficult to prove in situations like this. Such a a widely used chemical, a fundamental element, pure, unlike Sarin, tabun etc. It is sorta like a hammer, it is perfectly legal to have and use one, until you bash someones head in with it. A banned substance on the other hand...
Forwyn
Member
Tue Apr 17 13:43:21
i.e. bombing a chlorine production facility could reduce the availability of safe drinking water in a warzone. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
murder
Member
Tue Apr 17 13:51:28

"Actually it is."

Seb: November it's not. And you're smart enough to know that isn't the document.

murder
Member
Tue Apr 17 13:55:22

"i.e. bombing a chlorine production facility could reduce the availability of safe drinking water in a warzone"

All in the name of protecting innocent civilians
jergul
large member
Tue Apr 17 14:05:36
It is a chemical weapon if used as a chemical weapon or weaponized in attendant munitions.

It is not a chemical weapon if merely produced and stored. A reasonable amount of chlorine for Syria to produce and store would measure in the 100ds of thousand tons per year.
jergul
large member
Tue Apr 17 14:06:06
This according to the treaty.
jergul
large member
Tue Apr 17 14:09:18
This means that only prepared munitions, or excessive stockpiles (which Syria certainly does not have given the high level of legitimate production and storage everywhere on the planet) are chemical weapons.

Nimi's example was a good one. Simply because a hammer was used, does not mean hammers are now forbidden in general.
murder
Member
Tue Apr 17 14:10:07

"November it's not."

Somehow "no" became "November".

swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Tue Apr 17 14:10:46
well it ain't November!
Seb
Member
Tue Apr 17 17:38:19
Murder:

You prefer a link to the convention itself? Ok here's the article.


https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/articles/article-ii-definitions-and-criteria/


For the purposes of this Convention:
1. "Chemical Weapons" means the following, together or separately:
(a) Toxic chemicals and their precursors, except where intended for purposes not prohibited under this Convention, as long as the types and quantities are consistent with such purposes;
(b) Munitions and devices, specifically designed to cause death or other harm through the toxic properties of those toxic chemicals specified in subparagraph (a), which would be released as a result of the employment of such munitions and devices;
(c) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly in connection with the employment of munitions and devices specified in subparagraph (b).
2. "Toxic Chemical" means:
Any chemical which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals. This includes all such chemicals, regardless of their origin or of their method of production, and regardless of whether they are produced in facilities, in munitions or elsewhere.
(For the purpose of implementing this Convention, toxic chemicals which have been identified for the application of verification measures are listed in Schedules contained in the Annex on Chemicals.)

The annex on chemicals contains the schedules chemicals that are subject to verrification. I.e. notification, disclosure, disposal etc. Chlorine isn't on that list as it has legitimate uses.


But a chlorine barrel bomb dropped from a helicopter is still a chemical weapon under the convention.
Seb
Member
Tue Apr 17 17:40:13
Jergul:

I don't think anyone is saying the possession of chlorine is dodgy.

Having stockpiles at air bases starts to raise questions. Dropping barrels of it with an explosive charge off the back of a helicopter is clearly a no no.
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Tue Apr 17 18:19:15
lol
jergul
large member
Tue Apr 17 18:31:34
Seb
An inoperative Air Defense base, not airbase.

The whole narrative of degrading Syria's ability to use chlorine and barrels is a bit ludicrous. Syria has in pratical terms an infinite supply of both.

I trust you have caught that there are serious doubts about Syria using chemical weapons.
jergul
large member
Thu Apr 19 04:39:12
DAMASCUS, April 19. /TASS/. Two cruise missiles found unexploded by the Syrian military after the US missile strike on April 14 have been handed over to Russia, a source in the Syrian defense ministry told TASS on Thursday.



"Two cruise missiles that did not detonate during the US missile strike on Syria overnight to April 14 were found by the Syrian military. Both are in rather good condition. These missiles were handed over to Russian officer the day before yesterday (April 17)," the source said, adding that both "were sent to Russia by plane yesterday (April 18)."

TASS has no official confirmation of this information from the Russian defense ministry.

US President Donald Trump wrote on Twitter on April 11 that Russia should get ready for a missile attack on Syria, claiming the missiles will be "nice and new and smart".

On April 14, the United States, France and the United Kingdom delivered a massive strike on Syrian targets in bypassing of the United Nations Security Council. According to the Russian defense ministry, the missile strike was in the small hours on Saturday. The ministry reported that a total of 103 cruise and air-to-surface missiles had been fired, 71 of them were shot down by Syria’s air defense units. Three civilians were wounded. Neither of the missiles appeared in the zone of responsibility of Russian air defense systems in Tartus and Hmeymim. Russian missile defense systems were not used.


More:
http://tass.com/world/1000645
Seb
Member
Thu Apr 19 06:10:43
jergul:

I think the point is what was targeted was things more associated with nerve agents.

I certainly think there is a narrative about serious doubts about use of chemical weapons. I don't share that assessment. There is overwhelming evidence of them using chemical weapons - and scenarios about rebels stockpiling chemicals at locations likely to be bombed so that it gasses civillians is laughable from a practical consideration of:
1. What we would observe if that were true
2. What we would not observe if that were true





jergul
large member
Thu Apr 19 08:17:54
Seb
Turns out actors in the video have come forward and explained why they took part in the staged event.

Also, there is no need to stage chlorine gas attacks. Any attack in an urban area will leave residual chlorine traces from household articles for example, just as any attack will cause respitory issues from dust.

But feel free to believe any narrative you like.
Seb
Member
Thu Apr 19 18:29:33
jergul:

Yes, yes, it's all made up. The regime doesn't use chemical weapons for terror purposes.

Anything is possible and nothing is true...
jergul
large member
Thu Apr 19 19:08:48
Seb
I am not the one who threw out the rulebook and rendered anything possible and nothing true without independent verification Seb.

It seems less and less likely the regime made a chemical attack in Douma.

Remembering if you will that the onus is on France-UK-US.

Who in any event have not justified the attack they made on a UN member state through the mechanisms that exist for that.

People hung in Nurenburg for stuff like that.
jergul
large member
Fri Apr 20 02:22:37
A video released by the Iraqi airforce showing it destroy a multistory building with 76:3 = 25.3 missiles:

http://www...ia-with-dead-on-target-strike/

Or maybe it was just one guided general purpose bomb. Hard to tell.
Seb
Member
Fri Apr 20 03:15:51
Jergul:

Setting up such stark lines is absurd. The only independent verification is via UN where Russia can veto t&CS.

The whole r2p came about because Russia vetoes actual enforcement of international law.

Appoint you overlook.

Stop presenting your choice of whom to place faith in as objectivity.
Seb
Member
Fri Apr 20 03:17:02
They hung people for gassing children too. And murdering and torturing prisoners. Something you argue is less important than Asssad's sovereignty.
jergul
large member
Fri Apr 20 04:11:23
Seb
Noted that you find the UN-Charter and UN system to be absurd.

No wonder you think "Anything is possible and nothing is true".

There is no real point discussing international matters with you. We do not share a common framework of understanding.



jergul
large member
Fri Apr 20 04:24:51
The UK et al. has not invoked d2p in the appropriate UN channels incidentally. There is a procedure to be followed as stipulated by the treaty.

An unjustified attack is an unjust and illegal attack.

All UN treaties hinge on following the charter. There is no NPT or Chemical warfare treaty outside of that framework.
Seb
Member
Fri Apr 20 04:46:01
jergul:

What is absurd is you think that the we have a body and a charter that sets out rights, but that this should never, ever be enforced.

jergul
large member
Fri Apr 20 06:03:51
I think it absurd that you cannot accept that actions have conscequences.

D2p i Libya was covered by a UNSC resolution. So would be an example of enforcement.

The resolution was systematically abused, so of course it will take time and effort to rebuild trust to a point where UNSC members will trust that the wording of resolutions will be adhered to.

I warned you about this at the time.
jergul
large member
Sat Apr 21 15:09:16
http://www...bels-in-east-qalamoun-details/

One of the Commanders of a FSA affiliate pivoted full axis and enlisted his force to fight ISIS.

I suspect handing over the above storage sites intact was part of his deal.
Seb
Member
Sat Apr 21 15:23:38
jergul:

I think I pointed out that many of the people who went out and met FSA commanders (e.g. Anthony Lloyd) have pointed out that the FSA generally didn't like Islamists but viewed them as the better alternative. Generally they have not fought alongside ISIS, rather fought against them.

So "flipped full axis" is a bit propoganda-ish in the "so when did you stop beating your wife" kind of way.
Forwyn
Member
Sat Apr 21 16:20:40
Revisionism at its best.

This was four years ago, FSA being defector bait isn't a new thing. Naturally, beltway retards thought the answer was to give "moderate" groups like Al Zenki TOW missiles, so they wouldn't have to join Al Nusra to get good equipment. We see how well that turned out. But to deny it happened...that's an entirely new level of retardation.

http://www...y-rebels-defect-islamist-group

Syria's main armed opposition group, the Free Syrian Army (FSA), is losing fighters and capabilities to Jabhat al-Nusra, an Islamist organisation with links to al-Qaida that is emerging as the best-equipped, financed and motivated force fighting Bashar al-Assad's regime.
jergul
large member
Sat Apr 21 16:30:20
Seb
What Forwyn said. For secular Syrian forces, see the regime or the kurds. Its been like that for a long time. I suggested the current model the US is following back in 2014 (if you want to support the secular opposition, then arm the kurds).

What we are seeing is rebels turning over serious hardware, settling their status with the regime, and returning to the fold.

For good reason. The regime is steam rolling resistance these days.
Seb
Member
Sat Apr 21 16:50:32
Forwyn:

I think you have managed to complete missread my post.

Al-nuras isn't ISIS - and the FSA alliance with Al-nursa was a marriage of convenience - the better alternative to Assad.

What is revisionist is to say "wow, look they are now fighting ISIS", when the FSA first allied with Kurds and other rebel groups to fight ISIS in 2014, about four years ago.

jergul:

I am surprised to see you conflating all islamist groups with ISIS. Generally you know better.

The idea of a liberal Syrian democracy is dead #(to jergulian shouts of "hooray - westphalia - l'estat c'est il").

Is it unsurprising that the FSA - commanders of which are on record in interviews with western Journalists talking about the likes of Al-Nursa as a necessary evil who could be dealt with once Assad was gone, and who joined in an alliance with other islamists to fight ISIS in 2014 - would then view ISIS as an enemy worth continuing to fight.

Or do you think they should sit on their hands and say "whelp, seeing as Assad has managed to see off any dream of a liberal state, I guess we should just hope ISIS comes and kills us all".

I think you are reading way to much into it.

Surely it is not news at all that Assad, with Russian and Iranian support, has managed to stifle any moderate opposition. What do you think poison gas was about? "The west isn't coming to help you". Silly me, of course not, it was Isis secretly hiding cylinders of chlorine at bomb target sights.



jergul
large member
Sat Apr 21 17:02:40
Seb
I am not conflating all islamist groups with ISIS.

The reason I am making a big deal about it is because rebels have handed over intact weapon systems with intact logistic tails. We are speaking of scores of TOWs and MBTs with attendant munitions and spare parts.

This is more than the usual return to civilian life in regime areas.

Fighting ISIS is just a sidenote.

For the moderate opposition, see the Syrian parliament. Independents hold 25% (or 50 of 200) seats.

What poison are you refering to? Surely not the episode that was debunked by witness accounts detailing how the social media videoscapade was staged?
jergul
large member
Sat Apr 21 17:04:19
(re storing chlorine. The regime has recovered stocks of it in Douma of course. Everyone needs it, everywhere except perhaps rural India).
Forwyn
Member
Sat Apr 21 17:04:40
If the best you can say is that Al Nusra isn't ISIS, there really isn't anything worth saying.

And there's certainly no ground to stand on, saying that people who fight with Al Nusra aren't Islamists.

"We're violent Islamists, but we're not Daesh" isn't redeeming in the slightest.
jergul
large member
Sat Apr 21 17:06:20
What you may be thinking about is pre-war Syrian emigrees. The moral of that story is that sitting around in hotel rooms in Geneva will do absolutely nothing to generate popular support in Syria proper (regime controlled or not).
jergul
large member
Sat Apr 21 17:06:57
(re moderate opposition not represented in the Syrian parliament).
jergul
large member
Sat Apr 21 17:09:57
At least Al-Nusra has a sense of humour:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tahrir_al-Sham

Al-Sham indeed

(Al-Shame, and Al-Sheep are pending).
Forwyn
Member
Sat Apr 21 17:11:35
"marriage of convenience - the better alternative to Assad."

Lol. Imagine the cognitive dissonance required to reconcile a false reality where people who believe an Al Nusra state would be superior to that of Assad are not Islamists - or if they are, at least they're not ISIS
Seb
Member
Sat Apr 21 17:51:39
Forwyn:

Quite simply, the FSA believed that once they had got rid of Assad, they would be able to beat Al Nursa as there would be lots of international support for that as there are no real international sponsors for those kind of islamist organisations in their own right.

So talking about an "al nursa state" is kinda irrelevant.

And given how fisiparous the Islamist elements are, it's not an unreasonable point.
Seb
Member
Sat Apr 21 17:54:46
In any case, the FSA worked with Al Nursa in 2012.

There supposed alliance later on was more a general agreement that everyone would focus on fighting ISIS independently.

Anyway, you bought Al Nursa into the conversation, claiming my post RE FSA never having allied with ISIS and consistently fought them was "revisionism" - which points to a confusion in your mind about the distinction between the two.

Now you appear to think recounting the relationship between Al Nursa and the FSA in an effort to establish some clarity on that point, I am defending Al-Nursa.
Forwyn
Member
Sat Apr 21 23:41:36
No, you remarked that FSA are not Islamists. You justified that by saying FSA has fought ISIS.

Not remarkable. Every group has fought ISIS, because they are an aspiring Caliphate that absorbs or destroys every disparate group.

So you got a reminder that FSA has been fighting with, and outright defecting to, Al Nusra for years.

Naturally, these aren't Islamists, just pragmatic, revolutionary Muslims who are hoping for pipe dream assistance against Al Nusra, Al Sham, Al Zenki, etc etc, that they couldn't get enough of to defeat Assad in the first place.

Laughable.
jergul
large member
Sun Apr 22 01:16:19
Seb
You do know that Assad has huge amounts of domestic support, right?

You caught the video of him driving to east ghouta? Personally, with the journalist in the passenger seat.

A pretty eery piece of propaganda.
jergul
large member
Wed Apr 25 07:27:23
MOSCOW, April 25. /TASS/. The Syrian air defense forces shot down 46 cruise missiles fired by the United States and its allies against Damascus and its suburbs on April 14, Head of the Russian General Staff’s Main Operations Department Colonel-General Sergei Rudskoi said on Wednesday.

"The reconnaissance and air defense systems’ recording data we have obtained, the work at the scene and polls of eye-witnesses show that the Pantsyr, Osa, Strela-10, Buk, Kvadrat and S-125 surface-to-air missile systems protecting the Syrian capital and the nearby Duvali, Dumayr, Bley and Mezze airfields of the Syrian Air Force destroyed 46 cruise missiles," the general said.

Considering the missiles’ flight paths and the capabilities of the Syrian air defenses, these missiles were destroyed in five interception areas: three of them are located to the west of Damascus and the other two to the east of Syria’s capital, the Russian general said.
Missile strike against Syria

On April 14, the US, Great Britain and France delivered a massive missile strike against Syria without the UN Security Council’s authorization. According to the data of the Russian Foreign Ministry, the missiles hit a research center in Damascus, the headquarters of the republican guard, an air defense base, several military aerodromes and army depots.

As Russia’s Defense Ministry reported, the attack lasted from 03:42 to 05:10 local time. The Syrian air defenses shot down 71 out of 103 fired missiles. Three civilians were hurt in the missile strikes. The missiles steered clear of Russia’s Tartus and Hmeymim military bases and no Russian air defense systems were used.


The United States, Britain and France claimed the strikes were in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria’s Douma.

On April 7, a number of NGOs, including the White Helmets, alleged that chemical weapons were used in Douma, Eastern Ghouta. According to the statement published on the organization’s website on April 8, chlorine bombs had been dropped on the city, killing dozens and poisoning many locals who had to be brought to the hospital.

The Russian Foreign Ministry dismissed that report as fake news. The Defense Ministry added that the White Helmets were notorious for spreading falsehoods.

Representatives of the Russian Center for the Reconciliation of the Warring Sides held a probe in Douma on April 9 but found no traces of chemical weapons use.

More:
http://tass.com/defense/1001707

=================

Russian claims have now entered the realm of quite plausible (the ratio missiles intercepted to missiles fired was too high in earlier reports).

I believe that the information given is from their best analysis. It could still be wrong, but this is what the Russian military thinks is true.
jergul
large member
Wed Apr 25 07:28:45
Less than half of missiles were shot down by defences using 3 times the number of missiles downed.
jergul
large member
Wed Apr 25 07:51:35
Tass cites a Russian Ministery of Defense official saying that Russia will equip and train Syrians with a new SAM system.

In order of likelihood:

vityaz 50R6
s-300vm (antey 2500)
tor-M2KM
s-300pmu-2
s-400(pmu-3)
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Wed Apr 25 10:34:30
Are the Russians Correct?

http://www.unz.com/article/are-the-russians-correct/
Rugian
Member
Wed Apr 25 10:48:01
What the fuck is this happy horseshit? A 2 second Google search immediately reveals that the Syrians didn't shoot down shit. Yet here is jergul shilling Russian propaganda that's completely detached from reality.

I'm not saying that the Pentagon isn't capable of being lying liars. But if it comes down to them or the Russians, Im not trusting the Russians.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Wed Apr 25 10:52:24

Me Too!

jergul
large member
Wed Apr 25 12:26:49
Ruggy
A 2 second google search tells you that the US claims it shot 76 missiles into 3 buildings. Which beggars belief.

The Russians are saying 13 missiles hit those three buildings. Which is in the reign of normal force preservation (don't shoot more missiles than you need to destroy something. In this case 21 missiles fired, 8 intercepted, 13 remaining in a randomized 3-5-6 spread).

Less than half of missiles shot down by defences using 3 times the number of missiles downed

is underperformance compared to what you might expect from western systems (Iron dome and Pat for example).

In sum: You don't know shit and who cares what you believe.
jergul
large member
Wed Apr 25 12:32:26
rofl@subsonic missiles.

But also rofl@SAMs as used by Syria.

Shooting down some incoming missiles is not a winning strategy.
CrownRoyal
Member
Wed Apr 25 12:33:16
suck my vityaz
jergul
large member
Wed Apr 25 12:38:21
The vityaz is rather small as those things go.
show deleted posts
Bookmark and Share