An interesting development post President Trump inauguration has played out on the world stage with the attack on Syria. Is this what Trump meant when he talked about ‘making America great again’? The airstrike against a sovereign state again without the UN sanction is curious to those of us who do not subscribe to the White House narrative and by association the Australian proxy view. We all should by now wonder whether Australian foreign policy is an appendix to the US foreign policy. To get the answer to that don’t question our Foreign Minister as CNN may have the answer; this is obviously where she takes her brief to involve our military as an occupying force.
I plagiarised part of an article from the pages of
“US Attack On Syria Was Symbolic
By The Saker
April 07, 2017 “Information Clearing House” – “The Saker” – I have an important update: based on Russian sources, including video footage and the reports of one Russian journalist on the ground, Evgenii Poddubnyi, it has become clear that the US strike was largely symbolic. Here is the evidence:
- The Russians were given a warning which they, of course, passed on to the Syrians. The Americans must have assumed that this would happen.
- The Syrian airbase was lightly damaged: a few number of aircraft were damaged or destroyed, but many of these were in repairs and could not fly. Fuel storage tanks were destroyed. A number of aircraft bunkers were damage or destroyed. A few barracks were also destroyed.
- There were 6 or 7 casualties, which is very little.
- Crucially, the runways did not suffer.
Now here is the really intriguing thing: it appears that only 23 out of a total of 59 US cruise missiles hit the base. The rest are unaccounted for. This could be due to all sorts of reasons, including Syrian and Russian air defenses or Russian electronic warfare. I tend to believe that the latter is the cause. But then, this begs another question: why did the Russians let 23 of the cruise missiles through? Possibly to appease Trump and not force him to re-strike. Other possibility, to make sure that the political fallout from this stupid and reckless attack still come back to hurt the United States (had they destroyed all the cruise missiles this would not happen).
As for the Russian political reaction, I find it rather flaccid: Russia has condemned the attack and suspended the Memorandum of Understanding on Prevention of Flight Safety Incidents in the course of operations in Syria signed with the US.”
Clear your mind and mentally digest this. Go to the link. There’s more.
Needless to say, no chemical weapons or chemical weapon storage facilities were damaged: we know that since NOBODY, including the Russian reporters, were even carrying, nevermind wearing, any gas masks or, even less so, full chemical protection suits. This is hardly surprising since, of course, they never existed in the first place.
Just for the record, this attack was a direct and clear violation of
- US national law (Trump never got Congress to authorize this attack)
- International law (Trump is now a criminal guilty of the crime of ‘aggression’)
- The UN Charter
In other words, Trump is now a war criminal and the USA a rogue state (again).”
So my question now is: Are we being led to believe that all we have heard about Syria is ‘kosher’? There may be a story here! Read ‘Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War’. The origins of the Syrian conflict that we now see is there. We are simply the stage hands!
“When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth, they will either cease being mistaken, or cease being honest!” : Anonymous