Trump orders attack on Syria, asks for other countries to join him.

I think that you know that the United States before it did in Iraq, killing hundreds of civilians. Most Russian experts and many people in analytical forums are convinced that by this attack on Syria the US wanted to take everyone away from its terrible blow on Iraq with all these civilian casualties. And they succeeded.

I watched several videos, one of them was from a Russian expert on the Middle East, where he outlined the objective reasons for these events. I quite agree with him. This person is known for his deep understanding of what is happening in the Middle East, he knows who the United States, Israel, Qatar, Saudi Arabia are and what their goals are, so his assessment of the situation is quite accurate.
Among other things, he says that the Americans bombed the ammunition depot stuffed with chemical weapons in Idlib, which resulted in poisoning of residents, and then the Americans blamed Bashar Assad and Russia for it (in that "Russia did not cope with its tasks in the Syria") and then bomb this air base.

And as a result, terrorists begin an attack on the Syrian troops, are inspired and praise the US attack and this gives them a green light on the continued use of chemical weapons and provocation, as a result of which the whole world will again blame Syria and despicably attack it.
Speaking about the "US strategic interests" that they defend with this attack on Syria, they, of course, imply ISIL, for only a fool now does not know that the US and their "Eastern allies" in every way try to protect their terrorist offspring from destruction by Russia and Syria.
 
And here we go:

Terrorists from the Daish faction went on the offensive on Friday morning in the eastern part of the Syrian province of Homs, the Arabic edition of Al-Masdar reported citing military sources in Syria.

Following the Turks: Israel is preparing to enter the war in Syria on the side of the militants.

-------

Of the 59 American "Tomahawks", only 23 were hit in the Syrian base.
It is likely that the Russian air defense either knocked down or "rejected" the remaining missiles. But now Russia is going to shoot down everything.


The Russian Ministry of Defense commented on the US missile strike on the airfield of the Syrian government troops in Homs. The official representative of the Russian military department, Major-General Igor Konashenkov called such an action "a demonstration of military force."

"According to the command of the Syrian airbase, 2 Syrian military personnel were missing, as well as 4 - were killed and 6 received burn injuries in the course of extinguishing fires".

"It's already obvious that a strike by American cruise missiles at the Syrian airbase was prepared long before today's events. To prepare such a strike it is necessary to conduct a large complex of activities for reconnaissance, planning, preparing flight missions and bringing the missiles into full readiness for launch," I. Konashenkov. He also noted that "US administrations are changing, and the methods of unleashing wars since the bombing of Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya remain unchanged."

Considering the US actions as a gross violation of the Memorandum on the prevention of incidents in Syria, the Russian Defense Ministry decided to suspend cooperation on it with the Pentagon, concluded Major-General Igor Konashenkov.
 
I went to bed last night pretty much writing off Trump. It just looks so obvious that he purely reacted to machinations of the Deep State and is just wild in his actions. He so much looks the fool with his very abrupt and drastic change of view on Syria due to the supposed chemical attack and propaganda support coming out the MSM and the Deep State. He is going against so much of what he has said in his campaign and since his election with this act and risks losing a lot of support. But is he so wild, easily manipulated and careless?

The situation seems so hard to read from the outside and seems like others have said we will have to wait and see. Is he just fickle, worn out, outsmarted or giving in to the Deep State and not realizing the ramifications of doing so and attacking Syria? Is he playing the long game and trying to take some heat off of himself by throwing the Neocon crazies a bone with what could be little real impact on the conflict in Syria. Like “see I’m not a Putin and Russian puppet. I went against their interests and attacked and they are condemning me, so get off of my back with all of this Russia election interference stuff.” It has at least initially taken over the news cycle.

One thing I thought last night is that Trump is in a hard place in a lot of ways and war or some kind of justification will be needed where he can take more of the reins of power in the US. Congress is a corrupted mess where the various factions (Left, Neocon/Neoliberal Left, Tea Party Right, and Neocon Right) all are against him in some way and nothing of significance is going to be done to “Make America Great Again” due to a pervasive gridlock that is on display since his inauguration. Are these the opening moves to more involvement in Syria and war (and what about North Korea) as a means for Trump to take more control?

Unspoken about in relation to this gridlock is this business of the debt ceiling issue that will be coming to a head in late spring, early summer depending on who you listen to and has not been addressed in any significant way. With the gridlock and Congress factions all aligned against him in some way how does that get resolved without government shutdown and wider economic ramifications? Does Trump want the debt issue to come to a head and show that Congress, who is the body that has to act on the issue, is the swamp that needs to be drained, so it becomes an emergency where he can take more unilateral action?

Lots of questions and unknowns.
 
[quote author= Bear]Lots of questions and unknowns.[/quote]

Yeah, as for now Trump the Russian spy is officially a death end. They can't falsely accuse him again after this.
 
bjorn said:
[quote author= Scottie]So, it's particularly interesting to me that the Russians report that only 23 of the 59 missiles reached their targets. If they weren't blown out of the sky or flown into the sea or something, where are the impact craters where they veered off course? Even back in Gulf War I, there were reports on TV of stray Tomahawks, which was of course downplayed for public consumption.

Tomahawks are subsonic and outdated compared to their Russian counterparts but they do not miss their target from what I understand. (But hard to tell perhaps, just look at their overhyped patriot missile, which turned out to be complete rubbish.) If it's true that only 23 reached their target, something interesting might have happened or so I think.


[quote author= Scottie]So anyway, the effect is that Americans hear, "Tomahawk" and they start singing the national anthem and saluting a virtual US flag that they envision hanging in the sky in front of them. And then naturally, the Freedom and Democracy Effect kicks in, and suddenly everyone loves Trump.[/quote]

But those who voted for Trump or at the majority at least didn't voted for this kind of BS I believe. I doubt this will help him gain popularity. Unless Americans love their war machine so much that they indeed approve of it no matter what.
[/quote]
It will help him with his popularity. Killing brown people always does. Plus, one thing to watch is if the media starts talking about how he turned around his presidency. The groundwork was already laid the day before when Bannon got kicked off the NSC. Watch for the media talking about how the "grownups" are now in charge. Up until yesterday he was portrayed as a failed president who might not last his term. It reminded me how quickly the media and the deep state turned on Jimmy Carter.

Also, people who voted for Trump didn't want long drawn out quagmires, but most of them don't mind quick bombing strikes that make them feel good.
 
I think that Trump crossed to the dark side.
I want to believe that it is just a smart maneuver and that there was some plan, that Russia knows and coordinated with him.
On the other hand, if he really continues like his predecessors, then it is not gonna be a good situation.

Know since he is a president for about 3 months he probably saw the real power of the deep state. He is a smart guy and he is draining the swamp without a notice of all the critters that live inside or he became a new inhabitant of the same swamp.

His future actions will tell us what is the truth. I just hope that deep state didn't win so fast over him.
 
[quote author= Mr. Premise]It will help him with his popularity. Killing brown people always does.[/quote]

Just shows how fake Liberals are. They are social justice warriors at home and 'anti racist'. But killing brown people oversees is a okay. There is litterally no antiwar movement anymore in the US. Liberals are not antiwar at all.


I just feel that this wasn't so much about Syria.

It was about the Deep State wanting that Trump makes it loyalty clear to them. He was being tested, or else.

I have 2 scenario's in mind. Either Trump is planning something big. Or he has no leverage at all to get back to them so he just sings along. I have this impression that he is fishing for information since he is going after pedophiles. If he doesn't find anything, he has no leverage, if he does. He can get back at them?

He started this fight without any ammunition. He has nothing, even so that for the time being, he needs to play along. Or he has just given in entirely.
 
bjorn said:
Tomahawks are subsonic and outdated compared to their Russian counterparts but they do not miss their target from what I understand. (But hard to tell perhaps, just look at their overhyped patriot missile, which turned out to be complete rubbish.)

You might be right there: I might be confusing the Tomahawk with the Patriot system, which is indeed garbage-and-a-half. ;)

Still, compared to Russian systems, the Tomahawk really is rather outdated. But as one military analyst noted recently (can't find the link now!), even though US hardware lags behind nowadays, it's still somewhat difficult to shoot down hundreds of crappy missiles raining down on your head.

So, in terms of raw quantity, the US wins. Which is why Russia + China develop things like hypersonic anti-ship missiles, methinks... If you can't shoot ALL the missiles down, you make sure your first response involves disabling or destroying the platforms that can deliver those missiles...

Which is kind of like the Russian tactic of setting their towns and cities on fire, and falling back into the snowy cold. I cannot imagine your average American doing that! But, I digress.
 
Scottie said:
bjorn said:
Tomahawks are subsonic and outdated compared to their Russian counterparts but they do not miss their target from what I understand. (But hard to tell perhaps, just look at their overhyped patriot missile, which turned out to be complete rubbish.)

You might be right there: I might be confusing the Tomahawk with the Patriot system, which is indeed garbage-and-a-half. ;)

They do miss or malfunction with some percentage not hitting exactly where they are supposed to hit, but they are supposed to be pretty reliable as compared to how bombing used to be done.

This old article about the performance in the Persian Gulf war says about 50%.

http://articles.latimes.com/1992-04-10/news/mn-340_1_gulf-war

The Tomahawks, 288 of which were fired from surface ships and submarines in the Persian Gulf, Red Sea and eastern Mediterranean Sea, hit their intended targets slightly more than half the time, according to sources with access to the classified performance data. The Navy, which has said 85% of the low-flying drones were "successful," Thursday declined to say how many hit what they aimed for, but said a missile can be successful without striking its target.
 
Scottie said:
bjorn said:
Tomahawks are subsonic and outdated compared to their Russian counterparts but they do not miss their target from what I understand. (But hard to tell perhaps, just look at their overhyped patriot missile, which turned out to be complete rubbish.)

You might be right there: I might be confusing the Tomahawk with the Patriot system, which is indeed garbage-and-a-half. ;)

Still, compared to Russian systems, the Tomahawk really is rather outdated. But as one military analyst noted recently (can't find the link now!), even though US hardware lags behind nowadays, it's still somewhat difficult to shoot down hundreds of crappy missiles raining down on your head.

So, in terms of raw quantity, the US wins. Which is why Russia + China develop things like hypersonic anti-ship missiles, methinks... If you can't shoot ALL the missiles down, you make sure your first response involves disabling or destroying the platforms that can deliver those missiles...

Which is kind of like the Russian tactic of setting their towns and cities on fire, and falling back into the snowy cold. I cannot imagine your average American doing that! But, I digress.

Yeah, that's the problem here. They US can literally launch hundreds of those subsonic missiles. That will simply overwhelm Russian air defences. As for supersonic missiles, Russia already has those in operation and there is nothing the US could do about it if they are locked and ready to go. Russia has only one way to counter a possible barrage of hundreds of cruise missles. That's by attacking the ships the moment the first salvo is fired. Russia has this, but they need to strike back right away if it happens. And that means WW3.OSIT.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3M-54_Klub
Speed 0.8-2.5-2.9 mach

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrahMos
It is the world's fastest anti-ship cruise missile in operation.[14][15][16] The missile travels at speeds of Mach 2.8 to 3.0

Even faster Russian missiles are being developed and will come into production in 2018.
 
Bear said:
Scottie said:
bjorn said:
Tomahawks are subsonic and outdated compared to their Russian counterparts but they do not miss their target from what I understand. (But hard to tell perhaps, just look at their overhyped patriot missile, which turned out to be complete rubbish.)

You might be right there: I might be confusing the Tomahawk with the Patriot system, which is indeed garbage-and-a-half. ;)

They do miss or malfunction with some percentage not hitting exactly where they are supposed to hit, but they are supposed to be pretty reliable as compared to how bombing used to be done.

This old article about the performance in the Persian Gulf war says about 50%.

http://articles.latimes.com/1992-04-10/news/mn-340_1_gulf-war

The Tomahawks, 288 of which were fired from surface ships and submarines in the Persian Gulf, Red Sea and eastern Mediterranean Sea, hit their intended targets slightly more than half the time, according to sources with access to the classified performance data. The Navy, which has said 85% of the low-flying drones were "successful," Thursday declined to say how many hit what they aimed for, but said a missile can be successful without striking its target.

Good, looks like things haven't chance much, just like their crappy patriot missile system.

59 tomahawks, only 23 hit their target. 50% seems about right.
 
Course correction

Joe said:
Laura said:
I agree. Donald caved a lot faster than we expected.

Maybe he did but then again, as Pierre says, maybe it was to appease the warhawks who have been demanding action on Syria. Of course, they're unlikely to be convinced by it without some further action, but Trump has now set a precedent for his admin of taking unilateral action without consulting Congress, and it's not the traditional kind of US action where they obliterate a country over a period of months. Of course, this is not possible in Syria with Russian involvement and defenses, whether the hawks in the USA like it or not.

A live president is better than a missile strike protesting, then sudden dead president. Hostage to the Pentagon-Devil and 5th Column, but this way Trump can still turn around. He couldn't do much now about this hysterical 'Deathwish Avalanche' with the Nikki Haley types cheerleading, seeing as how his travel ban and stop Obamacare orders were neutralized.


After the missile attack was finally understood as a stern warning from the Universe, definite steps were taken to get this reality back on course (as was originally planned), so the new branch and how our consciousnesses are reading it can now trail-blaze toward a higher integrity and better morale version. Souled can follow the new branches and meet there as a better version of themselves, starting from yesterday.
 
Last night when I heard the news I was shocked and outraged, and in an instant I was convinced that Trump had pretty much lost to the deep state in such a way that would have dramatic consequences for the world and the people of Syria.

After reading the details, I am no longer so sure. And the thing is, this uncertainty wasn't even something I even wanted to explore. How could an illegal strike against a sovereign nation, and in particular against a military who is actually fighting for the survival of it's people be in any way defensible? We don't live in an easily decipherable world, and the past has shown that Trump is not easily understood. Many of his critics think he's a idiot and is easily manipulated. While I once held that opinion, I've come to think he is much, much smarter than his opponents.

The past week has seen a torrent of major events, and it started with the Trump administrations announcement that they were no longer seeking to remove Assad from power. I'm now thinking he may have been testing the waters as well as gauging the deep state's response. And what was it? Carnage. Saint Petersburg was attacked, Putin was depicted as 'behind it all', and then soon after there was the terrorist gas attack in Syria being used to frame Assad. And all this amid the phony investigations into the Trump/Russia connections. The Deep State has been on a rampage. I don't know if Trump expected this kind of retaliation, but that he made such a sudden 180 does make me think he either already had an inclination, or very quickly processed the ramifications of what was coming and neutralized it best he could. An official US strike against the Syrian military might not seem like much of a neutralization, but if he really wanted to 'punish' Syria then this was in effect a wholly impotent response. It was however very showy and theatrical, which is important for other reasons I'll get to in a minute, and is also in line with the way Trump does things.

Like Pierre said, the base was not a highly strategic target. Russia and thus Syria were given advanced notice of the strike which allowed them to clear out personnel and it was made explicit that people were not targeted. It's being reported there are between 4-10 casualties. Russia could have intercepted the missiles, but they didn't. The Russian Ministry is also reporting that only 23 of the 59 missiles hit the base (it's currently unknown where the rest landed). The runway was not hit. Only six jets were hit. Russia's revocation of the airspace agreement establishes a significant deterrence that the neocons will not likely challenge. The US is already saying that future strikes are not being planned.

Now, the thing with this show is that Trump was able to completely take the steam out of the crazed neocon and democratic war mongers. Not only that, but now they are now fawning over the decision and he'll undoubtedly gain support from those who have opposed him. Yes, he did it with an illegal and outrageous strike, but he's battling some immense power and in the grand scheme of things the US has done far worse unofficially in Syria. It's only a big deal because it's 'official' and Trump is utilizing that official importance for an ineffective strike. The strike has also provided an excuse for Russia dominance over Syrian airspace, so it has indirectly supported and enhanced the Russian position as well.

I think he knows what the Deep State is up to, and I think he's doing his best to mitigate it. My guess is that Syria and Russia also understand this action for what it is, and while all sides will make noise, it's pretty much all part of a show. And it's likely not a show that is being directed by the Western elite, even if they think it is.
 
I’m not sure what to make of this video someone supposedly took of people staging a car bombing. It may be a hoax or from some movie that was being made, but the explosion is certainly real. Regardless, it succeeds in getting the most important point across: the deceptive, orchestrated nature of false flag attacks.
_https://www.facebook.com/4biddenKnowledge/videos/514994408675559/

This anti-Assad “reporter” tweeted about the sarin gas attack in Syria 24 hours before it happened. These indicting incidents of media reports jumping the gun ahead of their false flag events are getting more frequent it seems. Must be that disintegration the C’s warned would begin happening to those not grounded in reality—which most certainly would include most media “machines”.
_https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10154636499516795&set=pcb.10154636499576795&type=3
 
bjorn said:
[quote author= Mr. Premise]It will help him with his popularity. Killing brown people always does.

Just shows how fake Liberals are. They are social justice warriors at home and 'anti racist'. But killing brown people oversees is a okay. There is litterally no antiwar movement anymore in the US. Liberals are not antiwar at all.

[/quote]
No, the people who react positively to this are definitely not the social justice types. The social justice types hates these attacks. What people who don't live in the US don't know is that the social justice types are a tiny minority. It's more the average "low information voter" as well as the authoritarian follower types that respond well to this. You add these two groups together and you get to about 60% of the population.
 
Back
Top Bottom