Tag Archives: Chemical warfare

Posted in Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Governments, Intelligence, Military, War

Tagged Chemical warfare, Russia, Syria

Tillerson in Moscow: Is World War III Back on Track? by James George Jatras

Posted on April 15, 2017 | 1 comment

This is a good article, in part because it speculates, rather than just screechingly condemns. From James George Jatras at strategic-culture.org:

If anyone is worried whether the prospect of a major war, which many of us considered almost inevitable if Hillary Clinton had attained the White House, is back on track, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s visit to Moscow was cold comfort. From his remarks together with his counterpart Sergey Lavrov, there is now little reason to expect any improvement in US-Russia ties anytime soon, if ever, and much reason to expect them to get worse – a lot worse.

There has been a great deal of speculation as to why President Donald Trump, who promised a break with the warmongering policies Hillary would have implemented, and which characterized the administrations of Barack Obama, George W. Bush, and Bill Clinton, would have bombed Syria’s Shayrat airbase in retaliation for a supposed chemical weapons (CW) strike without evidence or authorization from either Congress or the UN Security Council.

(I won’t bore anyone familiar with Balkan affairs with the almost certain origin of the gas attack in Idlib. The odds that it was a false flag by the jihadists far, far outweigh any chance of a CW attack by Syrian government forces. To cite the «Markale market massacres» is enough. Ghouta September 2013 wasn’t the first such deception in Syria, and Idlib April 2017 won’t be the last. American media condemning Assad for the CW attack and demanding justice for the victims never mention that the site is held by al-Qaeda and that they themselves have a CW capability. Nor that the jihadists likely knew when and where Syrian planes would be operating, since the Russians would have notified the US under the deconfliction agreement. This is not to rule out the Russian explanation that the release was due to Syrian bombing of the jihadists’ CW cache but I consider the planned provocation more likely based on the timing. Predictably, an amateurish four-page paper issued by the US intelligence community to justify accusations against Assad contained zero evidence.)

To continue reading: Tillerson in Moscow: Is World War III Back on Track?

Posted in Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Governments, Intelligence, Military, War

Tagged Chemical warfare, President Trump, Rex Tillerson, Russia, Syria

Trump Walks Into Syria Trap Via Fake ‘Intelligence’, by Justin Raimondo

Posted on April 14, 2017 | Leave a comment

Justin Raimondo makes a good case that the Syrian gas attack came from the rebels. He argues that therefore Trump fell for fake intelligence. Raimondo does not consider that perhaps what’s obvious to him and many others, including SLL, was also obvious to Trump, and he acted knowing the intelligence was fake, a possibility SLL raised in “Calling A Bluff?” That possibility raises questions that might run counter to Raimondo’s denunciation and call to arms to the antiwar movement. From Raimondo at antiwar.com:

In the summer of 2013, the international media was aflame with reports that Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad had murdered 1,400 civilians in the town of Ghouta: using deadly sarin gas, children, women, and men had been horribly slaughtered, and Syria’s Islamist opposition, in concert with the Washington foreign policy Establishment, was agitating for US intervention. It was the culmination of a years-long propaganda campaign, which then President Barack Obama had stubbornly resisted – and now, finally, he was about to give in and give the order for US missiles to fly. Yet, at the back of his mind, he still had unsettling doubts, and these were confirmed shortly before the day of the planned strikes when the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, interrupted his daily presidential briefing, as Jeffrey Goldberg reported in The Atlantic:

“Obama was also unsettled by a surprise visit early in the week from James Clapper, his director of national intelligence, who interrupted the President’s Daily Brief, the threat report Obama receives each morning from Clapper’s analysts, to make clear that the intelligence on Syria’s use of sarin gas, while robust, was not a ‘slam dunk.’ He chose the term carefully. Clapper, the chief of an intelligence community traumatized by its failures in the run-up to the Iraq War, was not going to overpromise, in the manner of the onetime CIA director George Tenet, who famously guaranteed George W. Bush a ‘slam dunk’ in Iraq.

“While the Pentagon and the White House’s national-security apparatuses were still moving toward war (John Kerry told me he was expecting a strike the day after his speech), the president had come to believe that he was walking into a trap – one laid both by allies and by adversaries, and by conventional expectations of what an American president is supposed to do.”

To continue reading: Trump Walks Into Syria Trap Via Fake ‘Intelligence’

Posted in Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Governments, Intelligence, War

Trump Withholds Syria-Sarin Evidence, by Robert Parry

Posted on April 12, 2017 | 1 comment

Many challenged the intelligence agencies’ proof-free assessments and assertions concerning collusion between Trump officials and Russia. Now the shoe is on the other foot, as Robert Parry challenges the Trump administration to disclose the evidence of Syria’s use of Sarin gas. From Parry at consortiumnews.com:

Exclusive: Despite President Trump’s well-known trouble with the truth, his White House now says “trust us” on its Syrian-sarin charges while withholding the proof that it claims to have, reports Robert Parry.

After making the provocative and dangerous charge that Russia is covering up Syria’s use of chemical weapons, the Trump administration withheld key evidence to support its core charge that a Syrian warplane dropped sarin on a northern Syrian town on April 4.

A four-page white paper, prepared by President Trump’s National Security Council staff and released by the White House on Tuesday, claimed that U.S. intelligence has proof that the plane carrying the sarin gas left from the Syrian military airfield that Trump ordered hit by Tomahawk missiles on April 6.

The paper asserted that “we have signals intelligence and geospatial intelligence,” but then added that “we cannot publicly release all available intelligence on this attack due to the need to protect sources and methods.”

I’m told that the key evidence was satellite surveillance of the area, a body of material that U.S. intelligence analysts were reviewing late last week even after the Trump-ordered bombardment of 59 Tomahawk missiles that, according to Syrian media reports, killed seven or eight Syrian soldiers and nine civilians, including four children.

Yet, it is unclear why releasing these overhead videos would be so detrimental to “sources and methods” since everyone knows the U.S. has this capability and the issue at hand – if it gets further out of hand – could lead to a nuclear confrontation with Russia.

In similarly tense situations in the past, U.S. Presidents have released sensitive intelligence to buttress U.S. government assertions, including John F. Kennedy’s disclosure of U-2 spy flights in the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis and Ronald Reagan revealing electronic intercepts after the Soviet shoot-down of Korean Airlines Flight 007 in 1983.

Yet, in this current case, as U.S.-Russian relations spiral downward into what is potentially an extermination event for the human species, Trump’s White House insists that the world must trust it despite its record of consistently misstating facts.

To continue reading: Trump Withholds Syria-Sarin Evidence

Posted in Government, War

After Trump’s Syria Attack, What Comes Next? by Ron Paul

Posted on April 10, 2017 | 1 comment

Ron Paul argues that the main beneficiary of Trump’s Syrian missile strike is ISIS. From Paul at ronpaulinstitute.org:
Thursday’s US missile attack on Syria must represent the quickest foreign policy U-turn in history. Less than a week after the White House gave Assad permission to stay on as president of his own country, President Trump decided that the US had to attack Syria and demand Assad’s ouster after a chemical attack earlier in the week. Trump blamed Assad for the attack, stated that “something’s going to happen” in retaliation, and less than two days later he launched a volley of 59 Tomahawk missiles (at a cost of $1.5 million each) onto a military airfield near where the chemical attack took place.

President Trump said it is in the “vital national security interest of the United States” to attack Syria over the use of poison gas. That is nonsense. Even if what Trump claims about the gas attack is true – and we’ve seen no evidence that it is – there is nothing about an isolated incident of inhuman cruelty thousands of miles from our borders that is in our “vital national security interest.” Even if Assad gassed his own people last week it hardly means he will launch chemical attacks on the United States even if he had the ability, which he does not.

From the moment the chemical attack was blamed on Assad, however, I expressed my doubts about the claims. It simply makes no sense for Assad to attack civilians with a chemical weapon just as he is winning his war against ISIS and al-Qaeda and has been told by the US that it no longer seeks regime change. On the verge of victory, he commits a suicidal act to no strategic or tactical military advantage? More likely the gas attack was a false flag by the rebels — or perhaps even by our CIA — as a last ditch effort to forestall a rebel defeat in the six year war.

Would the neocons and the mainstream media lie to us about what happened last week in Syria? Of course they would. They lied us into attacking Iraq, they lied us into attacking Gaddafi, they lied us into seeking regime change in Syria in the first place. We should always assume they are lying.

To continue reading: After Trump’s Syria Attack, What Comes Next?

Posted in Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Governments, Military, War

Russia, Iran Warn U.S. They Will “Respond With Force” If Syria “Red Lines” Crossed Again, by Tyler Durden

Posted on April 9, 2017 | Leave a comment

A predictable yet disturbing response from Russia and Iran to the US Tomahawk strike. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

A statement issued on Sunday by a joint command centre consisting of forces of Russian, Iran and allied militia alliance supporting Syrian President Bashar al Assad said that Friday’s US strike on the Syrian air base crossed “red lines” and it would “respond with force” to any new aggression while increasing their level of support to their ally.

In the statement published by the group on media outlet Ilam al Harbi, the pro-Assad alliances says that “what America waged in an aggression on Syria is a crossing of red lines. From now on we will respond with force to any aggressor or any breach of red lines from whoever it is and America knows our ability to respond well.”

Earlier on Sunday the UK’s Defence Secretary, Sir Michael Fallon, demanded Russia rein in Mr Assad (by which he really meant be willing to accept a new Syrian regime with a pro-western puppet leader, and one who is willing to allow the Qatar gas pipeline to cross the country on its way to Europe.

Fallon also claimed that Moscow is “responsible for every civilian death” in the chemical attack on Khan Sheikhun and said Putin was responsible for the brutal killings “by proxy”, because it was the Syrian president’s “principal backer.” The defense minister said the attack had happened “on their watch” and that Vladimir Putin must now live up to previous promises that Mr Assad’s chemical weapons had been destroyed. His comments came after Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson pulled out of a Moscow visit hours before he was due to fly.
* * *

Finally, for those who are unclear about the core geopolitical tensions that are at the base of the long-running Syrian proxy war, the answer is – as so often tends to be – commodities and specifically natural gas, as we first explained in 2013, and as summarized in the following October 2016 article courtesy of Eric Zuesse (see also “Competing Gas Pipelines Are Fueling The Syrian War & Migrant Crisis“)

To continue reading: Russia, Iran Warn U.S. They Will “Respond With Force” If Syria “Red Lines” Crossed Again

Posted in Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Governments, Intelligence, Military, War

Tagged Chemical warfare, Iran, Russia, Syria, US Tomahawk strike

Former DIA Colonel: “US strikes on Syria based on a lie,” from Intel Today

Posted on April 9, 2017 | 1 comment

Interesting assertions and analysis about the Syrian situation from former Defense Intelligence Agency official Colonel Patrick Lang at gosint.wordpress.com:

“In the coming days the American people will learn that the [US]Intelligence Community knew that Syria did not drop a military chemical weapon on innocent civilians in Idlib.”

Former DIA Colonel Patrick Lang

Patrick Lang — a former DIA Colonel — does not mince words about the US attacks on Syria. Lang claims that Donald Trump’s decision to launch cruise missile strikes on a Syrian Air Force Base was based on a lie.

Patrick Lang is truly a top expert on the Middle-East. The former DIA Colonel is highly respected for his deep knowledge and absolute honesty.

[NOTE: Many years ago, Lang helped me to understand a very ‘murky’ dossier regarding Libya. I trust his analysis 100%. Last week — knowing full well that ‘the shit was going to hit the fan’ — I asked him permission to reproduce his posts on my blog. Colonel Lang kindly agreed.]

ANALYSIS by retired Col. Patrick LANG

Donald Trump’s decision to launch cruise missile strikes on a Syrian Air Force Base was based on a lie. In the coming days the American people will learn that the Intelligence Community knew that Syria did not drop a military chemical weapon on innocent civilians in Idlib. Here is what happened.

1. The Russians briefed the United States on the proposed target. This is a process that started more than two months ago. There is a dedicated phone line that is being used to coordinate and deconflict (i.e., prevent US and Russian air assets from shooting at each other) the upcoming operation.

2. The United States was fully briefed on the fact that there was a target in Idlib that the Russians believes was a weapons/explosives depot for Islamic rebels.

3. The Syrian Air Force hit the target with conventional weapons. All involved expected to see a massive secondary explosion. That did not happen. Instead, smoke, chemical smoke, began billowing from the site. It turns out that the Islamic rebels used that site to store chemicals, not sarin, that were deadly. The chemicals included organic phosphates and chlorine and they followed the wind and killed civilians.

To continue reading: Former DIA Colonel: “US strikes on Syria based on a lie”

Posted in Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Governments, Intelligence, Military, War

Tagged Chemical warfare, President Trump, Russia, Syria

Luring Trump into Mideast Wars, by Daniel Lazare

Posted on April 9, 2017 | Leave a comment

Here’s a fairly conventional interpretation of Trump’s Tomahawk strike, with a, “the dems made him do it” thrown in. For an unconventional interpretation, see “Calling A Bluff?”. From Daniel Lazare at consortiumnews.com:

Exclusive: After launching a missile strike on Syria, President Trump is basking in praise from his former critics – neocons, Democrats and mainstream media – who want to lure him into more Mideast wars, reports Daniel Lazare.

Donald Trump entered military terra incognita on Thursday by launching an illegal Tomahawk missile strike on an air base in eastern Syria. Beyond the clear violation of international law, the practical results are likely to be disastrous, drawing the U.S. deeper into the Syrian quagmire.

But it would be a mistake to focus all the criticism on Trump. Not only are Democrats also at fault, but a good argument could be made that they bear even greater responsibility.

For years, near-total unanimity has reigned on Capitol Hill concerning America’s latest villains du jour, Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Syria’s Bashar al-Assad. Congressmen, senators, think-tank strategists, and op-ed analysts all have agreed that Putin and Assad are the prime enemies of “peace,” by which is meant global American hegemony, and that therefore the U.S. must stop at nothing to weaken or neutralize them or force them to exit the world stage.

Until recently, in fact, just about the only politically significant dissenter was Trump. Accusing reporters of twisting the news at a tumultuous press conference in late February, he told them, “Now tomorrow, you’ll say, ‘Donald Trump wants to get along with Russia, this is terrible.’ It’s not terrible. It’s good.”

But since getting along with Russia was terrible for America’s perpetually bellicose foreign-policy establishment, Official Washington declared war on Trump, building on Hillary Clinton’s charge during the last presidential debate that he was Putin’s “puppet.” It became the conventional wisdom that Trump was a “Siberian candidate” being inserted in the White House by a satanic Kremlin determined to bend freedom-loving Americans to its will.

As Inauguration Day approached, President Obama’s intelligence chiefs pulled out all stops to persuade the public that (a) Russian intelligence had engineered Clinton’s defeat by hacking the Democratic National Committee’s computers and placing thousands of embarrassing emails in the hands of WikiLeaks and that (b) Trump was somehow complicit in the effort.

To continue reading: Luring Trump into Mideast Wars

Posted in Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Government, Intelligence, Military, War

Tagged Chemical warfare, President Trump, Russia, Syria

These People Frighten Me! by Charles Goyette

Posted on April 8, 2017 | Leave a comment

Charles Goyette thinks Trump was played by the intelligence agencies and is barrelling towards catastrophe. From Goyette at lewrockwell.com:

Most of the things worth remembering during the 2008 presidential debates were uttered by Ron Paul. But Mike Gravel, the former U.S. senator from Alaska had a moment. Years earlier in the Senate, Gravel had distinguished himself for his opposition to the Vietnam War and the draft.

Then, in the first Democrat debate of the 2008 cycle, Gravel looked at the candidates posturing their bellicosity on the stage around him, including the now notorious warmongers Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, and said, “I got to tell you, after standing up with them, some of these people frighten me — they frighten me.”

Gravel was right to be fearful. And yet the interventionists are always somehow able to pass themselves off as wise and judicious.

They are anything but.

When Barack Obama announced in 2012 that Assad’s use of chemical weapons in Syria would be a red line for (more overt) U.S. military intervention, the truly wise and sophisticated – basically anyone with a passing familiarity with the history of forged documents, secret provocations, false flag events, and other phony war pretexts – knew for a certainty that a chemical weapons event would soon follow.

There are just too many players in the field that want the U.S. – then and now — to do their fighting for them. And so, it wasn’t long before a sarin gas attack occurred, one that was purportedly launched by Assad on Syrian rebels.

Fortunately, there is still the occasional serious journalist, standing out like a grown up among the State’s scribbling children. Among the adults is investigative reporter Seymour Hersh. By 2014 Hersh had discovered that the Syrian sarin incident the year before was the work of Turkey (with the help of the Saudis), manipulating events in Syria to draw the U.S. into fighting its regional opponents for it. For those who hadn’t swallowed the Iraq war kool-aid, it called to mind the hidden motives in which documents were forged to create a pretext for that debacle.

To continue reading: These People Frighten Me!

Posted in Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Governments, Military, War

The Syrian Air Base Attack, by Scott Adams

Posted on April 7, 2017 | Leave a comment

Scott Adams’ hypothesis is that Trump’s bombing was, surprise, surprise, another bit of brilliant persuasion. From Adams on a guest post at theburningplatform.com:

As I blogged yesterday, the claim that Assad ordered a chemical attack on his own people in the past week doesn’t pass my sniff test. For Assad to order a gas attack now – while his side is finally winning – he would have to be willing to risk his life and his regime for no real military advantage. I’m not buying that.

But let’s say the world believes Assad or a rogue general under his command gassed his own people. What’s an American President to do? If Trump does nothing, he appears weak, and it invites mischief from other countries. But if he launches 59 Tomahawk missiles at a Syrian military air base base within a few days, which he did, the U.S. gets several benefits at low cost:

1. President Trump just solved for the allegation that he is Putin’s puppet. He doesn’t look like Putin’s puppet today. And that was Trump’s biggest problem, which made it America’s problem too. No one wants a president who is under a cloud of suspicion about Russian influence.

2. President Trump solved (partly) for the allegation that he is incompetent. You can hate this military action, but even Trump’s critics will call it measured and rational. Like it or not, President Trump’s credibility is likely to rise because of this, if not his popularity. Successful military action does that for presidents.

3. President Trump just set the table for his conversations with China about North Korea. Does China doubt Trump will take care of the problem in China’s own backyard if they don’t take care of it themselves? That negotiation just got easier.

To continue reading: The Syrian Air Base Attack