Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
September 19, 2016

U.S. Allies 'Volunteer' To Share (Implausible) Blame For Deir Ezzor Attack

The U.S. is trying to distribute the blame for its air support of ISIS against the Syrian Arab Army in Deir Ezzor.

The facts, not put into doubt by any U.S. statement, via the Russian military report after Saturday's incident:

"Today at 17:00-17:50 Moscow time, international anti-Daesh coalition (two F-16 and two A-10 jets) carried out four strikes on Syrian government forces' units encirled by Daesh near Deir ez-Zor airport. The coalition's aircraft entered Syrian airspace from the side of the Iraqi border," Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov said.
As a result of the attack, 62 Syrian soldiers were killed and some 100 others were injured, according to information received from the Syrian command in Deir ez-Zor, he said.

The Syrian government now says some 82 soldiers were killed in the attack which also destroyed 3 T-72 tanks, 3 infantry fighting vehicles, an anti-aircraft gun and at least 4 mortars. Following the attack the Islamic State troops stormed the Syrian government position on the Jabal Thardeh hill. They are now able to harass the airport of Deir Ezzor, the only supply line for the ISIS besieged city and the 150,000+ civilians living there under government protection.

We note that this was not the first U.S. attack on Syrian government forces in Deir Ezzor. Back in December 3 Syrian soldiers were killed in an air raid.  In June a U.S. air attack on Manbij killed some 100 civilians. No U.S. attack on any ISIS target in Syria ever came near such casualty numbers.

It is very doubtful that this was not an intended attack. Even Human Rights Watch recognized Saturday's mass murder as "signal" to the Syrian government (before deleting its tweet).

Now the blame has to be spread.

Early Sunday Australia jumped in claiming its jets had taken part in the attack:

Australian aircraft were involved in a US-led coalition operation which killed dozens of Syrian soldiers stationed near Eastern ISIS stronghold city of Deir Ezzor, the Australia's Defense Department confirmed.
"Australian aircraft were among a number of international aircraft taking part in this Coalition operation," the Defense Department said in a statement.

Late Sunday the Danes followed:

"Two Danish F-16 [fighter aircraft] participated in these attacks along with the aircraft of other nations. The strikes had been stopped immediately after the Russian side reported that the positions of the Syrian servicemen had been hit," the military command authority of the Danish Armed Forces said in a statement issued Sunday.

This morning, the BBC defense correspondent says, the UK also claimed guilty:

Jonathan Beale @bealejonathan

BBC understands @RoyalAirForce jets might have been involved in #Syria Airstrikes that killed 60 + Syrian soldiers.

Four planes attacked and four airforces claim to have been part of it? That is neither plausible nor realistic.

Only the U.S. operates A-10 ground attack planes. Neither the U.K nor Australia own or operate F-16 fighters. While the Danish airforce deployed F-16s to the Middle East theater, those planes were send to only operated in Iraq, not in Syria:

Denmark will send seven F-16 fighter jets to help combat IS militants in Iraq, Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt said on Friday.

"I am very pleased that there now is a broad coalition, including countries in the region who want to... contribute," she said at a press conference, adding that the Danish fighter jets would not join US planes in bombing targets in Syria.

Additionally the Syrian military said that the planes came from Erbil in the Kurdish ruled northern part of Iraq. No other nation but the U.S. is known to use the Erbil facilities for fighter flights.

The drones which had kept surveillance over the area were also U.S. ones:

The strike began in the early evening, when planes attacked a group of vehicles that American surveillance aircraft had been watching for several days, according to a Centcom official ..

Obviously someone in a U.S. command phoned up U.S. allies and asked them to please share the blame for the "mistaken" U.S. air support for the ISIS ground attack: "If all are guilty, no one is guilty and no one can be punished."

A famous book and movie is the template for such play:

As Poirot pursues his investigation, he discovers that everyone in the coach had a connection to the Armstrong family and, therefore, had a motive to kill Cassetti. Poirot proposes two possible solutions ... The first solution is that a stranger boarded the train and murdered Cassetti. The second one is that all 13 people in the coach were complicit in the murder, seeking the justice that Cassetti had escaped in the United States. He concedes Countess Helena Andrenyi didn't take part, so the murderers numbered 12, resembling a self-appointed jury. Mrs. Hubbard .. confesses that the second solution is the correct one.

The U.S. says some 67 nations have joined its "coalition" against ISIS. Eight more U.S. allies will soon be found who's planes took also part in the raid: "What about that PA-18 from Luxembourg?"

With many parties claiming the crime the one real culprit can not be convicted. This new Murder on the Orient Express will stay unpunished.

The ceasefire in Syria is breaking down. The U.S. did not fulfill its promise to separate its "moderate rebel" proxy forces from al-Qaeda. No smokescreen of lamenting about humanitarian access can change that fact.

The Russian and Syrian airforce will soon go back to work. Any soldiers of the U.S. "coalition" in Syria should watch out for those planes. If the U.S. and its allies can make "mistakes" like in Deir Ezzor, others may also show imperfections in their operations.

Posted by b on September 19, 2016 at 13:44 UTC | Permalink

« previous page


Tartus and Hmeimim will never be under unchecked purview of Damascus, but rather will fall under the final authority of a future Alawite autonomy (through a veto power). And Alawites will not expel Russians. So the bases will stay if not forever, then pretty close to it. And, of course, nobody will bomb important Russian installations, mistakenly or not.

Posted by: telescope | Sep 19 2016 23:29 utc | 101

@100 That is really good news. Nice to know the Alawites will get a safe haven.

Posted by: dh | Sep 19 2016 23:32 utc | 102

@28 atabrit.. aljazzera's a propaganda site.. sabeh isn't much different, except with a turkish twist.

@32 fecklessleft... i agree.. i said something shorter, but along the same lines.. comments from some here - paul/tom in particular are consistent in bashing russia/putin.. some things are predictable and yes - staving off ww3 is essentially what putin is doing at present, but he isn't getting any help from the armchair, or f/t neocons..

@42/43 curtis.. thanks.. 'no accountability'... that's been the mantra of the usa leadership for some time now..

@51 frankly.. thanks - good post.. however, i see wars and finances as intimately connected and i don't share @69 C I eh? view on the nature of world finance, or he wouldn't be saying what he is, thinking it's the answer..

@71 wwinsti.. good post too. thanks. however, i do see it more like @81 grieved.. i think the west's arrogance has disallowed it's ability to see where it is at here and now..

@79 laguerre.. that is how i read it too.. thanks.. - i completely agree with @ 83 smoothie fwiw..

@92 dh.. thanks for the humour.. it helps in an otherwise depressing subject area!

Posted by: james | Sep 19 2016 23:37 utc | 103

@50 ian

D) Ash Carter was a CIA mole in the DoD, the CIA is now running the Pentagon. Since the CIA has been running the White House since January 2009, Obama remains non-plussed. As Lame Duck in Chief he's busy with investment decisions concerning his completion bonus and pokes his head up only on direct orders these days. Done his bit, not his problem. Kerry's been clueless since he took the job. That's why he got it. Clinton/Trump promises much more of the same.

Up to those of us with a shred of agency remaining to openly withdraw from the government gone bad and to design and implement a real-world seizure of power in the USA. I envision 10 to 12 years to completion. If we'd begun in 2004 we'd be done by now.

Posted by: jfl | Sep 19 2016 23:39 utc | 104


paul/tom are so consistent, they are formulaic. But they are sticky and utterly devoid of imagination, so they've been likely assigned to Moon of Alabama by their command chain (and I'm not talking about their husbands either).

Likewise, a "Blankone" character on ZeroHedge. It is a pattern worth following. Too cheap for Mossadis. Either that, or Mossad has found a new IQ minimum, which in itself would be pretty good news. They might be running out of even half-wits. The Reserve Banking-Ponzi-Madoff sector has stolen everyone with a 3 digit IQ from the Shabakistanis.

Posted by: Quadriad | Sep 19 2016 23:45 utc | 105

#87 - h
"Since when did they (CIA) get into the business of launching and fighting six-year wars? ... Is there another example out there that is remotely similar to Syria?"

The CIA ran US covert operations in Vietnam from late 1940s up to 1964. The CIA was also involved in a large unsuccessful campaign directed at Indonesia in 1958. However, although it's always a case of a little more or a little less depending on the era, the Pentagon is always the top dog and the CIA is rarely totally independent.

Posted by: jayc | Sep 19 2016 23:55 utc | 106

@dh 96

The info at your link makes no sense, as I'm sure you're aware.

The mountain top that was attacked is critical high ground for the SAA. It makes no sense whatsoever to put your worst troops in charge of it, assuming what was said about the conscripts is true.

So, even with a generous reading, it still is bullshit.

Posted by: woogs | Sep 20 2016 0:00 utc | 107

@106 Exactly my thinking too. Well done woogs.

Posted by: dh | Sep 20 2016 0:02 utc | 108

@106 But of course we can't be sure until the one star general completes his investigation.

Posted by: dh | Sep 20 2016 0:03 utc | 109

h @87--

Vietnam/Southeast Asia is the only similar example I can arrive at.

Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 20 2016 0:11 utc | 110

Time to be serious and play curve ball: The Syrian airspace must be closed to all uninvited military powers lest their aircraft should be shot downed.

Posted by: Enrique Ferro | Sep 20 2016 0:11 utc | 111


An investigation is meaningless. Events are moving too fast to have any impact. The Brits, though, did issue a scathing report on its part in the Libyan debacle. Only took 5 years.

Posted by: woogs | Sep 20 2016 0:13 utc | 112
Fighters from the U.S. created and trainer New Syrian Army surrender to IS in Deir Ezzor. Potentially have lots of Intel on training program. What the hell were they doing there anyway? Calling in airstrikes on the SAA position likely

Posted by: electionthoughts | Sep 20 2016 0:19 utc | 113

@111 Yes but no less than Army Gen. Joseph Votel, the head of U.S. Central Command, will be appointing the one star general. And not one but two defence officials told the Daily Beast. I don't make this stuff up you know.

Posted by: dh | Sep 20 2016 0:29 utc | 114

#110 Enrique

Far easier said than done. Russia can't afford the luxury of empty threats, and Russia/SAA currently have serious logistical problems to resupply the existing modest Deir Az Zor AD units, as well as too few modern fighter aircraft nearby to enforce a no-fly zone against NATO.

My guess is that it might be more realistic to lobby the Iraqi government to threaten to reduce the NATO privileges in Iraq if they continue to abuse the lack of all altitude air defenses in Eastern Syria. Either that, or expedite what they have to do anyway and liberate a road to the Deir. My guess is that the latter is more realistic but it will take time, effort and many more allied casualties.

Posted by: Quadriad | Sep 20 2016 0:37 utc | 115

@113..US is now spinning it that they blew up SAA prisoners, not soldiers.

Posted by: electionthoughts | Sep 20 2016 0:38 utc | 116

@115 Relax. General Joseph Votel is working on a balanced impartial report. See above.

Posted by: dh | Sep 20 2016 0:44 utc | 117

dh, lol.. yer on a roll..

Posted by: james | Sep 20 2016 0:59 utc | 118

The so-called "cessation of violence" is over. Time to fry some terrorats.

Posted by: BiblesNBlowjobs | Sep 20 2016 1:10 utc | 119

@117 Thank you james. I'm not sure my tone is generally appreciated but it's too late to change.

Posted by: dh | Sep 20 2016 1:12 utc | 120

@96 -- Do you actually believe ANYTHING the Daily Beast publishes? They're rabidly anti-Russian.

Posted by: rcentros | Sep 20 2016 1:15 utc | 121

@120 Short Next.

Posted by: dh | Sep 20 2016 1:22 utc | 122

What is up with the aid convoy being hit? Lots of western media saying it was Syrian or Russian airstrike. Not seeing mention of this in Russian press yet.

Posted by: woogs | Sep 20 2016 1:49 utc | 123

@Woogs Was the convoy hit before or after the so-called "cessation of violence"? If after, then why did it proceed if not to provoke the Syrian side?

Posted by: BiblesNBlowjobs | Sep 20 2016 1:58 utc | 124


Nothing I've read is clear on the exact time. Here's an example:

Just do a search on 'Syria aid convoy hit'. You'll see.

Posted by: woogs | Sep 20 2016 2:17 utc | 125

electionthoughts @115..US is now spinning it that they blew up SAA prisoners, not soldiers.

They surley are - the Clinton News Network is reporting -

" (CNN)The mistaken US-led coalition bombing of a Syrian military position Saturday may have happened because the personnel weren't wearing military uniforms and didn't have standard military weapons, several US military officials told CNN.

Officials said they now think the personnel bombed may have been Syrian military prisoners, according to several US defense officials.

That's a working theory of how US, British, Danish and Australian aircraft may have incorrectly assessed intelligence and targeted the site that killed more than 60 Syrian personnel near Deir Ezzor in eastern Syria. The UK Ministry of Defence is saying it used drones in the strike."

They're scrambling for an excuse that won't ever fit any narrative...what to do. what to do. LIE.

Posted by: h | Sep 20 2016 2:32 utc | 126

Just a reminder, this is what Mike Morell (former CIA director) said during an interview with Charlie Rose. It applies to Syrian soldiers as well no doubt.

MIKE MORELL: I'd give them the things that they need to both go after the Assad government, but also to have the Iranians and the Russians pay a little price.

When we were in Iraq, the Iranians were giving weapons to the Shia militia, who were killing American soldiers, right? The Iranians were making us pay a price. We need to make the Iranians pay a price in Syria. We need to make the Russians pay a price.”

CHARLIE ROSE: We make them pay the price by killing, killing Russians? and killing Iranians?


CHARLIE ROSE And killing Iranians?

MIKE MORELL: Yes. Covertly. You don’t tell the world about it. You don’t stand up at the Pentagon and say, "We did this." But you make sure they know it in Moscow and Tehran.

Posted by: Rageon | Sep 20 2016 2:38 utc | 127

The new cover story that it was Syrian military prisoners who were attacked does not explain how it was that tanks and other heavy weaponry were interspersed with these alleged prisoners.

The latest reports that an aid convoy near Aleppo was attacked by military jets has curious aspects. First, although the implication is that only the SAA and Russia had planes in that area, no one besides the rebels are making any direct allegations, even though the US certainly would have every reason to do so. Another false flag? Perhaps. Some MSM reports feature information that it was a "double-tap" strike, exactly the same as described by Powers two nights ago, and in this case dutifully reported by MSM as a hallmark of Syrian and Russian tactics. But no direct allegation.

Posted by: jayc | Sep 20 2016 3:02 utc | 128

UNSC resolution 2249

Posted by: From The Hague | Sep 20 2016 3:23 utc | 129

From what I read of MoA's post, the possibility arises that US-led Coalition forces are all intermingled and so it is possible that pilots from different countries are flying fighter jets belonging to other countries. An Australian pilot could have flown one of the Danish F-16s. Aside from the issue of diluting ultimate reponsibility for the air strikes, what might that say about US airforce capabilities?

Posted by: Jen | Sep 20 2016 3:27 utc | 130

I used to be a big fan of Putin and Russia as I thought they would fight the good fight but they are merely looking to join as equal partners and are constantly looking for cooperation. They are desperate to be accepted by the West as equal partners and share in the privileges, but the West already has disdain for them. It is sad that Syria is left to the wolves as Russia delivers knife in the back (constant ceasefire and appeasement).

Posted by: adamada | Sep 20 2016 3:46 utc | 131

@Jackrabbit 72
Your being disingenuous or ignorant. Here's the important phrase with that:
It calls upon "Member States that have the capacity to do so to take all necessary measures", in compliance with international law, international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law..."

The important part of that is "in compliance with international law." Meaning that as Syria is a UN member, and a sovereign country, you must get their permission to operate in their territory. Ergo, you can't just barge your way in and bomb at will without complying with international law; meaning to respect national sovereignty in compliance with international law. I said it many times here so you can finally get it, because I've been reading your posts since that resolution past, and you keep repeating the same detritus. Almost as bad as Tom with his "Putin invited the U.S. into Syria" garbage. :)

Posted by: skuppers | Sep 20 2016 4:05 utc | 132

I hope after this so-called "cessation of violence", the Resistance front will just go ahead and pulverize all terrorists, "moderate" or not. Just send them all to hell. No more dithering and allowing the terrorists to retrain and rearm.

This boy has already cried wolf twice already. Now let slip the dogs of war on the sheep.

Posted by: BiblesNBlowjobs | Sep 20 2016 4:14 utc | 133

@ h #68

You are right. There is no legal basis for the US or its allies to be in Syria. There is no immediate attack threat against those nations, nor is there any UN resolution authorizing any attacks by them. The only other recourse is where a country which under attack seeks assistance from third parties -- a good example being Russia and Iran, invited into Syria by that government to defend against attacks within -- all perfectly legal. That argument doesn't work for the US and its coalition allies when they seek to argue (1) that they are in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi government, and (2) that they are conducting attacks emanating from Syria in defense of Iraq.

(1) For the Aussie forces at least, they are in Iraq specifically in an internal stability support role (largely training and attack support against IS inside Iraq). The Iraqi government refused to provide the Australians with a status of forces agreement and so they are present there with diplomatic passports(!) This provides some legal cover but is a disgraceful abuse of diplomatic privileges.

(2) There is nothing in the Australian agreement with Iraq that authorizes military action inside Syria. Instead, the Australian government has relied on US assurances that attacks emanating from inside Syria (IS/Daesh) can be responded to under UN and international law. But that's not the case. The relevant convention relates to attacks from a State actor against a nation. It says nothing about responding to attacks by non-State actors such as IS/Daesh.

Long story short, none of the US coalition forces have any legal basis for conducting military operations inside Syria.

Posted by: damien | Sep 20 2016 5:10 utc | 134

How many people here can tell me when did the Cubans invite the US Empire into Algeria as a partner in 1963 war?

Tell me please ?

So little old Cuba did that, but Putin invites the evil empire into Syria ?

More "formula" equals more embarrassment for most

Posted by: tom | Sep 20 2016 6:01 utc | 135

More like 75

Posted by: tom | Sep 20 2016 6:03 utc | 136

b nailed the stinkiest rotting fish aspect of the 'accidental' attack on the SAA with this observation:

"No U.S. attack on any ISIS target in Syria ever came near such casualty numbers."

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 20 2016 6:23 utc | 137

@104 (Quadriad) "paul/tom are so consistent, they are formulaic. But they are sticky and utterly devoid of imagination, so they've been likely assigned to Moon of Alabama by their command chain (and I'm not talking about their husbands either)."

Yes, this is what so called Tag Team AstroTurfing, they have one side that put out obvious trolling statements , and then another troll with calm and collected response slips in , often sliding in Mainstream Narrative while pretending to be neutral.. like someone who constantly post about 'coup is fake' in here..

i saw a lot of new trolls (or old trolls with new ID) that post similar to wayoutwest. i guess the have the same briefing documents at their desk , and their target assignment..

MoA seem to be in the crosshair lately , i wont be surprised if MoA's host site got DDOS-ed later on... or hijacked by the likes of mark slovoda

Posted by: milomilo | Sep 20 2016 6:31 utc | 138

h @ 87
"Sure they do coups, and all kinds of other nefarious crap, but facilitating and managing six-year long covert wars? Is there another example out there that is remotely similar to Syria?"...

Indeed, yes. Vietnam was a CIA-run op until 1964; not run by the military. JFK NSAM 263[13 Jun 1961]to JointChiefsofStaff decided only JCS/military would henceforth run peacetime military ops, covert or not.

Then NSAM 263[5 Oct 1963] This was to bring home bulk of "personnel" by Christmas 1965. Note "personnel" [not troops or military], because all were under CIA command.

Then, apparently NSAM 273 [20 Nov 1963], written same day as big Honalulu meeting [but maybe unsigned by JFK] and NSAM 283 of March 1964 resulted in VN "war" going under JCS command. NSAM 283 was signed by LBJohnson.

This data from LFProuty and is what I recall from his 1993 interview few years before he died: [start about 33:00 where discussion of Vietnam begins]

NSAM = Nat'l Security Action Memo

Posted by: chu teh | Sep 20 2016 6:41 utc | 139
US to ‘revise’ cooperation with Russia after UN-Red Crescent aid convoy attacked near Aleppo
Published time: 20 Sep, 2016 (vid)
With no party yet found responsible for the alleged airstrike on the humanitarian aid convoy west of Aleppo, which killed several Syrian Red Crescent volunteers, the US State Department was quick to vent its outrage, blaming Damascus and Moscow for the attack.

A joint UN and Syrian Red Crescent (SARC) 31-truck humanitarian convoy delivering aid was bombed in five alleged airstrikes while offloading supplies in the Syrian town of Urm al-Kubra. At least 18 vehicles were hit, according to the UN.

As result of the attack, the mission’s chief and several other workers suffered severe injuries, a witness told Reuters. The convoy was carrying humanitarian cargo to some 78,000 civilians stranded in the war-stricken town.

While no party has claimed responsibility for the attack, pro-rebel groups rushed to blame the incident on government forces, claiming it was either a Syrian or a Russian warplane that carried out the strike.

In a statement issued by the US State Department, spokesman John Kirby said the US was “outraged” at the attack, stopping short of blaming any country in particular, but adding that “the destination of this convoy was known to the Syrian regime and the Russian Federation and yet these aid workers were killed in their attempt to provide relief to the Syrian people.”

Posted by: okie farmer | Sep 20 2016 6:59 utc | 140

re chu-teh @138, above...

My error. I think it is "...CIA-run op until 1965...", not 1964.

Can also view on YouTube at about 37:50...

The YouTube is edited slightly differently so timing marks are accordingly shifted.

Posted by: chu teh | Sep 20 2016 7:07 utc | 141

The hypocritical US 'awaits Russia's response on offer to extend ceasefire'.

"The secretary [Kerry] also urged Russian authorities to use their influence on Syrian President Bashar Assad to prevent bombings in the country."

Posted by: Yonatan | Sep 20 2016 7:15 utc | 142

Activist from the Syrian Civil Defence White Helmets shows area said to have been hit by attack
The UN has confirmed that the convoy was hit near the rebel-held town of Urum al-Kubra, without giving details.

Posted by: okie farmer | Sep 20 2016 7:32 utc | 143 (vid)
Assad 'has never bombed his people' - spokesperson

19 September 2016

The Syrian government has never bombed its own people, President Assad's spokeswoman has claimed.

Dr Bouthaina Shaaban, a political and media adviser to the Syrian leader, tells Today programme presenter Sarah Montague that all claims to the contrary are a "creation of the imagination of the western media".

Western powers, UN officials and human rights groups have long accused the Syrian government of carrying out air strikes, including the use of barrel bombs, against civilians.

Posted by: okie farmer | Sep 20 2016 7:40 utc | 144

What is the story on the aid convoy? Looking at the map, the place where it was hit, Urem al-kubra, is deep in al Qaeda territory.

Posted by: Peter AU | Sep 20 2016 7:58 utc | 145

Also, why was aid even going there? It is not cut off or surrounded. clear run to the Turkish border.

Posted by: Peter AU | Sep 20 2016 8:01 utc | 146

IMO, I think this false flag by the US evil empire.

Posted by: okie farmer | Sep 20 2016 8:03 utc | 147

Re the bombing of an Aid Convoy, the MSM is carefully omitting any mention of whether the contents of the convoy were vetted by Syria/Russia before it started its journey. We know that Assad has been providing aid to innocent Syrians trapped in SAA sieges AND that AmeriKKKa & its Khristian Koalition wants aid delivered to its "rebel" headchoppers. So it's reasonable to assume that if an unvetted convoy set out on a non-approved trip then the contents could be tested by shooting each load to discover how explosive/ flammable it was compared with food and other humanitarian aid. If individual trucks failed that test then it would seem sensible to destroy them.

It's blatantly obvious that this story is about unvetted aid convoys, NOT humanitarian aid. The video of the aftermath broadcast on News, half an hour ago, is so unconvincing that it was augmented with images of "injured children" and "fleeing civilians" completely unrelated to an attack on an Aid Convoy. has become as undiscriminating as the NYT & WaPo in its acceptance of fiction as fact. SBS, on the other hand, regularly adds the disclaimer "This story/vid could not be independently verified." used to do the same but now such instances are rare.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 20 2016 8:18 utc | 148

But the operative part is that R 2249 mandates intervention in Syria and Iraq by those member states “that have the capacity to do so”. This is an extraordinary UN Security Council mandate – no one is in charge, but everyone is in charge – that is, all those member countries that have the political will and the military muscle to intervene in Syria and Iraq.

What about the legitimate governments of Iraq and Syria, which are UN member countries too? The R 2249 simply ignores them as inconsequential entities.

Posted by: From The Hague | Sep 20 2016 8:25 utc | 149

cnn - 2 hours ago -- now says it's unclear if the convoy was hit by an airstrike or shelled.
stay tuned.

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Sep 20 2016 8:29 utc | 150

The SBS version of the Aid Convoy attack fairy story didn't include a disclaimer but did include additional info that the "White Helmets were overseeing the convoy - which was unloading in a rebel-held area."

That's Q.E.D. for me.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 20 2016 8:39 utc | 151

unauthorised aid convoy struck

Posted by: brian | Sep 20 2016 8:48 utc | 152

So, the convoy was real, the aid was real, only the aid trucked in consisted of TOW 2 missiles.

Shame on you Bashar, shame on you! Pity the poor murdered Jihadistanis...

Posted by: Quadriad | Sep 20 2016 9:06 utc | 153

It's worth mentioning, and noting, that complete control of has recently passed from Tony (Good Friend of Israel) Abbott to Malcolm (Good Friend of Israel) Turnbull.
SBS, on the other hand, has had it budget slashed by the Good Friends of Israel and is now obliged to run close to the maximum quantity of TV ads per hour allowable under the Broadcasting Guideline limits for commercial TV.
When SBS broadcast the three-part anti-Neocon The Power of Nightmares series in 2005, each one hour episode was uninterrupted and ad-free.

Meanwhile, has been slowly transformed into a Neocon mouth piece reminiscent of the Blues Brothers' epithet...
"Uh-oh, here comes that shitbox Dodge again!"

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 20 2016 9:12 utc | 154

the convoy that was targeted in Uram al-Kubra was an unauthorized and undeclared convoy that was using the same route as the UN aid convoy and thus using the UN convoy as a decoy to smuggle weapons and arms to the terrorist groups under siege; there were three convoys last night, two that belonged to the UN and one that was unauthorized nor declared, only the one that was not suppose to be there was targeted and completely destroyed.

Posted by: okie farmer | Sep 20 2016 9:22 utc | 155

What I think is funny is that those who deny evil 'conspiracy theories' now have a conspiracy theory about me!!!! Yes, I know. We are supposed to keep chewing the rocks thrown to us and never consider that there might be a story behind the story.

It will be interesting to see if this convoy attack is the point where Russia throws Assad under the bus ...

Anyway if you don't want to hear my point of view, no doubt because it is trueful and you assholes don't like truth, then fuck you.

Posted by: paul | Sep 20 2016 9:30 utc | 156

Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 20, 2016 5:12:00 AM | 153

Oh mercy; I ditched those sycophantic organizations decades ago; NPR was the first. ;-)
The god's be good, there are;
TRNN (The real news network)
Democracy Now
Foer Russ
Russia Insider
Zero Hedge (good headline reads)
Michael Hudson
Bill Black
Steve Keen
Max Keiser/Stacey Herbert
Etc. I do enjoy your posts, do carry on...

Posted by: V. Arnold | Sep 20 2016 9:40 utc | 157

#155 Oye Pablo!

You seem genuinely upset by that. Maybe you should grow some guts instead of lamenting on about Russian treachery.

I believe in plenty of conspiracies but I don't believe in unified evil. Lots of fragmented stupidity and short term thinking though, like your ideas on how Russia should best serve an (admittedly well above ordinary) Arab dictator who is still under a heap of pressure right now. Yes, he's been a reliable buddy of theirs. Yes, he genuinely has some of the worst scum on this planet working not just to see him Qaddafied but his entire country either thorn apart, or bled to death, or both. But, that doesn't make him a nice guy. He just happens to be protecting some people more important than his own rear end right now (more important players like Hizbullah, the Persian Western flank, and why not, the "normal" people of Syria in general), and that makes his own survival important to some parties concerned about the world future.

Let me clarify my position here. I do believe you when you say you are not involved in any conspiracy and that your mental limits come naturally. I do believe that "fuck you" is the supreme argument you're able to make in a situation like this. All I wish to say is, if my beloved wife (or non-wives if I agree to go full astray) decided to follow up on your recommendation more often maybe my own life would be a bit more fun. So I'll take "fuck you" as a personal recommendation and blessing in very thin disguise. Almost like "god bless you with frequent sexual encounters". How can that be unfriendly? Only silly pseudomoralist Europeans consider this type of expression a curse.

Anyway, your supposed "puto" Putin has a few dozen more parameters to worry about and digest than your brain can possibly imagine, so take it easy maybe. The opinion of Conservative Europeans, Chinese, US Progressives, Indians (that's a big one), SE Asians, South Americans, many power centers in Russia itself etc they all matter, not just the opinion of some random Southern Europeans wannabe Global Revolutionaries. I do believe that even Yisrael is ok maybe not spiritually redeemable before the Lord but will actively look to switch sides when the circumstances are right and throw their Anglo "Civilization" buddies under the Chinese bus / Russian trolleybus. A bit like they backstabbed Germans back in 1917. They weren't to Anglophile until that particular year and then all of a sudden overnight tada! - they became Anglozio to the bone, Christmas, Santa Claus, a** kissing king George and all. All for a little piece of Palestine dirt, and unlimited money printing power in all Anglistans. And Putin will still accept most turncoats. For now anyway . You and I may not like it. But you need a certain amount of strong enough friends to win. After a global victory, you can start genuinely worrying about longer term justice. Until then however, high moral ground is a loser dream, a practical luxury. So, contain your inner Don Quixote and his high mule, por favor.

Posted by: Quadriad | Sep 20 2016 10:05 utc | 158

@ Hoarsewhisperer 150 -re White Helmets overseeing the convoy...

In addition to the comments B has posted re 'White Helmets'

there is quite detailed coverage in several articles at
( The very same 'White Helmets' that are PR-ing themselves for a Nobel Peace Prize )

I imagine a simple phone call from their boss James Le Mesurier would suffice,
He's a British “security” specialist, ex Sandhurst, and an ‘ex’ British military intelligence officer.
He has a track record in dubious NATO interventions - including Bosnia and Kosovo, as well as Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine.

I'm sure he would be only to glad to supply 'incendiary ammunition' to the US disinformation campaign

Supporting 'Our Chaps' y'know

Posted by: DavidKNZ | Sep 20 2016 10:20 utc | 159

Where were S400. Sleeping.

Posted by: Kalen | Sep 20 2016 10:21 utc | 160

Posted by: V. Arnold | Sep 20, 2016 5:40:09 AM | 156

I know exactly what you're talking about and bs detecting has become a huge problem for the Average Joe. I've admired Stephen Gowans (What's Left) for several years because many of his analyses cite MSM sources for snippets of Truth. So the MSM can be caught blowing the whistle on bits of its own Page 1 bs, but way back in Page 7, or 9 or 15 territory.

But the syndrome which disturbs me most is the fact that such a large proportion of the population seems EAGER to swallow such MSM drivel as "He's killing his own people" which anyone with an IQ bigger than his/ her shoe size should be capable of recognising as baseless nonsense. Until that (gullibility) problem is resolved, things are going to get worse before they get better.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 20 2016 10:35 utc | 161

Apparently the aid convoy was hit by "either Syrian or Russian warplanes".

How can they not know which airforce it was yet have enough information to decide it could only have been one of Russia or Syria?

Posted by: Bob | Sep 20 2016 10:53 utc | 162

Dear Paul @ 155
Confirmation bias is indeed something to be wary of, however your contribution "It will be interesting to see if this convoy attack is the point where Russia throws Assad under the bus" reveals a serious deficit in comprehension...or I just fed the troll. In either case you are welcome to tell your story walking.

@153 HW
Sad to hear that... about SBS especially. Everyone gets tired of me complaining about the decay of the standard of media in Australia whenever I am home. We had it pretty good. Now, pretty much fully yankeefied...its what you get for following 'Worlds Best Practice' instead of championing what was done very well. There was room for many great bullshit detectors once upon a time.

Posted by: MadMax2 | Sep 20 2016 11:07 utc | 163

Most US Americans get their news information from MSM sources. As such, they buy the propaganda that Assad, like Gadaffi, Saddam, Putin, are bad guys wearing black hats (gassed, bombed their own people, etc.).

They maintain, through intense, orchestrated MSM misdirection, a superficial idea that the US is trying to make things better in the Middle East.

Occasional staged false flag terror events frighten and confuse and reinforce the bad guy narrative. Appeals to base senses of ethnicism, racism, classism, Nationalism.

Sidebar: Kicked into high gear Post 911 - shift from "President as Defender of the Constitution" to President as Commander In Chief and defender not of the Const., but protector of the people as CIC.

Posted by: fast freddy | Sep 20 2016 11:09 utc | 164

Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 20, 2016 6:35:59 AM | 160
"He's killing his own people" which anyone with an IQ bigger than his/ her shoe size should be capable of recognising as baseless nonsense. Until that (gullibility) problem is resolved, things are going to get worse before they get better.

Unless you look good as a deep blue/purple human; don't hold your breath. I mean, just look at the two leading U.S. presidential candidates; not exactly a formula for optimism (possibly, the worst in U.S. history). I gave up on the lot a long time past.
I also do not look to much of a future either; so, life for me is a day to day proposition. The now is tenable and doable, even pleasant...
I think 2017 is going to be a seminal year both economically and politically (for the planet), and if we, by some miracle, survive that year without an all out war with Russia; we just might make some form of progress; but that I strongly doubt...

Posted by: V. Arnold | Sep 20 2016 11:21 utc | 165

This intentional show reveals the schizophrenic nature of US foreign policy now. It has multiple personalities all vying for a piece before it collapses. The right hand has no control over what the left is doing. The fractures in the empire are turning to crevasses.

Posted by: Gravatomic | Sep 20 2016 11:44 utc | 166

Some Ozzies are on top of it ...

Sydney to protest against Australia’s involvement in Deir Ezzor massacre

1. We demand that Australia remove itself from the alliance of predatory nations currently waging this proxy-war against the Syrian government.

2. We demand that Australia reestablish diplomatic relations with the Syrian government who by all accounts represent the will of the majority of the Syrian people.

3. We demand that Australia lift the crippling economic sanctions on Syria that are blocking normal trade, finance and the diaspora from supporting their families at home.

Nice picture accompanying the call.

Posted by: jfl | Sep 20 2016 11:56 utc | 167

The Russian Defense Ministry said Russian and Syrian aircraft did not carry out any airstrikes against a UN humanitarian aid convoy near the city of Aleppo.

"No airstrikes were carried out against a humanitarian aid convoy in a southwestern suburb of Aleppo by Russian or Syrian aviation. Seeing as the convoy’s route lied through the territories controlled by militants, the Russian reconciliation center monitored its passage yesterday via drones," Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov said Tuesday.

According to the general, the monitoring finished when all humanitarian aid was delivered at around 10:40 GMT.

"Further movements of the convoy were not monitored by the Russian side. Only the militants controlling this area know details of the convoy’s location," Konashenkov added. The examination of video footage reveals no signs of an ammunition strikes on the convoy, he said.

"We have carefully studied videos by so-called activists from the site and found no signs of any ammunition striking the convoy. There are no shell holes, cars' bodies are not damaged and there are no construction faults from the bust wave. All shown on the footage is a direct consequence of the cargo being set on fire. The fire strangely coincided with a major offensive by militants in Aleppo."

The ministry emphasized that the perpetrator of the fire, as well as his goal may be known by members of the "White Helmets" organization that has connection to al-Nusra Front terrorists who have "accidentally" been at the right time and in the right place with cameras.

According to the official, al-Nusra Front terrorist group carried out an artillery attack on the southwestern suburb of Aleppo using multiple launch rocket systems.

Posted by: Zu | Sep 20 2016 12:31 utc | 168

A Disastrous Error in Syria

At about 5pm on Saturday, two US F-16 fighter bombers and two A-10 specialised ground attack aircraft bombed what they believed was a concentration of Isis fighters besieging pro-government forces in the city of Deir Ezzor in eastern Syria.

Whoever it was in the US Air Force who had misidentified the target as Isis made a disastrous error;...

I know this guy's name is Cockburn, but he's an imperial-corporate apologist. Seriously, is there anyone else at counterpunch who thinks the ISAF, formerly the USAF, made a 'mistake' last Saturday? OK, maybe the pilots might have thought so, but the people who sent them there knew exactly what they were doing.

Posted by: jfl | Sep 20 2016 12:46 utc | 169

The link in post#4 gives some very pertinent details about the U.S. "accidentally-on-purpose" attack against the SAA in Dezzor:

"ISIS launched attacks on the Syrian army positions in Deir Ezzor just 7 minutes after the US-led coalition's airstrikes on Saturday, a military source said, adding that the air and ground assault were highly coordinated, According to FNA report. This seriously cuts against any US claims about this being an accident."

What's big is not just the bombing action on the part of the US itself, but Russia's now public and irreversible statements, all to be understood in the context of recent events.

Posted by: Merkwürdigliebe | Sep 20 2016 12:58 utc | 170

@168 zu @170 mwl

The utter destruction of whatever credibility with the homeboys and girls that the USA may have had left by the overt conversion of the USAF into the ISAF has shone a very bright, new light indeed on these mock-ups by the White Helmets.

How can you tell when the USA is lying shamelessly? Check to see if their spokespeople's/flunkies' lips are moving.

Posted by: jfl | Sep 20 2016 13:08 utc | 171

oh well

Russians say it was neither them nor the Syrians who hit the convoy

Posted by: somebody | Sep 20 2016 13:16 utc | 172

This article says Assad is up to his old tricks!

"The ad campaign comes as pro-Assad forces allegedly launched a chlorine attack in Aleppo, and as images of children made front pages as they struggled to breathe while seeking treatment in hospital."

from Syria's Bashar al-Assad is pushing tourism while bombing his own people

I thought the article was a complete farce, but maybe is a real website (?) Anybody?

Posted by: metamars | Sep 20 2016 13:38 utc | 173

Reconnaissance Mistake

What led to Saturday evening's US air strike on the Syrian military positions - killing, according to Russian sources, 62, and the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, around 80 - has also not been clarified. According to the New York Times, based on a US military official, "Military intelligence" had identified the cluster of vehicles, as belonging to the Islamic State - erroneously. The attack went on for about 20 minutes, with the planes destroying the vehicles and gunning down dozens of people. The attack was only halted when a Russian official called CAOC in Al Udeld demanding an immediate end to the bombing. The attack was halted "within minutes." Regardless of whether German reconnaissance data played a role in that air strike or in those resulting in civilian casualties, there remains also the question of whether German in-flight refueling has played a role in the attacks. If this is the case, the Bundeswehr must also assume its share of the responsibility for the deadly consequences of the attacks.

Posted by: Rakdanbur | Sep 20 2016 14:12 utc | 174

It seems Kerry has no control over the defence establishment in US. Carter and his cronies. anitele’a @ 44.

Apologies if posted before, the previous thread was v. long.

Why the US had to kill the Syrian cease-fire, by F. Cunningham, Strategic Culture.

Confirmation of a sort (Last Geneva meetings.) Anecdote, gossip from the staff, from contacts, radio, press.

Everyone was furious at Kerry, the Amerikans, or Amrikis, or Amerloques, because it was not known till the very last minute if he would show his nose and his bike or not and when he did he was hours late. Mentioned because this is unusual for Kerry as he travels with such a ginormous entourage everything has to be organised like a full symphony concert. What held him up nobody knew, no excuse was offered. At night, the journos had to wait endlessly in the cellar of the Hotel going batshit.

The Americans sent the journos boxes of take-out pizza via delivery. Lavrov went down personally and offered - umpteen bottles of top-class vodka.

US can not be viewed as a cohesive structure. SmoothieX12 at 83.

Posted by: Noirette | Sep 20 2016 14:23 utc | 175

Jayc @106, karlof1 @110 and chu teh @138 & @141 thank you for taking your time to answer my question regarding the CIA’s history in conducting wars. And chu teh, I’ll dive into the links you provided.

damien @134 – the background you provided regarding the legality of the U.S. airstrike on Deir Ezzor is most appreciated. It is necessary to have an understanding, in my opinion, the legal grounds of which the CIA, State and DOD are operating under both in Iraq and Syria. Folks need to know any strike made using military force of any kind inside Syria is illegal. Period. No UN resolution overrides nor super cedes the U.S. Constitution and the division of power it lays out, especially related to the use of military force.

Posted by: h | Sep 20 2016 14:25 utc | 176

Feckless Left at 32. I would like to add in the same direction, with very plain language. Russia is low man on the pole, it is not as powerful as the US at present, that is fact. Putin (Lavrov etc.) are fighting for a multi-polar world where Nations uphold promises, obey the rule of law (including Int’l law, present ‘war’ rules, Treaties, the Geneva Conventions, ‘fair’ arbitrage at the WTO, weight of, and compliance to, the UNSC, and fill in a long list.) An orderly, stable, or more or less so space, makes them safe from attack, free to develop and live in peace, as it does everyone else, reciprocally. This is their best hope for survival, the inalterable path. So far Russia has resisted a direct, outright attack, even if minor, on the US (or its allies) and ‘runs to the UN’ (etc.) Russia does not have a red-line - red lines are for the bully, the Hegemon, the nasty parent, the abusive spouse (If you ever X or even speak about it I will bomb you/ punish you sooo bad/ lock you up ..)

Posted by: Noirette | Sep 20 2016 14:36 utc | 177

I know this guy's name is Cockburn, but he's an imperial-corporate apologist. Seriously, is there anyone else at counterpunch who thinks the ISAF, formerly the USAF, made a 'mistake'

cockburn and fisk can be contacted at the tavistock institute near russell sq.

what is worse a cockburn or a head fisk?

mi6 both rove around the world with nice big 4 story homes in england lionheart.

look at them like gnome chum ski and christopher cia dead hitchens and say more hearse at the new yorker.
all purveyors of scripted bilge with full deep state approval.
agents vagabonds filthy liars and whores acting pretty good
pollution of the well normalcy
cockburnt cock and bull

Posted by: charlesdrake | Sep 20 2016 15:29 utc | 178

o/t NYT news flash: The father of the suspect in Saturday’s bombings called him a terrorist 2 years ago, prompting an F.B.I. review, officials said 9:33 AM

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Sep 20 2016 15:41 utc | 179

darlin do not worry your little head on such nonsense.
that musselamic was an act or fbi patsy
gladio designed for distraction and strategy of tension.
you see the usa had a little massacre problem that day killing syrians,irainians,hezbollah and some russians.
psychological operations have been around for thousands of years.
you quote the jewish york times as proofs nice one ms wallflower ; )

Posted by: charlesdrake | Sep 20 2016 15:49 utc | 181

Looked at the pics accompanying the articles about the alleged humanitarian aid convoy and they do not provide evidence of damage from an airstrike, which also happens to be the assessment of Russia's MoD. Given the close proximity of White Helmet terrorists, I suspect an orchestrated propaganda hit aimed at Russia and Syria as we've seen displayed by the Propaganda System as part of the Information War portion of the current conflict. Further info from the SAA's Facebook that was posted at SyrPers: "SyAAF nor RuAF conducted any airstrikes against UN aid convoys, the convoy that was targeted was not the UN convoy that had humanitarian aid coming to Aleppo's countryside; the convoy that was targeted in Uram al-Kubra was an unauthorized and undeclared convoy that was using the same route as the UN aid convoy and thus using the UN convoy as a decoy to smuggle weapons and arms to the terrorist groups under siege; there were three convoys last night, two that belonged to the UN and one that was unauthorized nor declared, only the one that was not suppose to be there was targeted and completely destroyed." This might be interpreted as saying, yes this convoy was attacked since it wasn't really an aid convoy, but there's still the pics with Canthama providing this assessment: "All photos emerging from the "incident" indicates fishy attack, trucks without shrapnels mark, some even without the engine on the front, another interesting aspect is that the cargo part seemed destroyed while the truck front is intact."

Given how the ceasefire was nullified, the SAA has shown much greater motivation in its offensives, particularly in Hama, Homs and Aleppo. It also counter-attacked at Dier Ezor. I assume Russia and its allies also share in that increased motivation. One outcome seems certain: There will be no more ceasefires other than those arranged locally between the Syrian government and those wanting to surrender to its amnesty offer.

Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 20 2016 16:25 utc | 182

Charles Drake's comments are LIFE. How can anyone not love them? Or see them as anything other than artfully worded TRUTH. No sarc.

Ahmad Rahmani is Tamerlan Tsarnaev. Same. Same. Right down to the pressure-cooker bomb. Good-gawd. Can't the ZIO-scum come up with anything new or creative in their bag of tricks? Cuz I'm bored with Kardashian re-runs.

Posted by: Take Me | Sep 20 2016 16:30 utc | 183

h As others have posted, the executive has plenty of ways to get around congressional declaration/approval to take military action from covert ops as described in that other article ( link) to UN authorizations. The war powers thing needs to be resolved. Kain's commencement speech attempts to solve that but only for this particular action. And we know that both parties support the overall agenda so even if a vote were forced, the plan would continue but the decision would simply be more public. Sadly, Sen Kain (as HRC's running mate) actually makes sense (scary) in this point especially telling future soldiers why they're doing what they do or they might take on the don't-give-a-sh*t attitude of the Spec Ops guys training al Nusra as FSA. Iraq and other actions are prime examples of not just doing the wrong thing but mismanaging it at the same time. Double the waste and stupidity.

Posted by: Curtis | Sep 20 2016 16:35 utc | 184

chapter two.

The west-of-Allepo convoy that was hit had apparently arrived at its destination (within rebel-held territory) and was unloading when it was hit ...
Syria and Russia deny air strikes.
I think it was hit by rebels to deprive their "subjects" of aid, and blame it loudly and often on Assad/Russia, though I suspect the locals know better.
The Western press headlines haven't caught up with their content or "critical faculties"
With momentum on their side, Russia and Assad have no reason to want to starve the citizens being held captive by the rebels (regardless of their "politics"), while the rebels need their subjugation to maintain control.
tl/dr: Who loves ya?

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Sep 20 2016 16:38 utc | 185

Curits @184 - yes, the Executive and the neocons have figured out the ways around a declaration. One of those ways is the appropriations process. Few truly have an inclination let alone time to scour the ...2014, 2015 and even the 2016 military budget authorizations, but if they did they'd learn how and where the Syrian war funds are being allocated.

And yes, Kaine makes a great deal of sense and has been very vocal on the need for authorization. He's my Senator. I wish he'd stay in the Senate, honestly. He has no business running as Clinton's running mate in my opinion, but he is. Oh well...

Posted by: h | Sep 20 2016 17:21 utc | 186

@156.. paul... 'the truth', lol... what are you american? lol...

Posted by: james | Sep 20 2016 19:10 utc | 187

stumpy | Sep 19, 2016 12:35:02 PM | 31

Early reports had the US saying it consulted w. Russian theatre control over the targeting but received no reply. Don't see any follow-up on this angle. Could be the Russian controllers delayed before responding to guarantee embarassment for the US? Pure speculation, of course.

CNN reported that the US didn't give the Russians the precise location:
A statement from US Central Command said the coalition conferred with the Russian military before the strike.

The coalition airstrike was halted immediately when coalition officials were informed by Russian officials that it was possible the personnel and vehicles targeted were part of the Syrian military," US Central Command said.

A US official told CNN they broadly described the geographic area to the Russians -- as is customary -- before the strike but did not give a precise location. The coalition thought it was going after an ISIS tank position.

How stupid of the Russians to think that the USAF is competent.

Posted by: Ghostship | Sep 20 2016 21:46 utc | 188

#188 Ghostship

Red Herring. The hill had been held by SAA for years prior to the bombing. The high ground was critical to the airport's defense. There were NONE of the official US Allies many miles around for the US to claim that they were doing this to offer CAS to the allies.

Bullshit plain and simple.

The whole denial thing is as plausible as the Chinese Embassy bombing in 1999. The Axis of Terror knew full well who they were bombing. May have even coordinated it with their liaisons in DAESH. That doesn't matter. It was an act of war, plain and simple.

And whether the Brits, Danes, Aussies were also involved is also immaterial. They all volunteered their "participation", thus showing their support for the act of war against Syria and its allies. The result in my simple take of the affairs would be saying "we are extended US territory, all of us". Which attracts more present or future MIRVs being aimed at their cities, the last time I checked.

Posted by: Quadriad | Sep 20 2016 22:46 utc | 189

@188 ghostship..

i fully concur with @189 quadriad...

Posted by: james | Sep 21 2016 0:11 utc | 190

It looks like this website is siding with Russia, making silly bold statements, such as the US is providing air support for ISIS forces in Syria.
How US terrorists could be bombing the ISIS, deemed an enemy Sunni insurgent group since its successes in 2014 in Iraq against the US-Puppet Shia régime ruling in Baghdad, and at the same time providing air-support for the ISIS?
This is simply nonesense. The US supports Islamic groups against Assad, but NOT the ISIS.
The Syrian army positions were bombed by "mistake" to kill two birds with one stone. Weaken Assad, while at the same time trying to weaken the ISIS by bombing as well.

Posted by: zorro | Sep 21 2016 5:25 utc | 191

@191, zorro '... making silly bold statements, such as the US is providing air support for ISIS forces in Syria'

Who ya gonna believe, z : Sergeant Garcia? or your own lyin' eyes?

Posted by: jfl | Sep 21 2016 6:47 utc | 192

I don't agree that the US motive for asking others to share the guilt was so that it could avoid standing alone in the dock where it would be thus more easily punishable. No matter what it does, the US is never in fear of being called to account for its crimes. I think the motive was more brazen - to amplify the signal to the Syrian government. "Yeah, a whole bunch of us did it. Gee, too bad, huh? What are you gonna do about it??"

Posted by: Andrew Brooks | Sep 21 2016 12:34 utc | 193

The Yankees are so heavily invested in blaming Syria/Russia for the Aid Convoy mishap that it's becoming impossible to rule out probable involvement by Yankee-backed 'rebel' proxies in the crime. Kerry is in Full Spectrum, Toddler Tantrum, deflection mode and childishly over-inflated Russia's observation that the convoy "caught fire" as a claim that the cause was "spontaneous combustion." He then ridiculed that claim, conveniently forgetting that "spontaneous combustion" was his claim, not Russia's.

Imo, the Yankees are in panic mode, and whilst one could sympathise with people (here) who think Russia isn't doing enough in Syria, that view is persuasively contradicted by the spectacle of AmeriKKKa's Top Diplomat behaving like a 5-year old at the the UN. Kerry's tantrum suggests that the Yankees are far more pissed off with what the Russians are achieving in Syria than what the armchair critics think they aren't.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Sep 21 2016 19:49 utc | 194

Noting the 'FecklessLeft' signature on this thread I reread the Syria: The Feckless Left linked from the homepage, upper left, under 'Current Top Picks', and the actual petition signed by the feckless left of the title. It is amazing to revue the credulity of not only the signers but of the society at large of just three years ago. Malooga's piece is a great read in itself.

Posted by: jfl | Sep 22 2016 5:40 utc | 195

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.