Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
September 11, 2017
Syria Summary – A New Clash Looms in Syria’s East

When the Islamic State siege on Deir Ezzor was broken by the Syrian Arab Army we asked:

Will the SAA cross the Euphrates at Deir Ezzor to retake the valuable oilfields east of it? Or will it stay south of the river and leave those oil fields to the Kurdish U.S. proxies in the north?

To cross the river is clearly desirable but also potentially contentious.

Since then several convoys of military bridging equipment have been seen on the road to Deir Ezzor. It is now obvious that the SAA will bridge the river (all regular bridges have been destroyed by U.S. bombing during earlier fighting) and send significant forces across. New questions now are: When, where and with what aim?

As soon as the government intent became clear the U.S. pushed its local proxy forces to immediately snatch the ISIS held oilfields. In less than two days they deployed over 30 kilometers deep into the ISIS held areas north of the Euphrates. It is obvious that such progress could not have been made if ISIS had defended itself. I find it likely that a deal has been made between those two sides.

The U.S. diplomat tasked with the job, Brett McGurk, recently met with local tribal dignitaries of the area. Pictures of the meeting were published. Several people pointed out that the very same dignitaries were earlier pictured swearing allegiance to the Islamic State.


bigger

Just like during the "Anbar Awaking" in its war on Iraq the U.S. is bribing the local radicals to temporarily change over to its side. This will help the U.S. to claim that it defeated ISIS. But as soon as the payments stop the very same forces will revert back to their old game.

Originally the U.S. had planned to let ISIS take Deir Ezzor. It had twice attacked Syrian government forces in the area killing more than a hundred of them. This had allowed ISIS to capture large chunks of the government enclave and to disable the airport which was need for resupplies:


bigger

After Russian support for the SAA changed the balance of power, and after the election of Donald Trump, those plans had to change. Syria and its allies created facts on the ground and it is now again in control of the area it had lost to ISIS. It will also liberate the rest of the city.

Here is current map of the east-Syrian Euphrates area. .


Map by Weekend Warriorbigger

The SAA (red) has liberated parts of the city and the airport. The road from Damascus to Deir Ezzor is completely under SAA control. The population, which had nearly starved under the ISIS siege, is receiving fresh food, other necessary goods and medical attention.

The hatched areas of the map show possible next aims for the U.S. proxy campaign (yellow) and the Syrian government forces (red) in their fight against ISIS (grey) and against each other.

Critical oil fields are north and east of Mayadin. The Omar oil field in the east is the biggest one in all Syria. The U.S. wants these under its control to finance its Kurdish and Arab proxies in north-east Syria. The Syrian government needs the oil to rebuild the country. Should the U.S. supported forces try to annex the area we will likely see a direct conflict between them and the Syrian government forces. Would the U.S. and Russia join that fight?

Areas in the north-west and south-west of Syria have been relatively quiet. In recent weeks no relevant change of positions took place. In the south-east around the Syria, Jordan, Iraq border triangle the Syrian government retook several border points. The move comes after an agreement between Russia, the U.S. and Jordan conceded the area back to Syrian government control. The "rebels" in the area were CIA financed but are now out of income. They were ordered by their masters to move to Jordan but several groups refused to do that. The Syrian army and air force will take care of them.


bigger

The Syrian government again pointed out that U.S. (and Turkish) forces on its ground are uninvited and that their presence is illegal. The Russian foreign minster made the same point in a press conference today. Yesterday the Turkish president said "we mustn’t allow foreign powers intervene in Syria to serve their own interests." (His palace seems to lack mirrors.) These are clear signals to the U.S. that its presence and that of a U.S. proxy forces in Syria will not be condoned. 

President Trump had clearly said that his only interest in Syria is to get rid of ISIS:

"As far as Syria is concerned, we have very little to do with Syria other than killing ISIS,"

But Trump is now under the influence (or control?) of the U.S. military. The Pentagon and those forces influencing it might have their own plans. The war is mostly decided. The Syrian government will prevail. But the war is not yet over. Undesirable surprises may still come from the U.S. or other interested sides.

 

Adding: Several recent rumors about incidents in Syria were and are obvious fakes. Please be careful distributing wild claims when these have not been verified by a multitude of sources. The truth is: NO deconfliction line exists east of Deir Ezzor. The SAA did NOT shoot down an Israeli jet over Lebanon. NO U.S. General said that the Syrian army would be bombed if it tried to cross the Euphrates. NO attack on a SAA convoy by the U.S. airforce happened today.

Comments

@98
Absolutely! :>)

Posted by: Herk | Sep 13 2017 15:44 utc | 101

“Since then several convoys of military bridging equipment have been seen on the road to Deir Ezzor. It is now obvious that the SAA will bridge the river (all regular bridges have been destroyed by U.S. bombing during earlier fighting) and send significant forces across. New questions now are: When, where and with what aim?”
New here. But curious, what is the precise military evidence in the larger Syrian War context that the U,S, I assume, deliberately bombed those bridges. In other words: Looking for evidence there couldn’t have been any type of motivation like defending against ISIS takeover?
Admittedly, only stumbled in here and only after posting hope, I sure do, I will find clarification to my question.

Posted by: Jo Hahn | Sep 13 2017 15:46 utc | 102

@ Jo Hahn #101
The overall US strategy is to create a Sunni wedge in eastern Syria which would separate Iran and Iraq (Shia) from Syria and Hezbollah in Lebanon. First the US supported ISIS, which has (or had) a military arm bolstered by former Iraq soldiers, when that idea backfired the US went back to a strategy it had used in Iraq, supporting Sunni tribes. So it’s natural that the US wants to break up Syria to support its strategy, and that definitely included destroying the Euphrates bridges at Deir Zoor.
This strategy has been mandated by the US pursuit of “Iraq Liberation” (bill signed by Bill Clinton and by Operation Iraqi Freedom (under Bush 43) which gave Iraqis the freedom to exercise democracy, and with the Iraqi majority being Shia they sided with Iran. Who knew that would happen? . . .Just about everyone with any sense, nobody in Washington.
Breaking up the Middle East also goes back in history. Look at Yinon Plan, Israel.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 13 2017 16:04 utc | 103

@90 psychohistorian, debisdead & others
I have agree with G.Smiley @89 that knee-jerk dismissal of opinions based on label undermines this place
Do we not here abhor Identity Politics? It is the absence of such that makes MoA such an oasis
And for those attacking Christianity, at least pick the right target. Your issue is with ORGANIZED religion – the man-made institutions that claim to speak for God, all the while enriching themselves and mentally enslaving others with the “opiate of the masses”
Your arguments remind me of Bertrand Russell’s essay “Why I Am Not A Christian” where he builds a straw man out of Roman Catholicism and calls it Christianity (which it absolutely is NOT) and then proceeds to knock it down.
Belief in TRUE Christianity, man’s fall and redemption through faith in Jesus Christ and His work on the cross, does NOT require intellectual suicide, in fact, quite the opposite
Now there are those (and they are many) who twist God’s Word for their own gain, and destruction of others…
For example, the mainstream churches’ blind, unconditional support of Israel has NO biblical basis whatsoever
End of rant…
BTW I admire & appreciate virtually all the comments here, and yes even the occasional troll, if only for the spectacle of seeing an ignorant interloper wade into a pool of piranhas
Apologies if this comment appears more than once – I am having a dickens of a time posting this…

Posted by: xLemming2 | Sep 13 2017 16:13 utc | 104

Looking for evidence there couldn’t have been any type of motivation like defending against ISIS takeover?
IS had already crossed the bridges when the US bombed them. a long time beforehand.
The purpose was obviously to keep IS in Syria. The areas had already been taken over by IS, so it clearly was not “defending against ISIS takeover”.
The US could have bombed the bridges before IS took over the area (they had plenty of warning and plenty of time to do so), but the US deliberately chose not to.

Posted by: Just Sayin’ | Sep 13 2017 16:24 utc | 105

PS: the above is in reply to:
Jo Hahn | Sep 13, 2017 11:46:04 AM | 102

Posted by: Just Sayin’ | Sep 13 2017 16:26 utc | 106

Sep 29, 2016
Syria slams US coalition for destruction of bridges in east
BEIRUT- The Syrian government on Thursday criticised the US-led coalition fighting ISIS for destroying two bridges on the Euphrates river this week in areas the jihadists hold in the east of the country.
Monitoring group the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said warplanes most probably from the coalition hit the two bridges in Deir al-Zor province on Tuesday and Wednesday, making them unusable.
The attacks “confirm the so-called international coalition’s intent to bomb and destroy Syrian infrastructure and economic and social establishments through repeated aggressive acts,” state TV quoted the foreign ministry as saying.
Syria’s ambassador to the UN Bashar Ja’afari said the bridges had been used by hundreds of thousands of civilians.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 13 2017 20:07 utc | 107

Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 13, 2017 4:07:34 PM | 107
This was around the time that IS had booby trapped the two Euphrates damns wasn’t it?

Posted by: frances | Sep 13 2017 20:35 utc | 108

This was around the time that IS had booby trapped the two Euphrates damns wasn’t it?
Posted by: frances | Sep 13, 2017 4:35:55 PM | 108

Were any ever found?
Any credible reports to support the claim of booby traps?
More likely it was just US propaganda.

Posted by: Just Sayin’ | Sep 13 2017 20:41 utc | 109

@94 and @95
Armchair warrior? I’m guilty, obviously. I am in agreement with both of you, didn’t mean to give the impression that the progress of the SAA has been anything but impressive, or that Russia has not been playing their hand masterfully. I am in agreement that Russian domestic reasons, it’s commitment to diplomacy and the Syrian need to build a professional army while treating their troops with respect and dignity are more relevant to the situation then Russia’s concerns over it’s militaries modernization.

Posted by: Haasaan | Sep 13 2017 23:06 utc | 110

Just a quick note now this thread has essentially finished as I made by interjection in opposition to those seeking to disrupt the thread with their fatuous talk of revelations and miracles. This blog has been successful because it discusses subjects with an evidence based approach – something that those who interject with their thousand year ancient old wives tales seek to undermine.
I don’t give a flying fuck what bulldust any poster chooses to take on board, I have fought next to staunch catholics and committed followers of Islam, they had the good sense to leave their faith out of it when the job had to be done, something not seen in here by those who interject with evidence free arguments about miracles & revelations.
The weak-assed move to drag out identity politics as an attempt to deflect from their own stupid efforts to bring belief rather than evidence into the debate only backs what I initially wrote that desperation is driving the faith industries to stupidity beyond compare. The name calling (arsehole wasn’t it? was what provoked my interjection I loathe the banality of ad hominem as rhetoric), that is the usual response to those who query this position tells us exactly how bereft the proselytizers of the ancient bullshits are.

Posted by: Debsisdead | Sep 14 2017 0:07 utc | 111

Was “IS” being shipped to DEZ to fight US/Kurds?
Fascinating article – those IS who flee to Syrian side are alive – those who remained in the desert killed by US/Kurdish forces.
Deals and infiltration from Syria/Iranian/Hezbollah.
One needs to read between the lines here:
“Since 2013, the international parties with the strongest military influence in Syria have given IS the leeway to expand in Syria in order to set up its “caliphate” and wreak attrition on the revolutionary forces. It now appears that these same parties are now fighting each other in order to promote IS.”
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/News/22392.aspx
Alarm bells!

Posted by: daffyDuct | Sep 14 2017 2:31 utc | 112

This item is old and hijacked by garbage posts…
But, Deir Ezzor is turning into a sick farce.
Russia has AA covering most of Syria with US regime figures complaining publicly that Russia effectively controls the skies in Syria.
Syria has overwhelming forces massed in Deir Ezzor that can easily crush both the remaining Daesh and US terrorist/mercenaries above the Euphrates. Almost all frontline SAA forces have embedded Russia forces to make sure the US regime doesn’t dare attack them.
And despite all that, the fucking pansy Putin has made an agreement with ‘his American partners’ that now has US regime clown parachuting into strategic sites in Eastern Syria to claim as US regime territory.
What a sick fucking joke.

Posted by: garth | Sep 14 2017 7:22 utc | 113

Come on guys, let’s have another one of you spout your nonsense rationalizations about how this is all some sort of wise grand strategy by the brilliant Russians…

Posted by: garth | Sep 14 2017 7:27 utc | 114

garth | Sep 14, 2017 3:27:22 AM | 114
What ever the stratagy; SAA with Russia’s help is winning this war.
But, don’t believe your lying eyes…

Posted by: V. Arnold | Sep 14 2017 8:35 utc | 115

“What ever the stratagy; SAA with Russia’s help is winning this war.
But, don’t believe your lying eyes…”
LOL, whatever dimwit.
The US regime is airdropping their ‘special forces’ clowns all over eastern Syria as we speak to occupy Syrian territory…
And all thanks to that pussy Putin making sure he doesn’t hurt the fee-fees of his ‘American partners’.
* Convoys over heavy equipment is currently being flooded into the north of Syria by the American regime to its Kurdish terrorist mercenaries
* US regime clowns are airdropping all over eastern Syria in a mad land grab thanks to Russia once again selling out Syria
* The SAA is being forced by Russia to tippy-toe around the US regime terrorist held areas
Syria is being carved up as we speak. The US regime is getting what it wanted all along – to turn the north of Syria into a giant military base to attack Iran.
Way to Vlad! High fives all around!

Posted by: garth | Sep 14 2017 11:14 utc | 116

116
US is in no position to ‘occupy’ Syrian territory, they need proxies.
Their proxies are Kurdish fighters who are in danger of uniting Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran against them.
Bets are these fighters will need an accommodation with at least part of the above. Especially as they are not friends of Barzani.

Posted by: somebody | Sep 14 2017 12:34 utc | 117

garth | Sep 14, 2017 7:14:34 AM | 116
LOL, whatever dimwit.
Your rudeness aside; you are a sycophantic idiot.
Russophobe much?

Posted by: V. Arnold | Sep 14 2017 13:15 utc | 118

Wow this is the first time I have read the comment section on Moon of Alabama, what a good bunch of people. Polite and super well informed. This has been very helpful. This situation of the U.S. using the Kurds as their next proxy force has been and is worrisome to say the least. Today I will be looking for info to confirm just where the SAA is operating along the Euphrates, and hopefully taking things under control there, on both sides of the river.

Posted by: che | Sep 14 2017 13:19 utc | 119

Wikimapia has slightly strange mechanism for updating “administrative sub-units” that map the extend of control of “Damascus”, Peshmerga, SDF etc. It seems that various sub-units have their subcommittees of volunteers and they need some type of consensu to make an update. In case of disagreement how to update some sub-units are frozen in the past, so to speak. In cases when they are “overly optimistic” on the side of SAA, they seem to have good “prophecy record”, namely, usually the actual control of Damascus gets extended to the “optimistic projection”.
With all those methodological asides, SAA reached Euphratus a bit to the south of Deir Ezzor airport and got into a position to invade a large river island that flanks airport area from north-east. Instead, Wikimapia shows SAA taking a position across the main channel of Euphratus. If true, this follows a series of rather unexpected moves. Perhaps the story on “deconflicting in East Syria” was floated to surprise ISIS. In short, we will get some surprise developments.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Sep 14 2017 15:22 utc | 120

@29…
‘but the bottom line is that satellite imagery shows most Tomahawks seem to have hit…Trump was correct when he said Tomahawk attacks against runways are pointless because runways are easily repaired..’
It’s amazing to me how people continue to defy logic by saying things like ‘runways aren’t important’ when bombing an airfield…
It’s also funny to note that in July 2013 a senior naval analyst at the US Institute for the Study of War published a detailed plan to attack six Syrian airfields, called…
‘Required Sorties and Weapons to Degrade Syrian Air force Excluding Integrated Air Defense System (IADS)’
The document which is available online and which I will link to outlines a plan to ‘degrade’ not permanently destroy six of Syria’s top-tier airfields…the second-tier Shayrat not being among them…
The plan outlined that this could be done with a total of 72 precision guided munitions [PGMs]…24 tomahawks and 48 air-launched standoff missiles of identical warhead size…ie 1,000 lb…
On page seven on the list of degradation requirements, hitting runways is listed first…
‘Degradation is achieved by damaging the runway enough to preclude flight operations…’
And…
‘US PGM were not designed to completely destroy runways, but will cause some cratering of runways, enough to preclude flight operations…’
And…
‘Once PGM crater a runway, repairing is a lengthy process that requires specialized equipment, materials, engineering support, and significant manpower…
Gee you think…?…I guess that’s why we don’t see our city freeway paved over in a day instead of a year…
Here is the link to the report in pdf…
http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/RequiredSorties-to-DegradeSyrianAirPower.pdf
The fact of the matter is that the tomahawks did try to hit the two runways at Shayrat as can be seen in pictures of craters close to the runways…
The ISI imagery is completely inconclusive as to how many missiles hit the field…the wide shot showing the complete airfield with little yellow circles showing the alleged 58 hits is of no use because it is impossible to clearly see any features from that low resolution…
the close-up shots that follow show some hits on the hardened hangars but they clearly overcount the actual visible hits…for example they say that 13 double hangars got 23 hits…yet the photos show only a total of 8 double hangars and maybe 10 visible hits in total…
One of the double hangars is highlighted with a yellow circle but appears unhit…
Bottom line, ISI maybe think people who are blind or can’t count crater holes will just assume the veracity of their narrative…
There are more realistic pictures on the navy’s website…which does not attempt to make any claims about how many targets were hit…
http://navylive.dodlive.mil/2017/04/07/u-s-navy-destroyers-launch-strikes-on-syria/
The Russian MoD clearly stated that only 23 hits struck the airfield and no runways were damaged…being there on the ground and with considerable footage and photos from Russian media, there is no reason to doubt their assessment…
It is clear that the tomahawk strike was a spectacular failure…60 cruise missiles is a lot of firepower against one airfield, especially considering that US war gamers figured on 72 to take out six fields…

Posted by: flankerbandit | Sep 14 2017 19:21 utc | 121

It is clear that the tomahawk strike was a spectacular failure…60 cruise missiles is a lot of firepower against one airfield, especially considering that US war gamers figured on 72 to take out six fields…
Posted by: flankerbandit | Sep 14, 2017 3:21:37 PM | 121

I disagree that things are as “clear” as you claim.
The attack on the airfield gave Trump some respite from the constant anti-syria media-fuelled Zio-Con war-mongering, without causing any serious damage to the SAA war-effort. I don’t believe that was accidental.
What looked like a failure to you, could just as easily have been a deliberately “botched” attack.
The Zio-Con war-mongering media portrayed it, to the gullible US home-crowd, as a “win” for Trump and US power-projection, and had the (much ,more important imho) knock-on effect of dampening down (however temporarily) the Zio-con lust for Syrian blood.
The ostensibly “botched” nature of the missile attack allowed the Russians to portray it as a failure of US power projection, and Russian propagandists got to hint heavily to their equally home-crowd that it was a win for Russian EW weaponry (which I seriously doubt it was)
Win/Win all round.

Posted by: Just Sayin’ | Sep 14 2017 20:16 utc | 122

Russian propagandists got to hint heavily to their equally home-crowd
should read
“Russian propagandists got to hint heavily to their equally gullible home-crowd”

Posted by: Just Sayin’ | Sep 14 2017 20:17 utc | 123

A few holes in the tarmac of an airstrip in an airbase which most seem to accept was not particularly vital to the SAA war-effort, is a small price which the SAA would have been more than happy to pay, considering the subsequent dampening effect it had on the Media-fuelled Zio-Con warmongering

Posted by: Just Sayin’ | Sep 14 2017 20:22 utc | 124

oneoffposter
Suddenly launching cruise missiles at a sovereign state. Isn’t strategic patience.

Posted by: @Madderhatter67 | Sep 14 2017 20:52 utc | 125

@ Garth #116
The general view is understandably prevalent that Russia and its allies (Turkey, Iran & Syria) are winning a large victory in the Middle East. They are winning back Syria territory and severely weakened any chance for regime change in Damascas. There is also the concomitant evidence that Israel is upset with Iran and Jordan is more friendly to Iraq and Syria, and the US is moving against Iran. What does the US have in Syria? Some Kurdish troops who are miles from Kurdistan and so lack local credence, some undependable Arab tribesmen, and some special forces people. Turkey has promised to take care of the Kurds, and so the US will abandon them again. Regarding Russia vs. the U.S., Russia has Putin and the U.S. has. . .nobody skilled in diplomacy. They don’t war very well, either.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 14 2017 20:56 utc | 126

@122 And don’t forget Raytheon. Those missiles have to be replaced.

Posted by: dh | Sep 14 2017 21:32 utc | 127

@102 jo hahn. here is wikipedia stating “The Deir ez-Zor suspension bridge was destroyed in May 2013, from shelling by Free Syrian Army forces during the Syrian Civil War.”
also at the same link – “After the suspension bridge was destroyed, the Siyasiyeh Bridge became the last entry route across the Euphrates to the western section of the city and the adjoining province of Hasakeh. However the locally renamed “bridge of death” was sufficiently dangerous to attacks that only one vehicle could speed across the bridge at a time during night time darkness. It was destroyed in the autumn of 2014, being blown up as a result of the battle between the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant and the Syrian Army.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_ez-Zor_suspension_bridge
fwiw – this info runs 180 degree opposite mike the propagandist at pat langs site…

Posted by: james | Sep 14 2017 21:45 utc | 128

@122
A deliberately ‘botched’ cruise missile strike on Syria…?
Even typing those words strikes me as absurd…
The military are professional men…it is hard to see how a politician could tell them something like…’go ahead and strike Shayrat airbase, but try to cause as little damage as possible, ok…’
That sounds pretty preposterous…more likely the generals and admirals, once given the go-ahead, are going to try to be as effective as possible…that’s how you get ahead in the killing business…
From the purely logical point of view, we invoke Occam’s Razor…ie among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected…
There’s a lot of assuming going in with your hypothesis…

Posted by: flankerbandit | Sep 14 2017 21:49 utc | 129

@112 daffyDuct… bassel oudat, the author of the article you site from the al ahram – eqyptian news site, has been posting on syria for a number of years..
apparently his house in syria was bombed in november 2012.. “In Rome, Italian Foreign Minister Giulio Terzi condemned on Twitter a rocket attack that destroyed the home of journalist Bassel al-Oudat.Terzi said the journalist, who works in Damascus for the Italian news agency Adnkronos, had been the victim of a “vile attack.” Al-Oudat was not harmed in the blast.
read more: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/syrian-rebels-set-up-own-intelligence-service-to-defend-revolution-1.479323
it appears this bassel oudat is an affirmed ‘rebel’ from syria looking for the overthrow of assad.. things haven’t worked out just as he might have hoped, but he continues to get to publish articles that are 180 degree opposite most of what i read.. i had heard the reason the kurds/usa make such quick headway in certain area is they buy the local tribal leaders off.. either that, or they incorporate isis into their fabric… of course i am giving you the opposite story to bassel oudat, and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to off a story 180 degree opposite again.. this is what i believe oudat has done.. it’s propaganda for all intensive purposes as i read it…

Posted by: james | Sep 14 2017 21:54 utc | 130

Anyone for bridge?
Sep 29, 2016 — A U.S. -led coalition airstrike against the Islamic State on Wednesday destroyed al-al-Asharah bridge extending over the Euphrates River in Deir Ez Zor’s eastern countryside which is the last functional bridge to pass between the two sides of the river in the entire province. The airstrike comes a day after the International Alliance destroyed the al-Midan bridge. . .With the destruction of the al-Asharah city bridge in Deir Ez Zor’s eastern countryside the International Alliance has isolated the area east of the Euphrates from its western side for hundreds of kilometers from al-Raqqah till al-Bukamal. …here

Posted by: Don Bacon | Sep 14 2017 22:21 utc | 131

Even typing those words strikes me as absurd…
Posted by: flankerbandit | Sep 14, 2017 5:49:24 PM | 131

That’s ok. I expected it would. You don’t strike me as particularly perceptive
There’s a lot of assuming going in with your hypothesis…
if you say so.
‘go ahead and strike Shayrat airbase, but try to cause as little damage as possible, ok…’
lol
instead of your hypothesis:

    “We need to strike those Syrians where it hurts. Gimme a target!
    Ok boss, there’s this air base that is really not at all important to their war effort, how about that ?
    Excellent! ~
    That’ll really hit em where it hurts

Posted by: Just Sayin’ | Sep 14 2017 22:47 utc | 132

From the purely logical point of view, we invoke Occam’s Razor…ie among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected…
lol
yawn.
Occams razor – the last refuge of an armchair general

Posted by: Just Sayin’ | Sep 14 2017 22:50 utc | 133

The military are professional men…it is hard to see how a politician could tell them something like…’go ahead and strike Shayrat airbase, but try to cause as little damage as possible, ok…’
No it isn’t
That way everyone walks away with something they can call a “Win!”,
No one really gets hurt, Zio-con blood-lust quenched (temporarily at least), no need for Russkies to even feel they need to retaliate (which, non-idiots will note, they didn’t).
No confrontation, no test of russkie Air-defence capabilities against Tomahawks, (which the Yank Mil probably wanted to avoid) but the russkies can hint to the gullible that their EW capabilities won the day, the gullible swallow it without any real evidence.
Trump looks tough, the Yank Mil looks tough to gullible Yanks, it causes the Zio-con death-merchants and the their media lackeys to shut the fuck up for a while, the Russians look tough to both Syrians and Russkies, . . . everyone a winner.
and as dh mentioned: Raytheon get a bucketload of dollars to fill their shareholders coffers (and that’s what really matters)
Step right up. . . everyone a winnah!
Trumpism in action

Posted by: Just Sayin’ | Sep 14 2017 23:13 utc | 134

Re: 131 “The military are professional men…it is hard to see how a politician could tell them something like…’go ahead and strike Shayrat airbase, but try to cause as little damage as possible, ok…'”
FYI, Occam raisor does not minimize the number of assumptions, sometimes it is better to make 2-3 plausible assumptions than a single preposterous assumption. However, it advocates eliminating an assumption if we can explain events or observations using the assumptions that remain.
Here we see an assumption that there are restrictions on what a non-professional can tell the professional. If you call for a plumber, and he/she says: we have to nuke this baby and replace, and not with another crappy piece of shit but with something that will actually work. I will have all parts delivered in three days, and you will pay XX for the stuff and YY for labor. A non-plumber can only meekly agree, or start sobbing inconsolably due to the lack of fund.
But POTUS does not to be a shy citizen asking plumbers or generals what he should order them. In this case, they have to whack something because red lines were crossed according to a speech day before, dignity of POTUS and credibility of USA is at stake. No danger to American personnel. What can you do? Give me an hour and the staff will prepare all options. Any special wishes? It has to be close to whatever I mentioned in the speech, and make it flashy. Now, what do professionals say?

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Sep 15 2017 0:41 utc | 135

@29…
Your comment on technical issues is very general and basically unsound…
Saying things like ‘the radar horizon for a low-flying jet is 35 km’…does not take into account any important parameters such as the altitude of the radar and the actual altitude the airplane is flying at…
Also your statement that a cruise missile flies at 5 meters above ground level [AGL] is simply way off the mark…
Published information states that the tomahawk generally flies at 30 to 50 m AGL…
But this would be over relatively flat terrain where there are no major obstructions, like towers, bridges power lines etc…
In hilly terrain the ingress altitude could be up to 1,500 ft [450 m], according to this flight test engineer…and actually higher, depending on the actual flight path and terrain elevations…
The reason is that, even though a cruise missile is equipped to fly a nap-of-the-earth profile, it must be able to climb at a rate that will allow it to keep up with rising terrain…
We see from a topographic map> of the Levant that the terrain rises sharply a few km inland of the coast along a north-south axis from northern Israel all the way to Turkey…with several mountain ranges in excess of 2000 m height [6500 ft]…
Inland of these mountains the Syrian desert is a plateau of about 1000 m altitude…[3300 ft]…Shayrat is located in an area that is even higher, just northeast of the Anti-Lebanese mountains…
The best route in would be on an east heading through northern Israel and over the Sea of Galilee, which is relatively low-lying and features a break in the north-south ridge chain…
Even so the missile would need to climb to an altitude of about 3000 feet [mean sea level, MSL] in about 50 km flight distance from the coast in order to be at the elevation of the southwest Syrian desert about 50 km inland…
Flying at 500 mph [800 km/hr] that’s just under 4 minutes flight time to cover that 50 km and climb from sea level to 3000 ft MSL…that’s a climb rate of 800 ft per minute, which I guarantee is not within the performance capabilities of that flight vehicle…
Bottom line is that it would need to come in from the sea at a height closer to 2000 ft MSL, in order to have any chance of climbing the additional height needed to reach the Syrian desert plateau…
Once in southwest Syria, the best route would be to turn to a north heading…but it would have to overfly the Jabal ar Ruwaq mountain range and climb even higher, even if picking out a route following the river valleys visible in the mountain range…
From an aerodynamic perspective this would be a very challenging flight profile for this vehicle…
We recall from basic aerodynamics that rate of climb is a function of excess power available, in relation to vehicle weight…put simply, in order to climb, an aircraft must increase power [thrust]…
The problem with cruise missiles is that they have a very low thrust to weight ratio…the tomahawk weighs 2,900 lb and has a 700 lb thrust Williams F-107 turbofan engine…for a thrust to weight ratio of 0.24…
A fighter jet typically has a T/W close to 1 or even higher…which means it can actually climb straight up at full power and low weight…
Another problem is the very small wing on a cruise missile…which means a high wing loading, which the ratio of weight to wing area…
With a high wing loading the aircraft must maintain a fairly high speed just to stay aloft…ie its small wings need a lot of air flowing over them, otherwise the wing will aerodynamically stall and the aircraft will fall to the ground…
For the Tomahawk the minimum flying speed is going to be about 350 mph…with its maximum speed about 550 mph…that means that in order to be able to climb, it must be flying at a slower speed and not using full engine power…that way it has enough engine power in reserve in order to be able to climb…
The top speed number is published as 550 mph, while the minimum flying speed is a calculation based on the wing size…
The wingspan of a tomahawk is just 2.67 m [8.75 ft]…the wing area is not published but approximating by scale of the cylindrical fuselage which is 0.52 m [1.7 ft] it is clear from side view that the wing chord is less than that, perhaps a little more than half…call it 1 ft…
That gives a wing are of 8.75 square feet…giving a wing loading of 330 lb per square ft [2900/8.75]…a fighter is going to be about 60 or so…and even an airliner is going to about 100 lb/ft^2…
The combination of low thrust to weight and high wing loading means the vehicle has very little ability to climb…that’s just aerodynamics 101…
I can explain [and do a sample computation] of the aerodynamic math behind this for anyone interested…
But the bottom line is that on a flight path from the Med sea to strike a target in inland Syria, the tomahawk is going to be challenged aerodynamically and will need to operate at altitudes of up to 3000 ft MSL…if not higher…
More important, it would have to have been at an altitude close to 2000 ft even before coming in at the coast…
Having these parameter estimates we can more realistically bring the adversary radar into the calculation…
The radar horizon is quite straightforward math if we know the height of the radar and the height of the aircraft…
With the tomahawk at 2,000 ft MSL while still over the sea and assuming Russian radars are set up on the ridgetops about 10 or 20 km from Latakia…elevation about 3000 ft MSL [1000 m]…we get a target range of about 230 km…
That’s the range at which a Russian radar sitting on a 3000 ft MSL elevation in Latakia would be able to detect an aerial target flying at 2,000 ft MSL [600 m]…
That’s still not long enough to reach the Haifa area where we are assuming the missile came in…which is 308 km from Latakia…
However, as the missile climbed further to 3,000 ft to get over the
As the tomahawk altitude rose to about 3,00 ft MSL to cross the Jabal ar Ruwaq mountains…the radar detection range would be just over 260 km at which point the tomahawk would be only about 200 km from Latakia…within range of the radar…
Some further considerations…
1. the Russian Beriev A-50 airboren Early warning radar is also deployed at Hmeimim since the beginning of the campaign in 2015…its detection range for airborne objects is 650 km…
2 Any Russian fighter jets in the air at the time would also detect the cruise missiles with their onboard radars…
3. there is a network of Syrian air defense radars throughout the country…including Pantsir systems…
Bottom line is that the simplistic scenario you have presented does not in any way resemble a realistic scenario…
What actually happened in that strike and any countermeasures that may have been deployed by the Russians, I will leave for another discussion…
But the evidence clearly points to a massive failure on the part of the |US Shayrat strike…the airfield was in operation within hours and the alleged evidence for all of the missiles hitting the field is simply non-existent…
Add to the fact that post strike propaganda spin about not wanting to hit runways blatantly contradicts not only established military doctrine but also the US own planning as outline in that document I mentioned earlier…

Posted by: flankerbandit | Sep 15 2017 4:04 utc | 136

SAA crossed Euphrates River about when I predicted, which was several days ago, and is now confirmed by Russia, effectively ending the news blackout over that aspect of the Deir Ezzor operation. This news was announced at the MFA’s weekly press briefing given by Maria Zakharova at about the 30:00 point, https://www.rt.com/on-air/403434-zakharova-weekly-news-briefing/
In a brazen act of head scratching, the Outlaw US Empire has destroyed the last two bridges over the Euphrates, apparently to keep Daesh from retreating, but also slowing the SAA’s ability to advance. As for the seemingly rapid advance by SDF against Daesh without one bullet being fired, lots of accusations of “uniform switching” all over social media. It also appears that Abadi has finally been overcome in his attempt to keep PMU forces from driving to Iraq’s border region with Syria. Lots of additional noise about what might ensue if the Barzani Gang holds the announced referendum–Civil War–primarily from the commander of the Badr Militia, but he’s not alone, particularly with the Zionists recent declaration about their desire to see some form of Kurdistan. So, even after Daesh gets eliminated, the drive for both Iraq and Syria to regain their sovereignty 100% will continue.

Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 15 2017 15:50 utc | 138

@138 karlof1, whats Canthama/bundy saying? Cheers,

Posted by: Lozion | Sep 16 2017 19:24 utc | 139

@138 “….particularly with the Zionists recent declaration about their desire to see some form of Kurdistan.”
Zionist Kurd connection? Not according to Newsweek. It’s all fake news.
http://www.newsweek.com/turkey-fake-news-jews-promote-hate-kurds-iraq-666130

Posted by: dh | Sep 16 2017 20:33 utc | 140

140
According to the Times of Israel it is true

Posted by: somebody | Sep 16 2017 21:01 utc | 141

Study Finds Close Genetic Connection Between Jews, Kurds
The people closest to the Jews from a genetic point of view may be the Kurds, according to results of a new study at the Hebrew University

Posted by: Just Sayin’ | Sep 16 2017 22:27 utc | 142

Situation is getting really interesting:
https://www.stripes.com/news/german-prosecutor-reviewing-claim-of-illegal-arms-shipment-to-syria-through-ramstein-1.487869

Posted by: ProPeace | Sep 17 2017 3:57 utc | 143

Wow! Such a fucking blatant coverup to whitewash their crimes:
I hope that evidence has been preserved for the coming trials…
YouTube Inadvertently[!!!] Erases Syrian War Videos In Purge Of Extremist Propaganda

Posted by: ProPeace | Sep 17 2017 4:22 utc | 144

Good news! More than 1,000 gunmen switch sides to join Syrian army

Posted by: ProPeace | Sep 17 2017 4:36 utc | 145

So the clash that b wrote about has another data point of Russia bombing US proxies
How far will the US back down in Syria?
The crisis in Syria still exists as long as the US has boots/proxies on the ground. If the US loses Syria totally like it seems, think about what they will want to do to show their ongoing relevancy in the world…..nations are still buying US Treasuries so some still think that the US is top dog.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Sep 17 2017 6:03 utc | 146