SASless,
An eon ago, I was a mission commander for a Red Flag push which, along with a panoply of other 40-50 other players, included Harriers of 1(F) Sqn. About halfway through the mission-planning circus, one of the GR7 pilots momentarily lost his composure with me over a questionable element of my plan. Apparently in the interest of diplomacy, he then caught himself and immediately apologized.

He needn't have apologized, because, after all, he was the one who had to fly the plan on NVGs...and at about 300 ft lower than me. I was asking someone to join me on my strike, it was therefore *my* responsibility to be a credible leader - and it would've been irresponsible of him not to call me on it. My point is simply this: I think our RAF/RN/RAAF colleagues can and should critique and evaluate our operational plans and actions – harshly, if necessary. I welcome it, as there’s little room for ego in effective strategy.

Isn't it just possible that the intelligence services know considerably more than they are putting in the public domain, for us to argue over?

And those loveable cuddly rebels are really friendly with their Christian and Non Sunni Muslim neighbours, they haven't killed and chopped heads off of thousands, butchered whomever refuses to join them.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/21/w...raq-mosul.html

PressTV-Saudi chemical weapons agents found in Aleppo

PressTV-Russia confirms militants gassing Aleppo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhlMSgGK-zA

Adding a couple of paras to the previous posts by Racedo and TEEJ:

All this footage above shows that syrian military and correspondents freely walk through all the facilities totally destroyed by the strike, including the ammunition and bomb/missile storage (blown up) shortly after the strike happened.
If there were chemical weapons there, nobody would do so without special suits. Thus, obviously there were no such stuff there. While the main reason for the strike, as it was announced, was to destroy that particular site where the Assad's planes with chemical bombs operated from
Don't you think all this sounds a bit inconsistent?

By the way, in one of the above videos a long-beard guy in a unform says that obviously it was the "Nusra front" (part or associate of Al-Qaeda) who blew up the chemicals and then staged all this tragic show in order to trigger the coalition strike in just a day or two, without any real investigation.


And again, comparing with Iraq: it took about a week after the coalition strike killed 200-300 civilians (some 3 weeks ago) for the media to start asking the DoD and State dept officials who, in turn, were muttering something like "it looks like we might be involved", "we will investigate", "it was not our fault", etc. Here in Syria, even no attempt to investigate. Al-Qaeda seems to be a trustworthy source of information.


No doubt Assad is a bad guy and should be taken away. But at least the current regime is secular and there is a common groud to talk, without "holy wars" and other religious stuff. Why not to take away first all those various jihadists and then replace this bloody Assad?

Sorry Van, but Assad being marginally Secular doesn't provide a basis for communication anymore than talking to the NORKs as they are largely secular as well. I believe I saw a documentary that mentioned that one of the sanctioned churches of NK recognizes the fat one and his lineage as one of their gods.

Nice try, but no. The US made a deliberate precision attack on conventional weapon facilities - potentially releasing chemical agents was far from their intent. Using your own discriminator the absence of 'special suits' indicates that the US strike achieved their aim.

Incidentally I agree that the absence of CBRN equipment is significant. If the Russian or Syrian forces really did believe that the opposition did have the means to obtain, distribute, weaponise and deliver chemical weapons against them then the carrying and wearing of protective equipment by Russian & Syrian troops would be a matter of routine.

I'm not sure if you are an independent thinker or not as your logic always gets nudged in the wrong direction.

If they only had TLAM available, then didn't have any warheads suitable for destroying CW - that would require something like a thermobaric warhead.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/mili...pons-14826307/

AW&ST:

Pentagon officials say all 59 Raytheon-built Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles fired against a Syria’s Shayrat airfield on April 7 reached their intended targets and the 60th was waved off. One missile failed, but another was launched in its place. A surface-to-air missile site, radar and about 20 aircraft plus various ammunition bunkers and suspected chemical weapon storage facilities were damaged or destroyed in the attack. That is the assessment of the U.S. Defense Department. Speaking to the media at the Pentagon, two officials involved in the mission who declined to be named said the late-night naval strike was executed with 100% accuracy. “We’re very positive that 59 missiles hit,” they said.........

Russia was told in advance that the strike would occur, and Moscow’s regional air defense systems did not react to the passing Tomahawks. The Syrian-owned, Soviet-made surface-to-air missile system defending the base appeared to be no match for the agile, low-flying Tomahawk and was wrecked........

Preparations for the Tomahawk bombardment began on April 5, when Trump asked Secretary of Defense James Mattis for a menu of military options to respond to the chemical attack reported the day before. It was the largest chemical attack carried out in Syria since the attack on Damascus in 2013 and was made worse by a bomb strike on the local hospital treating the victims. The options, including the precision naval strike, were scrutinized by the National Security Council and presented to the Commander in Chief on April 6. By about 4.30 pm that day, while hosting the Chinese president at the Mar-a-lago resort in Florida, Trump told his generals to execute the Tomahawk plan. Four hours later, Russia was informed about imminent military actions against the airfield and then the USS Porter and USS Ross opened fire.

The ships are assigned to the Sixth Fleet operating from Rota, Spain. They were maneuvered into position the day before and had been awaiting the go-order. Officials say the crews of the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers are well practiced at this type of mission. It was assessed to be the military option with the lowest risk to U.S. forces, instead of a strike by manned fighters or bombers.

The missiles impacted their targets in Syria between 3-4 a.m. local time on April 7. Declassified imagery shows the significant blast marks in some targets and dark pinholes through others. U.S. officials say the exact damage is still being assessed, but they are confident that at least 20 aircraft were destroyed and they did not track any aircraft leaving the target area in the four hours after Russia was told. The runway was not targeted because the warheads used would not have been effective..........

So A Van scores. CW attacked but no evidence of thermobaric weapon use or chemical residue.

Not really. The Syrians wouldn't store such weapons on an airbase, they have/had specialised CW depots. Any used would be delivered specifically for a mission - especially since they were all supposed to have been handed over and destroyed.

Agreed and to add that in the off-chance that they were reckless enough to leave sarin on-base the risk of exposure the following day would be incredibly small or nonexistent. Sarin is a volatile gas and not a persistent agent.

Yes - I thought it was absolutely lethal - but also dispersed very quickly.
Check out the Twitter feed of Jeffrey Lewis at arms control wonk... a lot of detail on Sarin versus containers seen at Sharyat.

ORAC, I agree it is logical to keep such lethal devices away from your other facilities but I refer to the article you quoted, 'suspected chemical weapon storage facilities', so either they did and the Syrians kept stum as they didn't want to admit it, or they didn't.

Either way the US could have shown post-strike imagery.

Pontius - they did.

Satellite images show before, after US strikes on Syrian base | FOX31 Denver

Satellite images show before/after of US missile strikes on Syrian air base | Q13 FOX News

ORAC, and identified as the chemical weapons storage facilities.

Jolihokistix link below shows how a successful attack on the chemical weapons storage would not have released Satin gas as it is essentially a binary weapon. Hence little need for protective clothing.

Rare opposite point of view, from Russia, worth a read.
The chemical brothers: Putin and Assad | Russia | Al Jazeera

Further to your point, the governments, through intelligence services, put out exactly the information they want us to know and believe.

It is getting more difficult to know who to believe.

In my mind the most fascinating part of this whole affair is the refusal of arguably the majority of the public in the West to actually believe the MSM and the liberal narrative.

Twenty years ago people would nod in meek acceptance whatever was fed to them, today however it seems that taking the opposite position of a view presented by the MSM is the norm. Personally I think the whole episode stinks, too many loose ends and a presented narrative that just doesn't hold up to more than mild scrutiny. The strike did however push the Neocons such as McCain into orgasmic frenzy complimenting Trump as if he were a long time buddy returning home.

However over at Brietbart the Trump supporters on the whole are pretty pissed with him, if he continues down this path one suspects his support will seep pretty rapidly.

If Assad thinks he's making a point, I'd suggest he find a deeper bunker.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/w...ince-fklmrlnhg

https://feeds.thetimes.co.uk/web/ima...30&resize=1200

Several towns in Syria’s rebel-controlled Idlib province have been hit with incendiary weapons as President Assad and his allies step up their bombing campaign after last week’s nerve gas attacks.

Multiple witnesses recorded mobile phone footage of fierce fires burning in the town of Saraqeb yesterday evening. The bright white burning plumes of the missiles which started the blazes suggest that they were either white phosphorus or thermite bombs. Other footage shows the evening sky lit up by the inferno caused by the missiles. The local opposition radio station Fresh FM reported that Russian jets had dropped two incendiary missiles on the northern outskirts of the town.

Assad and his allies have intensified their attacks on Idlib, the last pocket of rebel territory in northern Syria, and other opposition-held areas in the south of the country since last week’s chemical attack on the town of Khan Sheikhoun, which is in Idlib. Apparently undeterred by President Trump’s cruise missile strike on the Shayrat airbase, they launched a wave of bombing raids over the weekend that killed dozens of civilians.

Thermite, which burns at 3,000 degrees centigrade and is almost impossible to extinguish, sticks to the skin and can reach the bone in seconds.

The use of both white phosphorus and thermite in civilian areas is prohibited by a 1980 convention, although they can be deployed as smokescreens on the battlefield. Russia, originally as the Soviet Union, is a signatory, although Syria is not; however, there is evidence that both parties have deployed the weapons in opposition areas.

In December Human Rights Watch reported that there had been an increase in Russia and the Syrian regime’s use of incendiary weapons over the past year, with 18 attacks in Aleppo and Idlib provinces between June and August 2016. The report noted that “for at least a few weeks in mid-2016, incendiary weapons were used on a near daily basis in opposition-held areas”.

Did the west not intervene and remove all the chemical weapons from Assad's forces.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/removal...ted-1403529356

Did he buy new supplies, if so from where, eBay?

I prefer this explanation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVevIuIRuok

CWs are spread across Middle East since the times when Gaddafi was removed, the country of Lybia bombed by "freedom bringers" and chaos started ruling there.

Some URLs (not Russian :-) :

http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/01/28/former-libyan-intel-chief-isis-has-qaddafis-chemical-weapons/

http://www.timesofisrael.com/libyan-...by-extremists/


In a similar way, the Syrian "opposition" seized some CWs from the government before the campaign started to eliminate them (CWs) under the UN (or likes) control.

Every now and then we read the reports that various CWs (some are released quite primitively) are used in Syria and Iraq. Thus, linking automatically any sign of their use to a single party (e.g. the Syrian regime) is just not correct. None of the party can be excluded, but a thorough and independent investigation should be performed before throwing Tomahawks. Again, US is still "investigating" about 200 dead civilians in Mosul 3 weeks ago, in the area which is under their control now, but as for Idlib everything "became clear" in a few minutes.

So, where are the evidences about which chemicals were used in Idlib and by whom?

Clowns and professional provocators such as "white helmets", Coventry based "Syrian observatory" and likes do not count.