Cookie Notice

However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Thursday, 6 April 2017

Oh Good. They've forgotten about the 'unspeakable' slaughter in Mosul.

I have no illusions about Bashir Assad's ruthlessness, and none about his commitment to regain control of Syria. His success in Aleppo, the recapture of Palmyra and even his quick reaction to the assault by the West's 'friendly' Islamist jihadis on Damascus have all given him the advantage. Meanwhile, the US-led blundering in taking Mosul, with its massive civilian casualties, makes Trump look a dick against Putin's effective siege of Aleppo. 

So I don't rule out Assad being responsible for a chemical attack in Idlib that has killed 70. But it's so / too convenient for the US led side, and such an unnecessary action for Assad, that I cannot rush to the same immediate verdict as the entire Western media seems to have done, at least without evidence. It's just too bloody convenient, particularly in silencing  the growing outrage against child and civilian casualties in Mosul, most recently as the 230 (as the Telegraph reported) child and mothers corpses were pulled from the rubble of a single Iraqi / US strike last week.

Whilst the slaughter of seventy in Idlib by poison gas is 'unspeakable', the slaughter of three times that number in Mosul by good, clean US missiles seems to be OK. Good. Glad that's clear.


DeeDee99 said...

There were/are no good options for Syria: only the devil it's better to know.

And, for all his faults, before the civil war started Assad was running a secular, multi-faith country. The alternative was not a PR-friendly, politically-correct, "liberal" democrat .... it was the far nastier ISIS.

The USA and Cameron should not have encouraged the insurgents. A country like Syria can only be led by a strongman. Assad was the devil it was better to know.

John M said...

In other news following DOnald Trump's threats it was reported that President Assad enjoyed a full night's sleep last night.

Anonymous said...

"And, for all his faults, before the civil war started Assad was running a secular, multi-faith country. The alternative was not a PR-friendly, politically-correct, "liberal" democrat .... it was the far nastier ISIS."

The Assads run a particularly nasty Fascist dictatorship. The main alternative was the Muslim Brotherhood, which is no better, as Morsi showed in Egypt.

ISIS is very largely the creation of the Assads, who wanted to be able to describe anyone who didn't like their dictatorship as "terrorists". There would be no ISIS if Assad had not released hundreds of extremists from jail at the start of the revolution, with the intention of corrupting it.

Your argument seems to be that Middle Eastern countries should stay in the Middle Ages for ever.

Don Cox

Elby the Beserk said...

1. Assad lost the only Chlorine plant in Syria to the rebels in 2012.
2. Chlorine bombs were found in East Aleppo when the Western back "rebels" were expelled.
3. Extremists have been slaughtering each other in Idlib since Assad decided to use the town to corral them there.

There is NO proof whatsoever that this was done by Assad. We need to remember that the West has been trying to overthrow Assad for many years, from long before the conflict there. However, in Syria, Assad is still very popular, and always has been - he has protected minorities, the primary education system was so good the BBC had a series on it, before 2011 their GDP was growing faster than ours, and the country had its first professional middle class.

I spent a few months on Twitter last year and conversed with Lyse Doucet, the BBC's correspondent out there. Mostly she reported from Beirut, and noted that her information came from "activists". "Acitivists" are a special class of saint at the BBC it seems - however, they never note that it is impossible to verify WHAT an "activist" tells you. So, if you are the BBC, you just broadcast what suits your world view. Which is that Assad is a demon.

Little if any of what you read about Syria in the MSM, or hear on the BBC, bears any likeness to what is happening. Do remember that. If you want to find out what really IS happening, check out Vanessa Bealey and Eva Bartlett.

Anonymous said...

"So I don't rule out Assad being responsible for a chemical attack in Idlib .."

And I don't care! What forty years of observing the brown world has taught me, they can't organise a piss up in a brewery.

I can't think of a better way to drive ( or encourage ) more rapefugees into Europe than by prolonging Syrian agony by intervening now.

I supported Trump ( although it's irrelevant since I am not a US voter ) mainly because he wasn't going to go 'head to head' with the Russians in Syria, as the Hildebeast vowed to.

Elby the Beserk said...

And for those of you above pronouncing on Syria. Have you ever been there? Have you spoke to Syrians? No, of course not.

visc said...

Dee Dee the US and UK (CaMoron) did not just 'encourage' the Syriam insurgents, none of whom were "moderate" but are fascistic Salafists they actively armed and aided and even created them. All mentioned are utter scum.

Raedwald said...

Elby - I can't help asking 'who benefits?'

Assad is not desperate, he has access to plenty of conventional munitions and knows very well the PR disaster his using banned weapons would be. Idlib is not the scene of a desperate battle. He can take-out the bottled-up rebels there at his leisure. It really makes no sense at all for him to use gas - why would he?

The advantages to the US / rebel side in contrast are clear.

And with the White Helmets around the place, one can't even be sure the stuff wasn't smuggled in in a so-called 'aid' convoy.

Rossa said...

With Putin now backing the Syrians and denying Assad used chemical weapons, if the US now goes all out in Syria, Russia will have to intervene. Russia's Defence Minister has said the Syrians were bombing a rebel munitions dump which included chlorine based chemical weapons. While, indirectly, it can be claimed the Syrians did it, it was the rebels who created the chemical bombs and stored them within the civilian population knowing that in the event the munitions were targeted what the outcome would be.

IMO Trump's first 'war' is more likely to be in North Korea, unless the visit by Xi tomorrow changes the situation.

Anonymous said...

Raedwald said @ 10:17

'And with the White Helmets around the place, one can't even be sure the stuff wasn't smuggled in in a so-called 'aid' convoy.'

Be careful with your counter-narratives mate, they don't like it.

'Al-Qaeda in Syria and its subordinate "moderate rebels" are being defeated in their last big attack on Hama governate. The Russian defense ministry said that more than 2,000 Jihadis had been killed during the failed attack. Another attack on Latakia was stopped cold by massive Russian air strikes on the staging areas. Al-Qaeda's back yard in Idleb is under constant air interdiction.

The usual response when under such pressure are incidents of "chemical attacks" "on civilians". Such is claimed today in Khan Sheikhoun. The video footage, taken (when?) in a White Helmets base, shows "rescuers" spraying water on people who are claimed to have been effected by Sarin. If this were a real chemical incident involving Sarin or similar stuff these unprotected, unprofessional "rescuers" would be heavily effected if not dead.

Conveniently this incident also happens just two days before another international conference on Syria. The heavy media attention is likely the starting shot of a new campaign of CIA support for al-Qaeda in Idleb and a second leg of Turkey's invasion of Syria.'

Various Issues - Moon of Alabama

(Be sure to read the comments)


Anonymous said...

All in the timing.

I am brain fucked, heartily sick to death of the relentless crimson Marxist tainted, media manipulation. I had hoped, thought that, after the June 23rd, the 2016 plebiscite the UK media would rein back on it's blizzard of pro Mult cult worship and cheerleaders for PC/EU/Arabist propagandizing but not a bit of it. Losers, they doubled down and the shitnewsstorm thus just kept on flowing. Ha, ha, ha! on an EU referendum the tories [and Berlin] outmanoeuvred the proles and we got a new executive!! Ungrateful as we are truly we never really noticed! All but - But sweet FA altered and shariza is, a queen of the black arts propaganda and sowing doubt where there was hope - aye mother Theresa and she's no Christian.

For a few minutes spend it shut tight and away from the 24 hour rolling bollocks and corporate ads, in quiet reflection. How much sway and power do these nutters - I'd call them the world elite from Soros all the way down to the Gulf - how much swing have they got?

I want you all to ponder on......the circumstances of what is and can only be described as a truly horrific attack.

Sarin gas is a dirty, terrible nerve agent, even the thought of using such a poisonous killer is beneath all understanding, aye death is terrible, indiscriminate violence unconscionable but...

Who would stoop to such murderous ends, well I know one lot who definitely would.

Why would Bashar al-Assad use this sort of gas, he's winning, certainly if the Russians and Israelis were cognizant of the facts, there'd be - no chance.

An air assault but only 70 killed, well honestly 1 would be too many and we are endlessly relieved it wasn't more - but why wasn't it more, if it was Sarin there surely would be many more dead - would there not?

The Syrian conflict has gone out of the western news churn.

Saudi Arabia, the KSA was coming in for some fearful stick and rightly earned for it lack of any human rights and what with Theresa visiting, what a perfect effort to kill three birds with one stone?
Finally is it not also intelligence based but Kosher info, that the cult of death Raqqa branch are mixing and producing - Sarin or like substances?

Why is that Sky, ITV, the BBC and not least the westminster dorks - why doesn't anyone ask some rather more pertinent questions before jumping in and adding one and two and coming up with six and a bit.

What the hell is Trump on about, have the Pentagon and 'the cousins' already reeling him in?

Now read, mark and ask some questions to yourselves and think on who really is telling the truth?

Anonymous said...

Don cox, stop being such an arse.

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 15.20

"An air assault but only 70 killed,"

How about an air assault which hit a rebel held stock pile of chemical agent. Not even necessarily nerve agent. Any unpleasant chemical that gets distributed as a result of an
explosion could be toxic in sufficient concentration.

The 2013 accusation of Gas attack proved groundless, why should we believe this time the 'intelligence' sources have got it right?

Anonymous said...

Here's why Trump changed his attitude toward Bashar al-Assad


Cascadian said...

It's all Pale-wood, the white helmets operate only with the consent of ISIS as documented by . Fake, fake, fake news and it's real disappointing that Trump cannot discern that.

Trump badly needs to clean house at his "intelligence" agencies, they are now distribution agents for Amal Clooney and the rest of the loonies, paleswinian supporters all.

For actual reporting view Eva Bartlett

Cascadian said...

Oops,documented by...... Eva Bartlett and others.

Additionally I think I detect feelings-based decision making in Trumps announcement, perhaps Ivanka is allowed too much leeway, her views on childcare and climate change do not align with sensible policy.

Gordon the Fence Post Tortoise said...



There is a *lot* that doesn't add up if one looks simply at Syria without looking at the other regional players who've proxies and side bets in the conflict.

Throw in:
The Gulfies and their associates in KSA have been stirring it

the Iranians I think have not forgiven the Gulf Arabs for funding Saddam in the Iran-Iraq war.

What looks like inept and malicious tinkering from the EU

The CIA base in Jordan must now be the biggest outside the continental USA

Israel minding its business

Erdogan minding his business

The Kurds

And a bunch of deranged Alu-Albar yelling nutters running amok.

Any western reporter going actually into the field must have something closely resembling a death wish. It's also the case that a consequence of the above is that one simply can't take any/all reporting at face value. Why Lyse Doucet isn't is Saltford Media City is quite a mystery

Gordon the Fence Post Tortoise said...

Dioclese said...

And this happened a day after the bomb in St Petersburg.

Call me a cynic, but isn't the timing a little suspicious?

Anonymous said...

I think that, Sky bouncing about and all over this 'attack' says it all.

Be aware that, Sky are THE UK Sunni apologists and calumniating al Assad is what the Turks and their masters in Riyadh greatly desire. To which, the PC tosserati @ Sky duly obliged, recall if you will that, their political editor is after all Faisal Islam.

Strange to report in the main [when compared to Sky], that, the beeboids have remained relatively 'middle of the road' on the claims concerning this 'attack' and on ITV tonight, the reporting was almost non existent, imho that is telling, although mother Shariza did stick in her tuppenneth and subtext "we luv you KSA..............." FFS.

After doing some big reading about Sarin, the ridiculous white clots who were running around and carrying 'victims' bare handed - is daft, if was Sarin they would have to be suited up and gloves very definitely on.

Late news, some talk of US "action" - fuck knows what all that means but why is Trump so misinformed [well yeah the CIA don't like Assad!! but fuck sakes]. Donald Trump, he's setting himself up pleasing the democrats and Soros by and but going against Russia and Putin...............oh my word, what TF is he doing?

There is another game going on here, it started with the anti Iran rhetoric after the Trump inauguration - imho. And it all begs the question do the KSA have such influence in the Pentagon and Washington/NYC?

Worrying times indeed.

Finally, OK the FCO it's been that way for a long time and now that the Asians have got in the front door and legs under the tables.........Even though having said that, why are we so beholden or should I say mesmerized by the sand dwelling camel humpers inhabiting the Arabian peninsula? Is it just backsheesh paid to Fallon et al, tories in general or, the nightmare - the UK establishment wants, nay craves Britain becoming the first Western European Islamic republic?

Do they hate us that much, I think that they really do - imho.