After years of fighting, Damascus is clear of terrorists. This is a major event. The Terrorist supporters have been deported to greater Idlib. whilst ISIS fighters themselves are going to unknown location. Probably the deserts of Deir Ezzor
https://twitter.com/SyrianLionesss/status/998533926078615552
https://twitter.com/SyrianLionesss/status/998654896206417920
https://twitter.com/SyrianLionesss/status/998535641469276160
https://twitter.com/SyrianLionesss/status/998610928475213824
The most likely area of operations for new KSA support of the Syrian civil war would be within Northeastern districts of the country. The de facto administration of that section of Syria is the Kurdish-oriented govt known as the “Democratic Federation of Northern Syria”. This move by Saudi Arabia has some potential due to the US-backed SDF (Syrian democratic forces, also the official defense force of the Kurdish-centered govt in Syria) being outfitted as pro-western secular opposition to the Syrian govt. The formerly western-backed FSA (Free Syrian army) lost support from the US and the rest of the west due to their growing illegitimacy, this was caused by Islamist radicalisation within their ranks. The SDF doesn’t have as much negative baggage attached to their history, this means the international community would gain what’s recognized as a credible fighting force within Syria to oppose Assad. In-turn the Kurdish govt views Saudi Arabia in a positive light. For example it was Ilham Ehmed who is the Co-Chairman of the Syrian Democratic Council (the political wing of the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces) stated back in October of 2017 that “Saudi Arabia is an important country it must play its role in promoting stability in Syria and we are ready to cooperate with it.”
Recently there’s been a disparity of interests between the YPG branch of the SDF and the US Coalition. The US may sever their support of the YPG to appease Turkey and sacrifice a greater fraction of Syria’s future territorial integrity. They may be expecting Turkey to conflict with the interests of the US-Coalition so long as YPG support remains. The Turks have been using the pretext of YPG affiliation with the PKK (The Kurdistan Workers Party, a terrorist organisation as designated by NATO ) in order to intervene within Syria. The recent creation of the Raqqa military council by the SNA (Turkish-backed Syrian National army of the FSA) with the aim to expel the YPG from the Raqqa governate is evidence of this.
Saudi Arabia will predictably support an Arab majority branch of the SDF designated as the Deir ez-Zor Military Council. The grim reality is that they are known to have questionable Islamist ideologies and to have been recruited from members of former FSA, al-qaeda and ISIS units. The most notable example would be their very own commanding officer, General Commander Rashid Abu Khawla who has a colourful past of running a criminal outfit that ran extortion checkpoints throughout Deir Ezzore in the earlier stages of the war before they pledged their allegiance to ISIS. Although ISIS initially allowed them to maintain their checkpoints Abu kwala and his men eventually fled Deir Ezzore for Al-Hasakah, startled by the excecution of Kwala’s brother Ata Allah on the charges of rape and bribery. Kwala would later move to Tel Abyad in Turkey before reappearing in Syria as the commander of the newly formed Deir Ezzor Military Council.
It remains to be seen whether or not Saudi Arabia will neglect to support the YPG. This would present Saudi Arabian de facto consent to present-day Turkey’s judiciary methods of militarily imposed disciplinary actions towards PKK affiliated organizations.
Over the past week, American MSM has been shilling the missile attack. Leftists are beside themselves with joy. In fact the common sentiment among the media is “Trump is not doing enough war”. Why are they shilling so hard for a massive failure of an attack that resulted in a 70% missile interception rate? In fact, this is the first time in history a nation has had such massive success defending itself from modern missiles with only cold war era air-defense.
Unfortunately, blatant lies are what the news media does best. Headlines reading along the lines of “Syrian air defense firing blind”, “Evil Assad crippled”, “100% missile accuracy”, “Zero interceptions” It is clear MSM wants war and destruction. By brainwashing the public into believing the missile attack was a success, they are attempting to drum up support for intervention. Even though videos all over YouTube show dozens upon dozens of missiles intercepted
The conflicting reports between Russia and the United States are causing much confusion. Were 71 missiles intercepted or none at all? Well lets break it down. According to SouthFront, only S-125, S-200, Buk, Kvadrat and Osa missile systems were used to intercept the missile attack. These missile systems are cold war era and range from bad to hopeless. How is it possible that 71 missiles were intercepted? These missile systems should only have been able to destroy roughly 15% of the incoming missiles. The SyADF does not have the capability to intercept such a number of missiles simultaneously in one striking wave.
So how did so many missiles get intercepted? The answer lies in Russia’s electronic warfare (EW) systems. Russia has Krasukha-4 EW systems in Syria. The Krasukha is able to jam airborne radars, such as radar guided missiles at ranges of up to 250 kilometers. The missiles, once jammed, are then provided a false target away from the original to ensure that the missiles are no longer a threat.
For most of the flight path, guidance for the Tomahawk and Storm Shadow cruise missiles is provided by GPS. However, in the final phase, the missiles begin using their internal guidance system. During this phase of the flight path the missiles are vulnerable for EW counter-measures. The missiles impacted by EW systems start to steer off. The missiles’ speed significantly reduces and they become an easy target for air defense systems or fall.
So what was the purpose of this missile attack? The answer lies in the USA’s state of the art JASSM-ER missile. Weighing in at a whopping 1.4 million USD, this is the first time JASSM-ER missiles have been used in an attack. JASSM-ER is the first missile to carry the Counter-electronics High Power Microwave Advanced Missile Project (CHAMP) payload. CHAMP is an electronic warfare technology that fries electronic equipment with bursts of high-power microwave energy, non-kinetically destroying them.
It is likely that the missile attack on Syria was done for the purpose of testing JASSM-ER and CHAMP against Syria’s air defense systems (SyADF) and Russian Krasuka-4s while comparing it to Tomahawk and Storm Shadow missiles. No one knows for sure weather or not JASSM-ER and CHAMP have proven successful in countering Russian electronic warfare systems, as that information is undoubtedly top secret classified. But it brings up an interesting question about the future of smart missiles and EW technology. In the event of a nuclear launch, such EW systems could be used to destroy missiles before they reach their intended target.
A few days ago, al-Assad made a statement to all his ministers and others in high up positions who believed themselves to be above the law.
“Every official who walks the streets in a parade with bodyguards is a coward with an inferiority complex. Every official’s son who blocks streets with his car and his bodyguards’ cars is a psychopath and his father will be held responsible, and I will personally study any complaints about this. It is totally unacceptable for anyone to act like an authority in the street because he stood with the army, and it will be punished, because those who protect the homeland on the fronts, will protect it from inside too. Personally, when I drove my car prewar and post war, I stopped at red traffic lights.”
Many people were skeptical and unsure weather al-Assad was serious about enforcing these rules. He proved all the skeptics to be wrong, because late last night & this morning, Assad’s warning to the ministers was enforced on the streets of Damas sending the capital in shock.
The first order of business was to stop 10 cars traveling with no license plates & darkened windows and to arrest all the drivers. All 10 cars belonged to Army officers. The orders by Assad was to make arrests regardless of seniority or positions.
Later, Police stopped the Prime Minister’s son and The of Head of Intelligence’s son just as Assad warned about family members earlier.
Most interesting & telling part of this development is that it was the simple traffic Police who were making those arrests on direct authority by Assad
Things have also turned around in Aleppo with the arrival of Major General Deeb Zeitoun, who is overseeing officials and their conduct in the city.
What’s likely happening is Qatar has had to come to an agreement with Iran to supply their shared offshore gas reserve (North Dome/South Pars) to Indian and Chinese markets, and abandon the Syrian gas pipeline extension to Europe via Syria. Qatar and Iran are essentially producing out of the same massive offshore reserve in the Persian Gulf, and are competing on getting this gas to market. Back in 2016, Qatar had purchased a 20% stake in Rosneft along with Glencore, so Qatar will get a piece of the profits from the Russian gas dominance in Europe. Qatar cutting a deal would allow Qatar access to Iranian terrestrial pipeline networks into Asia, although likely not at the profit levels they would like if they had full control of the pipeline networks. Initially Qatar had planned a gas pipeline via Saudi and Syria en route to Europe, which was blocked by Syria back in 2012, and then Russia had officially entered the fray to defend their literal monopoly of the European gas market.
Enter the “Syrian Rebels”, a Saudi-Qatari-US-Israeli backed ploy to fund terrorists led by private military contractors to overthrow Assad, and get a puppet President in who would grant construction rights for the Qatari pipeline. This brute force strategy using foreign backed PMC’s has utterly failed with Russian support. From the other end, the United States of Israel have blocked Iran from building a gas pipeline via the military campaigns in Iraq, thus closing the Mediterranean corridor for Iran.
This has forced Iran to focus their attention on supplying the Asian market, most notably China and India, who have been purchasing an increasing amount of oil and gas from Iran and Russia, and less and less from Saudi and the other gulf countries. China is doing this to try to force Saudi, Qatar, and the gulf monarchies to accept the Yuan for oil/gas payments instead of USD, and is putting the Gulf monarchies on a collision course with the United Slaves of Israel and threatening the Petrodollar mercantilism racket.
Whenever the United Slaves of Israel dollar is threatened, a false flag ensues, and a major military campaign is executed. Iraq and Libya are perfect examples. As a matter of financial survival, Qatar had to make a deal with Iran since Qatar has been boxed out of the European market directly, and Iran was the biggest obstacle in getting Qatar’s and other gulf monarchies oil and liquefied natural gas to the two biggest markets in the region — India, and China.
Even though Qatar was a major financial backer of ISIS and al-Qaeda led forces otherwise known as the FSA, I believe that after Trump’s trip to the Middle East asking them to do their part to stop the terrorists and the founders of ISIS, forced these Middle East nations to push Qatar out of the inner circle and point the finger at them (scapegoat)!
Even though I believe Qatar to be as guilty as hell in its quest for a pipeline and backer of ISIS and FSA (al-Qaeda), I think that its “plan B” was reason enough to oust them. I have a feeling that Qatar saw the writing on the wall when it bought into Rosneft (along with Glencore) and went ahead with a deal with Iran but what could also be happening is the other nations ALSO now see the writing on the wall. I think its now obvious that Syria, Iran, Iraq and Russia are winning this war and I don’t think that the US backed SDF can stop the SAA from participating in Raqqa or rescuing Deir Ezzoir. The best the US coalition can hope for is balkanisation of Syria and a buffer zone in its south so to not allow Iran a transit corridor to Syria and Lebanon which would threaten Israel. However, after the end of ISIS and FSA (al-Qaeda) this would take away the US reason To be there “to destroy ISIS”! If they stayed it would simply be OCCUPATION as they have no legal grounds to be there in the first place. So if there will no longer be Qatari pipelines then there is no reason to be there. A complete and utter mess up by the USA again. The only thing I can foresee now is a proxy war between the SDF and the SAA but that would ally turkey with Syria. Turkey is leaning towards the Eurasian union now with its deal to be the turkstream gas hub from Russia to Southern Europe. Yet a much needed NATO ally. Shit has certainly hit the fan! Russia’s intervention in this war Has made all the difference and now we can see iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, turkey and Russia all allying under common interests. But it ain’t over until the fat lady sings!
Written by
@IslandRarotonga
>French ‘inteligence’ beats UK’s “planes take off and fly” release CW report to blame Assad. The report compares 2013 attack that reads: sarin filled hand grenades dropped from a helicopter, Syria denined Report refuses to acknowlege IS ties, nor jihadists using chemical weapons against kurds in Aleppo & elsewhere
http://undocs.org/A/67/997 , page 30-37
http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/fr/dossiers-pays/syrie/evenements/actualites-2017/article/attaque-chimique-en-syrie-declaration-de-jean-marc-ayrault-a-l-issue-du-conseil … Went through the french report with the 50 words of french i understand and the magic of google translate, it’s a joke. Not as much as the 4 pages the US presented though. I may have understood some stuff wrong so it would be nice if some french anon could translate points b.) and c.) on page 2. Some of the rest would be interesting too but it’s not really important in relation to where/how the sarin was produced. So as far as i understood it they claim to be able to match the sarin to be from stocks of the syrian government. The problem is that they want to base that accusation on two chemicals they found. DIMP (Diisoproplymethylphosphonate), a byproduct of some of the most common sarin synthesis routes, and Urotropine (supposedly used as stabilisator. Never heard of that, the most common stabilizer is tributlyamine). Now i’m no CW expert but if mahmoud and his friends decided to cook up sarin in their basement they’d use the easiest synthesis route (meaning there would be DIMP in their end product) and they’d have to stabilize it as well if they wanted it to have a reasonable shelf live. If you take a look at the UN report about the 2013 incidents (http://undocs.org/A/67/997 , page 30-37) you can see that they tested and found a shitload of other stuff, and not just its presence but also its concentrations/the relations to other chemicals that were present. That was necessary to match some of the sarin that was used back then to be of the same stock (Khan al Assal and East ghouta), they WEREN’T able to match this to be from the syrian stocks, even with the way better and more reliable (because the samples were taken by competent personal and quickly processed) data they had back then.
Written by @634Asuka
Video with the President Assad’s AFP Interview from 13.04.2017 and transcript bellow:
Question 1: Mr. President, first I want to thank you very much to receive me for an interview. Mr. President, did you give an order to strike Khan Sheikhoun with chemical weapons last Tuesday?
President Assad: Actually, no-one has investigated what happened that day in Khan Sheikhoun till the moment. As you know, Khan Sheikhoun is under the control of al-Nusra Front, which is a branch of Al Qaeda, so the only information the world have had till this moment is published by Al Qaeda branch. No-one has any other information. We don’t know if the whole pictures or videos that we’ve been seeing are true or fabricated. That’s why we asked for investigation to what happened in Khan Sheikhoun. This is first.
Second, Al Qaeda sources said that the attack happened at 6, 6:30 in the morning, while the Syrian attack in the same area was around noon, between 11:30 to 12. So, they’re talking about two different stories or events. So, there was no order to make any attack, we don’t have any chemical weapons, we gave up our arsenal a few years ago. Even if we have them, we wouldn’t use them, and we have never used our chemical arsenal in our history.
Question 2: So what happened this day?
President Assad: As I said, the only source is Al Qaeda, we cannot take it seriously. But our impression is that the West, mainly the United States, is hand in glove with the terrorists. They fabricated the whole story in order to have a pretext for the attack, It wasn’t an attack because of what happened in khan Sheikhoun. It’s one event, its stage one is the play that we saw on the social networking and on TVs, and the propaganda, and the stage two is the military attack. That’s what we believe is happening because it’s only few days – two days, 48 hours – between the play and the attacks, and no investigations, no concrete evidence about anything, the only thing were allegations and propaganda, and then strike.
Question 3: So, who according to you is responsible about this alleged chemical attack?
President Assad: The allegation itself was by Al Qaeda, al-Nusra Front, so we don’t have to investigate who, they announced it, it’s under their control, no-one else. About the attack, as I said, it’s not clear whether it happened or not, because how can you verify a video? You have a lot of fake videos now, and you have the proof that those videos were fake, like the White Helmets for example, they are Al Qaeda, they are al-Nusra Front who shaved their beards, wore white hats, and appeared as humanitarian heroes, which is not the case. The same people were killing Syrian soldiers, and you have the proof on the internet anyway. So, the same thing for that chemical attack, we don’t know whether those dead children were killed in Khan Sheikhoun? Were they dead at all? Who committed the attack if there was an attack? What’s the material? You have no information at all, nothing at all, no-one investigated.
Question 4: So you think it’s a fabrication?
President Assad: Definitely, a hundred percent for us, it’s fabrication. We don’t have an arsenal, we’re not going to use it. And you have many indications if you don’t have proof, because no-one has concrete information or evidences, but you have indications. For example, less than two weeks, around ten days before that attack, the terrorists were advancing in many fronts, including the suburbs of Damascus and Hama which is not far from Khan Sheikhoun, let’s suppose we have this arsenal, and let’s suppose that we have the will to use it, why didn’t we use it when we were retreating and the terrorists were advancing? Actually, the timing of that attack or alleged attack was when the Syrian Army was advancing very fast, and actually the terrorists were collapsing. So, why to use it, if you have it and if you have the will, why to use it at that timing, not when you were in a difficult situation, logically? This is first.
Second, if you want to use it, if you have it and if you want to use it – again, this is if we suppose – why to use it against civilians, not to use it against the terrorists that we are fighting? Third, in that area, we don’t have army, we don’t have battles, we don’t have any, let’s say, object in Khan Sheikhoun, and it’s not a strategic area. Why to attack it? What’s the reason? Militarily, I’m talking from a military point of view. Of course, the foundation for us, morally, we wouldn’t do it if we have it, we wouldn’t have the will, because morally this is not acceptable. We won’t have the support of the public. So, every indication is against the whole story, so you can say that this play that they staged doesn’t hold together. The story is not convincing by any means.
Question 5: With the US airstrike, Trump seems to have changed his position on you and Syria drastically. Do you have the feeling that you lost what you have called a potential partner?
President Assad: I said “if”. It was conditional. If they are serious in fighting terrorists, we’re going to be partners, and I said not only the United States; whoever wants to fight the terrorists, we are partners. This is basic for us, basic principle, let’s say. Actually, what has been proven recently, as I said earlier, that they are hand in glove with those terrorists, the United States and the West, they’re not serious in fighting the terrorists, and yesterday some of their statesmen were defending ISIS. They were saying that ISIS doesn’t have chemical weapons. They are defending ISIS against the Syrian government and the Syrian Army. So, actually, you cannot talk about partnership between us who work against the terrorists and who fight the terrorism and the others who are supporting explicitly the terrorists.
Question 6: So, can we say that the US strike changed your opinion on Trump?
President Assad: Anyway, I was very cautious in saying any opinion regarding him before he became President and after. I always say let’s see what he’s going to do, we wouldn’t comment on statements. So, actually, this is the first proof that it’s not about the President in the United State; it’s about the regime and the deep state or the deep regime in the United States is still the same, it doesn’t change. The President is only one of the performers on their theatre, if he wants to be a leader, he cannot, because as some say he wanted to be a leader, Trump wanted to be a leader, but every President there, if he wants to be a real leader, later he’s going to eat his words, swallow his pride if he has pride at all, and make a 180 degree U-turn, otherwise he would pay the price politically.
Question 7: But do you think that there will be another attack?
President Assad: As long as the United States is being governed by this complex of military industrial complex, the financial companies, banks, and what you call deep regime, and works for the vested interest of those groups, of course. It could happen anytime, anywhere, not only in Syria.
Question 8: And, your army or the Russians will retaliate if it happens again?
President Assad: Actually, if you want to talk about retaliation, we are talking about missiles coming from hundreds of miles, which is out of our reach, but actually the real war in Syria is not about those missiles; it’s about supporting the terrorists. This is the most dangerous part of this war, and our response is going to be what we started from the very first day: is smashing the terrorists everywhere in Syria. When we get rid of the terrorists, we wouldn’t worry about anything else at that time. So, this is our response. It’s a response, not reaction.
Question 9: So, what you say means that retaliation by the Syrian Army or by the Russians will be very difficult, because the boats are very far?
President Assad: For us, as a small country, yeah, of course it is, everybody knows that. It’s out of reach. I mean, they can have missiles from another continent. We all know that. They are a great power, we’re not a great power. Talking about the Russians, this is another issue.
Question 10: Would you accept the findings of OPCW investigation?
President Assad: Since the very first time, when we had in 2013, I think, the first attacks by the terrorists on the Syrian Army by chemical missiles at that time, we asked for investigation. We were the ones who asked for investigations every time there was chemical attacks or allegations about chemical attacks. We asked. And this time, we were discussing with the Russians yesterday and during the last few days after the strike that we’re going to work with them on international investigation. But it should be impartial. We can only allow any investigation when it’s impartial, when we make sure that unbiased countries will participate in this delegation in order to make sure that they won’t use it for politicized purposes.
Question 11: And, if they accuse the government, would you step down?
President Assad: If they accuse, or if they prove? There’s a big difference. No, they are already accusing the government, and if you mean by “them” the West, no, we don’t care about the West. If you mean the chemical agency, if they can prove that there’s an attack, we have to investigate who gave the order to that attack. But a hundred percent, as Syrian Army, we don’t have, and we cannot – even if we want, we cannot – we don’t have the means to commit such attack, and we don’t have the will.
Question 12: So, you mean that you don’t have chemical weapons?
President Assad: No, no, definitely, a few years ago, in 2013, we gave up all our arsenal, and the chemical agency announced that Syria is free of any chemical materials.
Question 13: Because the Pentagon said that there are chemical weapons in the airbase, you deny it?
President Assad: They attacked that airbase, and they destroyed the depots of different materials, and there was no sarin gas. How? If they said that we launched the sarin attack from that airbase, what happened to the sarin when they attacked the depots? Did we hear about any sarin? Our Chief of Staff was there a few hours later, how could he go there if there was sarin gas? How could you only have six martyrs if you have hundreds of soldiers and officers working there, but there was sarin, and they didn’t die. The same fabricated videos that we’ve been seeing about Khan Sheikhoun, when the rescuers tried to rescue the victims or the supposedly dead people or inflicted people, but actually they weren’t wearing any masks or any gloves. How? Where’s the sarin? They should be affected, right away. So, this is all allegation. I mean, this attack and these allegations is another proof that it was fabricated and there was no sarin anywhere.
Question 14: If you say that you didn’t give any order, it is possible that the chemical attack could have been carried out by a rogue or fringe element from the army?
President Assad: Even if you have a rogue element, the army doesn’t have chemical materials. This is first. Second, a rogue army cannot send an airplane at their will, even if they want. It’s an airplane, it’s not a small car to take it from place to place or a small machinegun to use it. You can talk about somebody who has been using his pistol on his behalf the way he wants and break the law, that could happen anywhere in the world, but not an airplane. This is second.
Third, the Syrian Army is a regular army, it’s not a militia. It’s a regular army, it has hierarchy, it has very clear way of orders, so this kind of “rough personnel tried to do something against the will of the leadership of the army” never happened during the last six years of the war in Syria.
Question 15: Did the Russians warn you before the US attack? And were they present in the airbase?
President Assad: No, they didn’t warn us because they didn’t have the time to warn, because the Americans called them maybe a few minutes before the launching, or some say after the launching, because it takes time to reach the base. But actually, we had indications that there was something that was going to happen, and we took many measures in that regard.
Question 16: Do you confirm that 20% of your air force has been destroyed in this attack as the Americans said?
President Assad: I don’t know what’s the criteria, what’s the reference of 20%, what’s the hundred percent for them? Is it the number of airplanes? Is it the quality? Is it, how to say, the active airplanes and stored airplanes? I don’t know what do they mean by this. No, actually, what we and the Russians announced about a few airplanes being destroyed, most of them are the old ones, some of them were not active anyway. This is the reality, and the proof is that, since the strike, we haven’t stopped attacking terrorists all over Syria. So, we didn’t feel that we are really affected. Our firepower, our ability to attack the terrorists hasn’t been affected by this strike.
Question 17: You know, your government said in the beginning that you hit a chemical weapon depot. Is it true?
President Assad: It was a possibility, because when you attack any target related to the terrorists, you don’t know what’s in it. You know that this a target; it could be a store, it could be warehouse, it could be a depot, it could be a camp, it could be a headquarter, we don’t know. But you know that the terrorists are using this place and you attack it, like any other place, and that’s what we’ve been doing since the beginning of the war on daily bases, on hourly bases sometimes, but you cannot tell what’s within this. So, that was one of the possibilities that the airstrikes attacked a depot of chemical materials, but this is conflicting again with the timing of the announcement, not because only the terrorists announced it in the morning, but because their media, their pages on Twitter and on the internet announced the attack a few hours before the alleged one, which is 4 in the mourning. 4 in the morning, they announced that there’s going to be a chemical attack, we have to be ready. How did they know about it?
Question 18: Don’t you see that Khan Sheikhoun is a huge setback for you? For the first time in six years, the US attack your army and yesterday after a brief honeymoon, yesterday Tillerson said that reign of Assad family is coming to the end, don’t you think that Khan Sheikhoun is a huge setback for you?
President Assad: There is no reign of Assad family anyway in Syria. He’s dreaming, or let’s say, he’s hallucinating, so, we don’t waste our time with his statement. In reality, no. Actually, during the last six years, The US was directly involved in supporting the terrorists everywhere in Syria, including ISIS, including al-Nusra, including all the other like-minded factions in Syria, this is clear, and this is proven in Syria. While if you want to talk about the direct attacks, actually only a few months ago, there was a more dangerous attack than the recent one, just before Obama left, I think a few weeks before he left, it was in Deir Ezzor in the eastern part of Syria when they attacked a very strategic mountain, it was a Syrian base, a regular Syrian Army base, and that helped ISIS to take over that mountain, and if the Syrian Army wasn’t resilient and strong enough to repel ISIS, the city of Deir Ezzor would have been now in the hands of ISIS, means a direct link between Deir Ezzor and Mosul in Iraq, which would have been a very strategic gain to ISIS. So, actually, no, the American government was directly involved. But this time, why did they attack directly? Because, as I said, the terrorists in that area were collapsing. So, the Unites States didn’t have any other choice to support their proxies, the terrorists, but to directly attack the Syrian Army because they sent them all kinds of armaments and it didn’t work.
Question 19: So, for you, it’s not a huge setback?
President Assad: No, no, it’s actually part of the context, the same context for six years; it took different shapes, but the core of the American policy and the Western policy towards what’s happening in Syria, it hasn’t changed at all. Forget about the statements; sometimes we have high-pitch statements, sometimes you have low-pitch statements, but it’s the same policy.
Question 20: You have gradually pushed most of the rebels into Idleb, do you plan to attack it next?
President Assad: We’re going to attack terrorists anywhere in Syria, Idleb or any other place. What’s the timing, what’s the priority, this is a military issue and should be discussed on the military level.
Question 21: You said before that Raqqa is a priority for your government, but the forces advancing on the city are mostly US-backed Kurds, aren’t you afraid of being excluded from the liberation of Raqqa?
President Assad: No, we support whoever wants to liberate any city from the terrorists, but that doesn’t mean to be liberated from terrorists and being occupied by American forces, for example, or by another proxy, or another terrorists. So, it’s not clear who is going to liberate Raqqa. Is it really Syrian forces that are going to hand it over to the Syrian Army? Is it going to be in cooperation with the Syrian Army? It’s not clear yet. But what we hear is only allegations about liberating Raqqa. We’ve been hearing that for nearly a year now, or less than a year, but nothing happened on the ground. So, it’s just, let’s say, a hypothetical question, because there is nothing concrete on the ground.
Question 22: The US and Russia are the co-sponsors of Geneva process. Because of the tension between the two countries, do you think that this process can continue?
President Assad: Look, there’s a big difference between the process being active, which could happen anytime, to reactivate the process and to be effective. Till this moment, its’ not effective. Why? Because the United States is not serious in achieving any political solution. They want to use it as an umbrella for the terrorists, or they want to get in this forum what they didn’t get on the ground in the battlefield. That’s why it wasn’t effective at all. Now, it’s the same situation, we don’t see this administration serious in that regard, because they still support the same terrorists. So, we can say yes, it could be reactivated, but we cannot say we expect it to be effective or productive. No.
Question 23: After six years, Mr. President, aren’t you tired?
President Assad: Actually, the only thing that could make pressure on you is not the political situation, not the military situation; actually the human situation in Syria, the daily blood-letting, the daily blood-shedding, the suffering and the hardship that inflicted every house in Syria, this is the only painful thing that could make you feel tired- if it is accurate to say “tired”- while if you talk about the war, about the politics, about the relation with the West, no, I don’t feel tired at all, because we are defending our country, and we’re not going to get tired at all in that regard.
Question 24: What makes you lose sleep?
President Assad: Again, the suffering of the Syrian people. The humanitarian interaction between me and every Syrian family directly or indirectly, this is the only thing that could deprive me from sleep from time to time, but not the Western statements and not the threat of the support of the terrorists.
Question 25: Today, there are people from Foua’a and Kefraya who will move from their village to Damascus and to Aleppo. You are not afraid that in fact it will be a displacement of population, that the Syria after the war will not be the same Syria as before?
President Assad: The displacement in that context is compulsory. We didn’t choose it. We wish that everyone could stay in his village and his city, but those people like many other civilians in different areas were surrounded and besieged by the terrorists, and they’ve been killed on daily basis, so they had to leave. But of course they’re going to go back to their cities after the liberation; that happened in many other areas where the people are going back to their homes. So, it’s temporary. Talking about demographic changes is not in the sake or in the interest of the Syrian society when it’s permanent. As long as it’s temporary, we wouldn’t worry about it.
Journalist: Mr. President, I want to thank you very much for this interview.
President Assad: Thank you.
Journalist: It was very interesting, and thank you very much for talking with me.
President Assad: Thank you.
Trump’s apparent change of heart and the seemingly chaotic and unpredictable moves he made starting from bombing a Syrian airbase took many people by surprise – including me , in fact. For a while, I had been trying to figure out what the man was thinking – *really* thinking when he decided to pull the trigger on Syria. Sure, he made these vapid statements about the “beautiful babies”, but, that’s probably just for show; that’s for the consumption of his American base. That doesn’t strike me as the reasoning that a billion-dollar rich real estate mogul – a cynical cutthroat son of a bitch type who would dominate the cesspit of the New York real estate market, would make.
First of all, what follows is merely an analysis I have made given specific assumptions and speculations given those assumptions. Therefore, please give this article no more weight than you would a run-of-the-mill Alex Jones conspiracy theory.
To get this out of the way, it *might* be entirely possible that everything we’ve seen so far has NOT been stage play, and Trump really *is* a soft, gullible moron who is now under the beck and call of the Neocon not by the usual “I’ve got you by the balls” sort of power-play, but because they know exactly how to play his gullibility like a fiddle. In both former cases, the difference in outcome would probably not be much different.
[Sidebar: But if we would make any comparison, for example, with Obama, sometimes a man’s principle, or perhaps personality, like cowardice, could still play as a limiting factor even under duress – what with Obama never ever having the gall to actually attack Syria directly, during his entire two terms. Whereas it took Trump only 3 months to overtly crater a Syrian airbase. Either way, both have done their part, in their own way, to destabilize Syria.]
Now, if Trump was NOT a dump, gullible moron, why has he seemingly betrayed every single principle he has stood for during election? Why has he betrayed maybe 50% or so of his electorate? This is a difficult question to answer, especially if you, like me believe(/d) one specific thing: that Trump was not lying when he said he would put America First, that he would Make America Great Again. So that will be one of the assumptions I will be working with during this analysis. Trump was not lying. If that is the case, then why would he go against his very campaign platform – the very reason he was chosen by the American people over Clinton, if he was not simply doing it to pull the wool over the eyes of Americans to gain power? The speculation, therefore, that attaches to this assumption, is that these actions are part and parcel of “America First” and “Make America Great Again”.
I have been thinking about it in this line for a while now, actually, and I kept coming in blank; I could not, in my mind, think of a way to connect throwing away a good relationship with Russia, bogging down the US in another Middle East conflict with “Keeping America Safe” as one of the campaign taglines went. And then, just today, it hit me – Trillions of dollars in debt. Immediately, in my mind, came what seemed to have been a pretty innocuous interview with Trump, explaining his several policy 180s, essentially, that it was much harder to be President than he thought. What, I thought, if we took this line at face value?
What if Trump has come to the conclusion that it was impossible to revive, or, hell, even rescue, America’s economy from imploding from trillions of dollars in debt? That is, impossible except for one way – a miracle. Specifically, the miracle of World War II. In the midst of a crippling depression, it seemed as if America’s entry into the greatest war in the history of mankind immediately precipitated nothing short of an economic resurrection. Of course, the details are a bit more complex than that, but that is how the layman understands it. And that, I believe, might also be how Trump understands it.
So, given all of the assumptions of speculations above – what is Trump’s game? I believe he was not lying and he really does want to “Make America Great Again”. I speculate that he has instead come to a terrifying conclusion – no amount of harassing US companies, or wall-building, or tax reforming can save the US economy now. There is only one path left – the last remaining path to making America great again lies in destabilizing as much of the world as possible. Leveraging the Military-Industrial Complex to carry most of the weight of the economy, Trump will make a fevered pitch for conflict all across the world, as we see today – Syria, Afghanistan, North Korea, what’s next? Perhaps he will soon be bombing Africa again, who knows? But all this serves one purpose – to get people to buy weapons, American weapons lots of it. Just as in the second World War, which say America essentially strip Europe of all its wealth by being the arms dealer (as well as selling consumer goods), Trump might *NEED* the same miracle just to keep the US economy from collapsing – and the country, from dying. Of course, Trump is no fool – he knows that if he oversteps himself, and the nukes start flying, it’s game over.
So here is my prediction, given the analysis presented above, for the foreseeable Trump presidency (maybe a year? a few months?) destabilizing (as openly said by Sean Spicer) all the world’s traditional hotspots: Middle East, North Korea and I suspect some place in Africa is next (except Libya – that’s already a given). I predict that we will straddle the line extremely closely between cold war and Armageddon, and whether or not we actually enter it would depend much more on luck than real intent.
– /sg/ War Intel
/sg/ Syria General 