Monday, October 8, 2012

Turkey continues attacks- The madness behind the methodology

The mention of NATO mortars supplied to NATO mercs via Turkey
This is not "responsive" fire. This is Turkey attacking Syria.
The attacking has continued and is ongoing as this news is posted
Notice in the brief video, Turkey is flying over Iraq and striking "targets"?
Where is the condemnation?
The article below is a must read-
From Gulf News originally from Washington Post Delusion of a limited Strike

The madness behind the methodology?

The scale of such an operation is bound to be much larger than its proponents have suggested. I conducted an open-source analysis to estimate the requirements for establishing command of the air over Syria. The study shows that the effort could require about 200 strike aircraft and more than 100 support aircraft for only the first waves of strikes, making a Syrian intervention many times larger than the opening phase of Nato’s recent air war over Libya. After that, there is a high probability that the operation would develop into providing close air support for rebel forces. This new phase of the military operation would require a further escalation of force numbers and resources. 
Interventionists have pressed for a partial no-fly zone between Aleppo and the Turkish border.  ( Attacks from Hatay Province comes to mind)

 A US-backed intervention along these lines, most recently advocated by Qatar and Nato allies France and Turkey, would unfold in two major phases.
The first, establishing a no-fly zone, would require a sustained effort to degrade Syrian air defences in order to achieve command of the air. While dense and overlapping, Syria’s strategic air defences present few serious challenges for western air power. Most of the equipment consists of ageing Soviet-designed surface-to-air missile systems that Nato either destroyed or countered with relative ease in previous interventions over Kosovo and Libya. Because many of these older systems are relatively immobile, it is likely they could be eliminated quickly using an initial barrage of cruise missiles launched from naval vessels in the Mediterranean Sea, in combination with an early wave of air strikes.
 But the Syrian systems have recently been augmented with more advanced and capable Russian designs, including the Buk-M2E and Pantsyr-S1. These and other mobile air defences pose a larger threat. Should Syria’s mobile air defences survive initial strikes, they could quickly complicate efforts to use air power to defend a safe zone from attacks by Al Assad’s ground forces. Recent upgrades to US aircraft targeting systems may mitigate these concerns, but Syrian air defence operators might still find ways to pose persistent risks to coalition aircraft. If so, they would hamper efforts to locate and hit ground targets and might make any campaign much longer and slower than interventionists anticipate.

A no-fly zone would also require destroying enough of Syria’s most capable combat aircraft on the ground to deter Syrian pilots from challenging the zone. My study found that initial strikes would require destroying more than 450 targets, including at least 22 early-warning radar sites and command-and-control facilities, 150 surface-to-air missile batteries, 27 surface-to-surface missile batteries, 12 anti-ship missile batteries, 32 airfield targets and more than 200 hardened aircraft shelters. This could require dropping more than 1,600 munitions over hundreds of sorties in the opening days of strikes and could drag on much longer should mobile targets prove difficult to find, which is all but guaranteed. Advocates of a partial no-fly zone imply that a lesser effort would be required. But even enforcing a limited zone would necessitate targeting air defences, command and control facilities and airfields as far away as south of Damascus due to the range of some of Syria’s static air defences. If coalition aircraft were later called upon to support a rebel offensive as in Libya, a total no-fly zone encompassing all of Syria would rapidly be required.

In the second phase, establishing a northern safe zone would require delivery of humanitarian supplies over the Turkish border. But Al Assad’s ground forces would almost certainly contest the zone using the 1,980 artillery pieces, 500 rocket launchers, and hundreds of mortars at their disposal. These weapons contribute to the large advantage in firepower Al Assad’s forces currently enjoy over the rebels. They would surely be used against a safe zone, were it believed tactically expedient, since the government would see the area as a launch pad for the rebel military. If so, a more robust effort would be needed to protect civilians and aid organisations.
Having declared the region a safe zone, the burden would fall on coalition aircraft. This would require moving beyond keeping Syrian aircraft out of the sky to targeting pro-regime ground forces directly and on a sustained basis. Identifying targets and directing air strikes would likely require friendly forces on the ground with the training necessary to effectively coordinate air-to-ground attack. Syrian rebels lack this training. Western special forces are the most likely candidates, meaning a US-backed intervention is unlikely to stay limited to air power alone. It would require some boots on the ground. Syrian rebels could help in forcing Assad’s troops to concentrate their firepower, thus providing attractive targets for coalition attacks from the air. But this would entail continued fighting in and around population centres, with Syrian civilians caught in the crossfire. Even in this era of highly accurate munitions, some coalition bombs inevitably would fall on civilians. Assuming Western air power succeeded in defending a northern safe zone from Al Assad’s forces, this would still leave the regime free to continue its assaults in Homs, Damascus and elsewhere.
Syria’s humanitarian crisis would continue to worsen until rebels could organise for significant offensive action. While rebel forces are substantial, they remain fragmented. Interventionists hope a safe zone will provide a base for them to organise. But if rebels struggled to form a cohesive force capable of offense, pressure to escalate to strategic bombing against regime targets in Damascus would become intense. What started as a limited humanitarian operation in the north would end with the West playing the role of rebel air force — this time all the way to Damascus. Stalemate will inevitably produce wider calls for intervention, but for outside powers seeking to end Syria’s civil war, there is no limited option.

Reading this reinforces the thought that war is insanity and only the psychophathic make these types of plans. The ordinary Syrians that will be killed..... it is utterly appalling to think about.
Does it enter the deluded minds of the war mongers? The death purveyors? These grim reapers?
Or is humanity that expendable to them?



  2. Hi Penny,

    I'm sorry to tell you that I think your final question can be answered by asking another very simple question:

    How much remorse or sadness do you feel when you step on and kill some ants in your yard?

    I think the answer is the same. Little or none.

    The globalist elite psychopaths do not view any of us as being any more valuable than ants or "worker bees", in their view of the world.

    They have no empathy or compassion - and this includes not only dirt-poor Somalians, Syrians or Palestinians - it includes ALL of us, even those of us in the USA, UK, Canada and all of the supposedly "developed" nations.

    Whether we live or die makes very little difference in terms of their big plans. In fact, a great number of us are going to have to die in order for their grand designs to be possible.

    So, I guess we should just learn to accept it and "not take it personally", right??

    Because you know, they just don't see any of us as "human" or having any real value as far as they are concerned - them being as "enlightened masters", or whatever bullshit delusion it is they cling to, in seeing themselves as being better and smarter than the rest of us, and therefore worthy to dominate and control us and every aspecr of our trivial lives.

    Spiritually, there is a very high price to pay for their hatred and indifference - the ultimate price - and their final justice will come one day, just as it will for each of us.

    One very beautiful day - or a horrible day - depending on the condition of your soul.

    1. A good description of Assad, as he unleashes heavy weaponry and barrels of tnt on his hapless citizens.

    2. I think you meant "unleashes heavy weaponry on" ... thousands of non-Syrian Jihadists FOREIGNERS who have been financed, trained and armed by the US/CIA/NATO, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Turkey and the list goes on.

      Very few of the "FSA rebels" are Syrian, were born in Syria or have ever lived in Syria - other than right now, as they were brought in as Mujahideen from many other places, as far away as Kosovo and Chechnya.

    3. Your analysis is based entirely on your weakness for fallacious pro Assad propaganda. Even the Iranians have acknowledged the popularity of the opposition to Assad's Regime.
      "Iran's foreign minister, Ali Akbar Salehi, yesterday repeated Iran's offer to host talks between the Syrian government and the rebels, calling for "national dialogue between the [Syrian] opposition, which has popular support, and the Syrian government to establish calm and security".

      Mr Salehi's remarks appeared an attempt by Tehran to hedge its bets, in the hope that a post-Assad Syria would not be hostile to Iran's interests."

      Even your anti Imperialist mates of The Socialist Workers Online say "The revolution in Syria is rooted in popular uprising"
      To the misguided likes of the frquent posters here they have this to say. "Those in the Western left who allow a reflexive and unthinking “anti-imperialism” to set them against the Syrian revolution are simply confessing their own bankruptcy."

    4. Well, at least you weren't too rude about it, so I appreciate that. I think that obviously neither of us have ALL of the facts to be 100% certain, so we will have to agree to disagree on what we believe is actually happening in Syria.

      Personally, I can't imagine any possible way that if there were a sincere popular uprising with noble objectives, that there would ALSO be such an intense, focused and blatant CIA destabilization campaign at the exact same time, if you get my meaning. They are not separare events, or coincidences.

      And when you combine the intense involvement of the CIA and MI-6, along with Saudi, Qatari, Turkish and French intel agency actions to provide financing, training, arming and transport of the most radical jihadist terrorists from many locations - Libya, Kosovo, Chechnya, Egypt, Iraq, etc - with hundreds of million$$$ in weapons and NATO sat-comm gear, well, then, sir, you have something MUCH different than a simple "popular uprising" in Syria.

      Not many people believe Assad is a wonderful person to live in power under, but the issue here is whether the criminals (US/CIA/NATO) and terrorist thugs (such as the "FSA" / al-Qaeda [controlled by CIA] and other Mujahideen splinter groups involved - are something far worse than the "brutal Assad regime" is to begin with.

      Anyone who truly believes that NATO and a radical Jihadist government in Syria would be a better way of life for the Syrian people (who are multi-ethnic and know very well they would be slaughtered under a radical terrorist regime) is seriously naive and/or deluding themselves.

      There is no improvement to be made for the good people of Syria by forcing this globalist elite NATO "humanitarian bombing intervention" on their nation, removing their elected leader, Assad, and replacing him with...WHO AND WHAT EXACTLY??

      Yeah, that's the problem. Which leads me back to my original point, which is that this entire operation is highly planned, staged and designed by outside foreign powers (US, NATO, Saudi, Qatar, et al) as a multi-pronged assymetrical warfare (psychological, ecnonomic and guerilla/terrorist/mercenary warfare) against the sovereign nation of Syria (including the slaughter of innocents to cause fear), to produce a "regime change" in the process.

      This, of course, is a violation of international law, to foment or conspire to effect any coup d'etat of a sovereign foreign power. It is also a violation of numberous US laws, not to mention NATO's own useless charter. But this is exactly what they are doing.

      Another hint, probably the biggest one, that what is happening in Syria is NOT what we are being told in the globalist mass media, is the fact that we are simply only allowed to hear one side of the story, and you can probably guess which side that is - the globalist approved side - US (including our al-Qaeda NATO mercenaries = GOOD, Assad "Regime" = BAD.

      It's just far too obvious for any intelligent and aware person to accept that kind of bullshit. Especially if you're someone like me, who has studied these psychological warfare patterns in mass media in several previous wars, including Yugoslavia, as a prime example of blatant one-sided propaganda and the "one hero / one victim" narrative, just to keep it simple enough for the idiot masses.

      You're welcome to your views and opinions, but I'd say beware of any "popular uprising" that has the CIA involved, because those have a remarkable track record of going horribly wrong and ending with thousands of innocent civilians butchered in the streets, one way or another. A few examples being, Iran, Iraqi Kurds, Bay of Pigs, etc.

      Either way it goes, none of this is any good for the decent, innocent human beings in Syria, and I pray for their safety and peace for their troubled nation.

    5. The Assad Regime has in fact become so BAD, that former loyalists have defected in disgust at Assad's criminal actions. Here is one of Assad's ex-propagandists, who should know what he is talking about. He isn't the first defecting Syrian to say that Assad has criminally staged bombings to convince the Syrian people they are under attack from terrorists. You are backing a Regime that has lost all legitimacy to rule the Syrian people Ludwig.

    6. "So, I guess we should just learn to accept it and "not take it personally", right??"

      I know your being facetious LVB, the day humanity accepts that will be the day humanity is completely done for

      Let that day never come

    7. "anonymous"

      could you bolster your fallacious claims somehow?
      Is it possible?

      "A good description of Assad, as he unleashes heavy weaponry and barrels of tnt on his hapless citizens"

      Any "hapless" citizens appear to suffered at the hands of NATO mercs

      'Your analysis is based entirely on your weakness for fallacious pro Assad propaganda."

      Where would one find pro-Assad propaganda via NATO media

      How many "former loyalists" according to you have defected and can you prove the veracity of their loyalty?
      How much money was paid to the defectors?

      Having written 300 posts on the Syrian situation, there seems to be no truth, fact or logic in any of your statements.

      As for the NATO plan of mass strikes, since you are so concerned about Syrians being killed...
      Let your feelings be known to NATO, these strikes will ensure mass scale slaughter

      But, your ok with that right?

      The myth of "killing to save"

    8. The myth of "killing to save" was ironically used by Dr Assad, who excused himself for having blood on his hands while he operated to save his patient Syria.

      "When a surgeon in an operating room … cuts and cleans and amputates, and the wound bleeds, do we say to him your hands are stained with blood?"
      —Syrian President Bashar Assad.

    9. Anonymous 5:34 am

      could you provide a link for that quote, so I can check the context in which this alleged quote if true, was used

      You see I like to see claims substantiated...

    10. "We will not be lenient. We will be forgiving only for those who renounce terrorism. ... When a surgeon in an operating room cuts and cleans and amputates, and the wound bleeds, do we say to him, 'Your hands are stained with blood?' Or do we thank him for saving the patient? ... Today we are defending a cause and a country. We do not do this because we like blood. A battle has been forced on us, and the result is this bloodshed that we are seeing."

      Entire quote in context to ridding Syria of NATO mercs
      Why do you support terrorism in a sovereign nation?
      Why do you support mercs killing and ethnically cleansing Syrians?
      Why do you support the destabilization of nations?
      Is it just rampant NATO propaganda that has skewed your thought processes?

    11. You have spent over 5 hours at my blog!
      Seriously, do you get paid to spread NATO propaganda,as if there isn't enough of it to be had.
      Do you do it on Israel's behalf?
      Just curious.

    12. To call the majority of people fighting the Assad Regime NATO mercs is disingenuous to say the least. The movement against Assad and his minority government is large and widespread to such a degree that you could say his Regime has a terminal illness.

    13. I call them NATO mercs, because that is what they are.
      It is not disengenuous it is fact and truth
      That aspect has been reported on prolifically here
      As just one example from the article lvb linked

      "This successful strike was carried out by the Liwa’ al-Ummah Brigade, which is in fact comprised of Libyan volunteers and is openly affiliated with al-Qaeda. The British media hailed this attack as another major blow against Assad. The unasked questions are: what is an entire Libyan brigade doing in Syria? How exactly did they manage to transport themselves and their weaponry into an area supposedly subject to an embargo?

      An entire brigade of Libyan mercs

      Never mind the Brits, French, Pakistani Chechnyan, Tunisian. Turks and on and on etc
      Syrians fighting Assad are practically non existent
      Other then NATO news spin

    14. "Syrians fighting Assad are practically non existent
      Other then NATO news spin".
      What an embarrassingly stupid comment. Got any credible source to support this obviously foolish statement?

  3. Hey Penny,

    Here's another great article from Scott Taylor in there in the Great White North, eh:

    1. ty lvb

      "Were it not for the provision of arms and money from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE, it is undeniable that Assad loyalists would have suppressed the rebellion in its infancy. In the over-simplified Western propaganda, Assad is portrayed as an evil despot who must be deposed by the freedom loving, prodemocracy Syrian civilian fighters.'

      Anonymous must take all the simplistic spin to heart
      denying all the facts of the situation
      Over simplified western propaganda
      It is always the same

  4. It does make me sad to read the news and think of the thousands that will most likely suffer at the hand of these psychopaths.

    But it's hard to watch the RT video presentation without laughing. Is this real? I see some dudes haphazardly running around ineffectively shooting their weapons in random directions. Then they show us some smoke and confusing pictures of buildings and what appears to be "border area" type shots. The reporter from Tel Aviv doesn't really explain what we're seeing and doesn't have first hand evidence. They show a map of Turkey and Syria and some marks on it and then go through the official story line.

    Not much of a report. Not that there is anything better. I don't trust any reporting anymore. Who knows what's happening.

    I love how the report is titled "Fog of War."

    I was finally able to open SANA and I don't see any mention of the border shelling with Turkey. This is very odd. Nor have I seen many direct statements from high ranking Syrian officials. Funny how we never get to hear their voices when a big controversy like this erupts but Hillary Clinton is first out of the gates snarling.

    On SANA there is an article on a diplomatic ratcheting up of words though:

    "The information Minister advised the Turkish government to step down in favor of figures that are accepted by the Turkish people, which would benefit Turkey.

    He stressed that the Turkish government must stop destroying the future of the Turkish people, noting that Turkey's weight has decreased greatly under the current government."

    So Turkey is getting a bit more aggressive and using the same logic Turkey and the West have used against them--throwing it right back in Turkey's face. How long before Syria also demands a buffer zone within Turkey and demands the right to enter Turkey to destroy any threats?

    Very odd we aren't allowed to see Syria's official response to the shelling and are only getting vague media bullshit.

    1. Hey WWM

      but we live in a free and democratic society right? ;)

  5. @AnonymousOctober 8, 2012 7:50 PM

    Iran has always said it prefers dialogue among opposition groups. By opposition they mean internal opposition not NATO/FUKUS mercenaries. I see you quote from an article of a paper in the UAE. I would take this with a pinch of salt my friend.

    1. Hey hans

      btw I am reading that book, can't tell you how far along I am but, interesting so far

      Anonymous likely doesn't realize there are internal opposition as well as NATO mercs
      Anonymous likely doesn't realize that the internal opposition has NOT wanted intervention in Syria and have talked on several occasions with Russia and China

      See "simplistic" propaganda reference

  6. 'Notice in the brief video, Turkey is flying over Iraq and striking "targets"?
    Where is the condemnation?'

    where is the NO-FLY zone! where is UNSC....where is everybody?

    1. Well Turkey is backed by NATO...
      the one world army so...

      Everybody (psycho bullies) is simply standing behind Turkey

  7. no wonder 'anonymous' is anonymous

    amazing how the allah akbah muslims commit every sin in the book convinced that no matter what their destination is paradise

    1. Anonymous is a troll from New zealand who has not crossed the line... yet
      But, given time?
      It will happen

  8. Can anyone shed some light as to why the RT commentator who is based in Israel is commenting about Syria? is RT trying to say it is too dangerous for their staff to be based in Syria?

    1. She does say "what we've witnessed now is five days of increasing conflict along the Turkish-Syrian border . . ." so maybe she just flew in from the border?

      Her arms do look a bit tired.

  9. Hi Hans, don't know why she is in Israel?
    can't help you, sorry