Former CIA Officer: "The Intelligence Confirms The Russian Account On Syria"

[Frank Cannon]

Topic: Former CIA Officer: "The Intelligence Confirms The Russian Account On Syria"

form·er1
ˈfôrmər/
adjective
adjective: former

    1.
    having previously filled a particular role or been a particular thing.
    "her former boyfriend"
    synonyms:   one-time, erstwhile, sometime, ex-, late; More
    previous, foregoing, preceding, earlier, prior, past, last
    "the former bishop"
    antonyms:   future, next
        of or occurring in the past or an earlier period.
        "in former times"
        synonyms:   earlier, old, past, bygone, olden, long-ago, gone by, long past, of old; literaryof yore
        "in former times"
        antonyms:   future, present
    2.
    denoting the first or first mentioned of two people or things.
    "those who take the former view"
    synonyms:   first-mentioned, first
    "the former of the two"

[bigheadfred]

It's the next gas attack that's going to be the problem. That could be either of them (I'd say 85% ISIS, 10% Assad chancing it, 5% rebels).

What is the state of affairs when you can make that statement as a foregone conclusion? These people suck. All of them.

[TomSea]

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446504/syria-gas-attack-us-response-military-russia-isis-obama

Again, I believe we are told ISIS nor Al Qaeda were in this area; this gassing likely had nothing to do with AQ or ISIS.  We might be able to say as easily it was some other group.  But this was likely a one-off, slapping the ruler on the knuckles of both the Syrian Regime and Russia.

I think all of this really hurts Putin, he won't be able to enjoy the support at home when it seems to be proven that Russia has looked the other way per what the Syrian Regime has done.

One might remember, Syria is a country that is largely controlled by different groups in different areas. It looks like this strike was in the rebel area once again showing ISIS is not being fought that much by Putin and Assad.

[TomSea]

I think we are told too, this was a Sarin gas attack that might have even had an uncommon neuro-agent in addition, making it more likely that the poisonous gas was made by someone who knew what they were doing in an industrial complex.

Mosul has had mustard gas attacks, I don't think mustard gas is nearly as deadly, this is what has raised eyebrows as well; this was a more dangerous attack.



https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3286709/is-this-the-proof-syrian-butcher-bashar-al-assad-ordered-chemical-weapons-attack-on-syrian-women-and-children/

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,257614.0.html

[don-o]

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446504/syria-gas-attack-us-response-military-russia-isis-obama

Again, I believe we are told ISIS nor Al Qaeda were in this area; this gassing likely had nothing to do with AQ or ISIS.  We might be able to say as easily it was some other group.  But this was likely a one-off, slapping the ruler on the knuckles of both the Syrian Regime and Russia.

I think all of this really hurts Putin, he won't be able to enjoy the support at home when it seems to be proven that Russia has looked the other way per what the Syrian Regime has done.

One might remember, Syria is a country that is largely controlled by different groups in different areas. It looks like this strike was in the rebel area once again showing ISIS is not being fought that much by Putin and Assad.

It is an absolute humiliation for Russia. They could not shoot down our incoming (had they done so the wreckage would be all over the internets). They are exposed as being either blatant violators of PG conventions or bumbling incompetents off the possibility they were sincere in their commitment to clean up the situation.

[geronl]

Just because the incident happened in rebel-controlled territory doesn't mean Assad did it.

[truth_seeker]

Amb. John Bolton said the borders of Syria and Iraq date to WWI, but are no longer meaningful.

[Smokin Joe]

I think we are told too, this was a Sarin gas attack that might have even had an uncommon neuro-agent in addition, making it more likely that the poisonous gas was made by someone who knew what they were doing in an industrial complex.

Mosul has had mustard gas attacks, I don't think mustard gas is nearly as deadly, this is what has raised eyebrows as well; this was a more dangerous attack.



https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3286709/is-this-the-proof-syrian-butcher-bashar-al-assad-ordered-chemical-weapons-attack-on-syrian-women-and-children/

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,257614.0.html

To start, a CRS Summary report on weapons and effects. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/R42862.pdf
In the most recent attack, victims involved and shown on television did not show the characteristic skin lesions of mustard agents or Lewisite, so it is likely they can be eliminated from consideration. I am sure if there had been hideous lesions they would have been publicized. 
FYI
Characteristics of Blister Agents
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blister_agent

That leaves chlorine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorine (and other pulmonary agents) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulmonary_agent ,

blood agents such as cyanide, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_agent ,

and nerve agents. https://sis.nlm.nih.gov/enviro/chemicalwarfare.html

Nerve Agent Characteristics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent

If we look at past events in the region, (and I will include Iraqi uses of WMD for fairly obvious reasons), considering the likely disposition of at least some of those chemical agents.
In 1988:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/16/newsid_4304000/4304853.stm

1988: Thousands die in Halabja gas attack
Thousands of people are reported to have been killed and many others injured in a poison gas attack on a Kurdish city in northern Iraq.

Up to 20 aircraft, said to include Iraqi Migs and Mirages, were seen overhead at around 1100 local time in Halabja.

According to experts, the chemicals dropped by the planes may have included mustard gas, the nerve agents sarin, tabun and VX and possibly cyanide.

The attack on Halabja, which is about 150 miles (241km) north-east of the Iraqi capital Baghdad, is the latest in the Iran-Iraq war and follows its occupation by Iranian forces.

http://elibrary.law.psu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1133&context=psilr



ISIL chemical attacks on Kurds (AlJazeera)
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2015/08/ugly-threat-isil-chemical-weapons-syria-iraq-kurds-150819124716038.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=916pCbvbl6g

[LonestarDream]

Dunno about you, but I prefer my intelligence analysis from someone who didn't lose their access to classified intel back when Bill Clinton was sworn in.

But, hey, that's just me. 

Experience counts.  Like the things you witnessed in Iraq.

[Smokin Joe]

Amb. John Bolton said the borders of Syria and Iraq date to WWI, but are no longer meaningful.

From http://lostislamichistory.com/how-the-british-divided-up-the-arab-world/ How the British Divided Up the Arab World

>snip< Which side won? None fully got what they wanted. In the aftermath of WWI, the League of Nations (a forerunner to the United Nations) was established. One of its jobs was to divide up the conquered Ottoman lands. It drew up “mandates” for the Arab world.

Each mandate was supposed to be ruled by the British or French “until such time as they are able to stand alone.”
The League was the one to draw up the borders we see on modern political maps of the Middle East. The borders were drawn without regard for the wishes of the people living there, or along ethnic, geographic, or religious boundaries – they were truly arbitrary. It is important to note that even today, political borders in the Middle East do not indicate different groups of people. The differences between Iraqis, Syrians, Jordanians, etc. were entirely created by the European colonizers as a method of dividing the Arabs against each other.

The bolded part of the quote is a grievance I have heard from people from the region.

[LonestarDream]

ZeroHedge is a libertarian site, that is largely against foreign adventures.

They are often ahead of the curve and usually well sourced.

Ted Cruz
Tom Cotton
Oliver North

Additionally, I haven't seen any info that Laura Ingraham was against it.

Against Bombing:

David Duke
Richard Spencer
Alex Jones
Richard Parry, Consortium News
Zero Hedge

 

[LonestarDream]

 - infra red signatures of the bombs being dropped, lack of sufficient high explosive damage at the target site
- photos taken in the aftermath of the tomahawking of the airbase that clearly show binary agent munition

Have not seen any evidence of these things, just 'trust me' hearsay. 

And ISIS recently used Chroline like gas in Mosul.  Similar symptoms as what happened in Mosul...

And as others who have examined the video of the attack have pointed out, the first responders should have fallen Ill if a nerve agent would have been employed. 

[TomSea]

ZeroHedge is a libertarian site, that is largely against foreign adventures.

They are often ahead of the curve and usually well sourced.

We can consider wikipedia unreliable but I'd still place them over Zero:

Zero Hedge is an English-language financial blog that aggregates news and presents editorial opinions from original and outside sources. The news portion of the site is written by a group of editors who collectively write under the pseudonym "Tyler Durden" (a character from the novel and film Fight Club).

Zero Hedge's content has been classified as conspiratorial, anti-establishment, and economically pessimistic,[3] and has been criticized for presenting extreme and sometimes pro-Russian views.[1][4][5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge

[TomSea]

Dr. Craig Pirrong, professor at the Bauer College of Business writes that "I have frequently written that Zero Hedge has the MO of a Soviet agitprop operation, that it reliably peddles Russian propaganda: my first post on this, almost exactly three years ago, noted the parallels between Zero Hedge and Russia Today."[18]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge

[LonestarDream]

One person's opinion.  Have been following ZeroHedge for 12 years.  Very little about Russia specifically is written.  The site is more concerned about liberty, economic freedom and publishing various opinions to support the same.

So there is Rand/Ron Paul streak there that is always against the fiscal burdens war and the distortions of the economy that funding a giant war machine causes. 

[LonestarDream]

We can consider wikipedia unreliable but I'd still place them over Zero:

Wikipedia, PBS, BBC, snopes .  These outlets are known biased against conservatism.   

[Sanguine]

Pirrong is an interesting fellow:

April 9, 2017
Down the Syrian Rabbit Hole
Filed under: China,History,Military,Politics,Russia — The Professor @ 12:15 pm

The Syria story has many threads. I’ll address a few of them here.

First, to follow on Ex-Regulator’s comment: Trump’s initial public justification for the strike–the humanitarian impulse stirred by pictures of dying children–is deeply troubling. Sentimentality is a poor basis for policy. In particular, it has no limiting principle. If you take a tragic view of humanity–if you view mankind as fallen and flawed–you know that there is a virtually unending supply of sad, heartbreaking, stories. So how does a president choose which appeal to answer? And how do people know which appeals he will answer? Truth is, we have no idea. The line will be arbitrary, which leads to unpredictable, inconsistent policy.

Further, as Ex-Reg notes, by emphasizing his susceptibility to sentimentality, Trump makes himself a target for manipulation. These manipulations are likely to include false flags whereby those attempting to get the US to intervene on their side create an outrage to pin on their opponents: it cannot be precluded that this occurred in Syria last week.

Second, in subsequent remarks by others than Trump, the administration has downplayed the humanitarian aspect, and emphasized the signaling motivation. Moreover, it has explicitly stated that the signal was not directed at Assad alone, or even Putin and Assad, but also at Kim Jung Un and the Chinese.

My concern here is the Rolling Thunder problem: the signal that you think you are sending through a limited use of force is not necessarily the signal that your intended audience hears. What happened in Vietnam during the Johnson years was that graduated escalation was interpreted by Ho Chi Minh et al as weakness, and as an unwillingness to take decisive action. Assad or Kim Jung Rolly Poly may conclude that they can easily absorb a strike like the one launched Thursday night, and that Trump may not be willing to go much further. Or, they may conclude that (a) this strike was so modest, (b) Trump is likely to engage in graduated escalation if he escalates at all, and (c) they can absorb much heavier blows. Either way, they could be encouraged, rather than deterred...

http://streetwiseprofessor.com/

[TomSea]

Wikipedia, PBS, BBC, snopes .  These outlets are known biased against conservatism.

That's still better than basically broadcasting propaganda for a closed-state (as graded by Freedom House) like Russia and where whenever there is Russian wrongdoing, there is always some excuse, coup in Ukraine, jet shot down over Ukraine,  a country as Russia is where journalists and opposition politicians are gunned down.  There is no freedom of the press in Russia or little of it.  Why take their view when once again Zero Hedge or Consortium News are airing pro-Russian pieces?

[TomSea]

Pirrong is an interesting fellow:

I'll bookmark the blog, it looks interesting.

[LonestarDream]

Pirrong is an interesting fellow:

Very good post.  False flags are part of the complexity of what has to be dealt with.

Whether we like it or not.  Will note that the area bombed was rebel, not ISIS.

That would tend to argue AGAINST false flag.  So more evidence would help in the evaluation of this situation.

[LonestarDream]

That's still better than basically broadcasting propaganda for a closed-state (as graded by Freedom House) like Russia and where whenever there is Russian wrongdoing, there is always some excuse, coup in Ukraine, jet shot down over Ukraine,  a country as Russia is where journalists and opposition politicians are gunned down.  There is no freedom of the press in Russia or little of it.  Why take their view when once again Zero Hedge or Consortium News are airing pro-Russian pieces?

They are not pro Russian pieces.  You are projecting and imputing things that are not there.

[LonestarDream]

The alternative explanation for the chemical attack–a false flag–hardly provides any cover for Obama and the Obamaites because that would mean that the chemical attack was launched by opposition forces that the administration supported. So, either the administration entered into a farcical deal, and was played the fool by Assad, or it was played the fool by anti-Assad forces whom it had supported.

REALLY good article @Sanguine

It even brings up the @don-o doctrine. 

[Sanguine]

The alternative explanation for the chemical attack–a false flag–hardly provides any cover for Obama and the Obamaites because that would mean that the chemical attack was launched by opposition forces that the administration supported. So, either the administration entered into a farcical deal, and was played the fool by Assad, or it was played the fool by anti-Assad forces whom it had supported.

REALLY good article @Sanguine

It even brings up the @don-o doctrine.

Thanks, I thought so too.

[TomSea]

@LonestarDream
Let's see Zero Hedge report on major news stories, if they are like the BBC and make no errors, then there is no problem but as it is, it's all of this conspiratorial and psyops stuff, there is nothing wrong with this but I don't see what is wrong with using the BBC if they are reporting on a fire, a plane crash and so on.

Zero Hedge really isn't in that kind of news reporting, it's about tossing out nothing but speculation, conspiracy theory and so on.

So, I think making such comparisons are not the best.

[geronl]

scroll down to the list.

both sides have used gas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_chemical_weapons_in_the_Syrian_civil_war