From Russia Insider:
In a statement given on Friday morning in Moscow, Russia's Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that the US missile strikes against Syria were planned well in advance of the alleged "gas attack" in Idlib province on Tuesday.
According to Zakharova:
It is obvious that these missile strikes were planned before. For every expert it is obvious that this decision was made well in advance and before the Idlib events.
She also says that recent events in Syria are being used as a distraction as the US carries out deadly airstrikes in Mosul.
Read the rest here.
11 comments:
Truly, I have no idea what to believe on this anymore. I can't tell the bad guys from the good guys, and I am positive this is how most Americans feel. Who can tell??? One says this and one says that. All I do know is Christians are always the victims of violence in the Middle East and around the world.
God help us!
Kathleen:
I'm afraid it is very simple. The "bad guys" are - without question - the Americans, Israelis and Saudis. The good guys, also without any doubt, are Syria, Russia and Iran, all fighting to save the last decent leader in the Middle East, a man who is Muslim but protects his Christians. Assad is not a villain by any stretch.
There are many articles on this blog which support these conclusions. Feel free to browse through them.
ap
Assad decent? Decent leaders do not deploy chemical weapons and cluster bombs against civilians including women and children. He does provide a measure of protection for Christians, That alone does not excuse his war crimes.
Russia and Iran are good guys? We have now entered the Twilight zone. Russia has invaded its neighbours and seized territory (Georgia and Ukraine). Iran is perhaps the world's biggest instigator, funder and champion of Islamic terror. Russia publicly stated that Assad surrendered his chemical weapon stockpile. Putin was lying, or was deceived by the "decent leader" Assad. I have not seen any denunciation of the Syrian war crime by the so called "good guys."
.
The fact that the American navy was able to launch a cruise missile attack on Syria on short notice simply demonstrates the professionalism and preparedness of the US armed services. The Syrian chemical weapons attack was launched by aircraft from the air base that the US president hit with the cruise missiles. There is little doubt that US warships have the coordinates in their weapons systems of the main possible Syrian targets in case they are needed. In this case they were.
John the Mad, Major (Canadian Forces ret'd.)
None of this Syria drama is surprising, when you see who has the ear of the President: The indispensable son-in-law, Jared Kushner.
Once again the U.S. is drawn into a conflict while those innocent Israelis stand in the corner with their finger in their mouth and act as if they do not know anything.
I had a small hope that the Tribe would be sidelined for awhile, after Trump was elected. I was wrong, wrong, wrong.
They continue their demonic machinations unabated.
A few days ago was the 100th anniversary of the American declaration of war against the Central Powers of WWI. Catholic hating Woodrow Wilson was impatient to get involved in that world tragedy but he waited until his handlers delivered the required public opinion influencing tools. 'Remember the Lusitiania', like 'remember the Maine' was used to good effect and millions of young Americans were eagerly marching off to 'make the world safe for democracy'. I thought Trump had more integrity and a little more imagination than to use worn-out ploys like fake gas attacks to provide the excuse he needed to obey his Zionist masters.
It's a pathetic sham, and the world knows it.
John the Mad:
When you can supply me with proof, after an international investigation, that Assad was stupid enough to "gas" his own people, I will listen to your arguments. Otherwise, I suggest you avail yourself of the internet and investigate ALL sides to this story.
The same applies to your descriptions of Mr Putin and Mr Assad. Show me the evidence.
Aged Parent:
Let's see if we can narrow our areas of disagreement.
1) Do you agree that President Putin (a former KGB general) ordered Russian troops to invade, and that he continues to occupy, Crimea, parts of Eastern Ukraine and parts of Georgia? If so, do you agree that means Putin and the Russians are not really "good guys" as you assert.
2) Do you agree that it would be normal for US Navy warships deployed to an area of conflict to have had the necessary Syrian targeting data entered into their computers ready to program their cruise missiles, allowing for a swift response, if so ordered. If so, do you agree that the Russians know this and are making a false statement when they state that "For every expert it is obvious that this decision [not planning] was made well in advance and before the Idlib events."
3) Do you deny that that the Shiite Iranian clerics in control of Iran are exporting Islamic terror in support of their Islamic supremacist beliefs? If so, do you agree that you are not very credible in asserting Iranians are "good guys."
4) "The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which monitors the war using sources on the ground, could not specify whether they were Syrian or Russian planes, but said they were Sukhoi jets, which both Damascus and its ally Moscow use." [report from the Daily Mail, UK] Do you agree this is this a credible source? (We know ISIS has no air force. Surely we agree on that.)
5) Amnesty International has stated it was, "... able to authenticate more than 25 pieces of video footage shot in the aftermath of the chemical weapons attack. Some videos are of sufficient quality for experts to observe victims with pinpoint pupils, described as a classic symptom of nerve gas poisoning." Given the evidence that the attack occurred by Russian made aircraft taking off from the Shayrat airbase (the US tracks all flights in this conflict area as a matter of routine) can we agree this is the source of the attack. (I agree it may not have been Assad; it may have been the Russians. But it is more likely to be the former.)
6) Do you agree that Assad has previously dropped banned chlorine gas on his own people? The UN said he did just that in an attack on Khan Sheikhoun in the Ghouta area of Damascus on Aug. 21, 2013. It killed hundreds of people in contravention of the Geneva Conventions and the Chemical Weapons Convention to which Syria is a signatory, concluding that there was “clear and convincing evidence that surface-to-surface rockets containing the nerve agent sarin were used." You can google The Toronto Globe and Mail for info. Perhaps we can agree that this disqualifies him from being a "nice guy."
7) Do you agree that newly released photos showing piled up containers outside the damaged Shayrat aircraft shelters greatly resemble Soviet Union era containers in which the Soviets used to hold chemical weapons? (May I gently suggest you avail yourself of the internet to see the photos.)
Dear John the M:
Thanks for your additional comments.
1) No. For centuries Crimea was part of Russia until one day Nikita Kruschev decided arbitrarily to "gift" it to another nation. When the turmoil in Ukraine began a few years back - a turmoil created by the US - the Crimeans people, in an internationally monitored election, decided overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia. So, no: Putin did not "invade" Crimea.
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/why-did-russia-give-away-crimea-sixty-years-ago
2) Only if you believe that it would be appropriate for Russian military to be stationed right off the coast of New York. So, no: the US has absolutely no business being anywhere in the world looking for monsters to destroy. The unmitigated arrogance of the USA, the failing empire, believing it can police the world is every bit as disgusting as the Communists were when they occupied Russia.
3) No. You clearly have little knowledge of Iran, its history and its people. Right now Iran is helping Syria fight the fowl ISIS terrorists. Ponder that for a moment. In Iran its small population of Christians and Jews are left alone and not persecuted. Ponder that, too. Read more history, and listen less to propaganda. The demonization of Iran is a strictly Israeli project.
4) When a full, non-partisan investigation of this so-called gas attack is completed I will then determine if that was a credible source.
5) Can we agree on the source of the attack ? No. See my answer to point #4.
6) No. Why on earth would a leader trying to save his country from US/Israeli-backed terrorists take a few hours off to gas his own people ? Let us get serious, my friend. In any case, ask yourself who facilitated the removal of all chemical weapons from Syria in 2013. Don't know the answer ? (Hint: his initials are VP)
7) See my reply to #4. Let's all stop the hysteria and await a full international investigation.
Good read: http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/04/its-wmd-all-over-again-why-dont-you-see-it-.html
Aged parent,
I found your blog through Vox Cantoris.
I agree with you on everything except #1.
A little bit of history:
The Apostle St. Andrew blessed the hills on which Kiev now stands and foretold that a great city would be built upon them.
Pope St. Clement was thrown overboard and landed on the shores of Crimea.
Kiev was a thriving metropolis while Muscovy (Moscow, I.e. Russia) was a little village that no one ever heard of. The Kievan Rus' consisted of what is today Ukraine, Belarus and parts of Russia.
After the Mongol invasions in the 1200s, Kiev declined while Moscow started to grow.
After the fall of the Byzantine empire in 1453, the last Byzantine princess married Ivan, the Grand Duke of Moscow. Thus the Russian royalty styled themselves tsar and tsarina and claimed for centuries that they were the heirs of the Byzantine royalty. (Never mind the fact that there were internecine conflicts, assassinations etc of Russian royalty.)
The Crimea was part of Ukraine from the very beginning. The fact that Ukrainians and Russians settled there doesn't make it any less part of Ukraine.
Margaret
Margaret, you have probably read this story before but it is worth repeating as it gives an insight into the way Russians view themselves and the destiny of Russia. When Constantinople fell to the Muslims in 1453, a Greek monk is said to have set a dispatch to the Duke of Moscow stating;
"Two Romes have fallen, a fourth there shall not be, thou are now true ruler of all faithful Christians".
So Moscow is the "Third Rome", heir to a glorious past and promised a great future conditional on being of service to Christianity.
Quite a good 'myth' to believe in! It served the Russian state and the Tsars well. Any territorial expansion could be explained as the necessary work of bringing Christians into the fold. Their frequent confrontations with the Ottoman Empire did free many Christian nations from the slavery and humiliations of Islamic rule.
Dear Margaret:
many thanks for the fascinating history, some of which I was already aware of.
I guess my main point in number one was only to suggest that Russia did not "invade" the Crimea in 2014, as all the mendacious media and the government have been spouting. The election was fair, free and observed by non-biased international observers. I probably phrased it poorly.
Again, thanks for the great comment - and a happy Easter to you and yours.
ap
Post a Comment