Israel...and Turkey... Coordinate Air Strike

[PoliticalChic]

1. "EL AVIV – Israel’s airstrike in Syria Sunday was coordinated with Turkey, which in turn coordinated rebel attacks throughout Syria timed to coincide with the Israeli strike, according to Egyptian and Jordanian intelligence sources speaking to WND.

2. ....rebels did not know about the Israeli strike in advance, but instead were given specific instructions for when to begin today’s major assaults against the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.

3. “Almost the moment the Israel Air Force departed was the moment the rebel advance began,” added the Egyptian intelligence sourc

4. ...Egyptian and Jordanian sources described to WND how immediately after today’s Israeli air strike the jihadist rebels used access roads to advance toward Damascus...

5. Large explosions rocked Damascus earlier today with Syria blaming Israel for the strikes, which reportedly targeted a military research center in Jamraya near Damascus.

6. ...reports followed confirmations Saturday by anonymous Israeli officials that the Israel Air Force had carried out a strike against Syria on Friday targeting a shipment of advanced missiles bound for Hezbollah.

7. The New York Times quoted U.S. officials saying the strike targeted Iranian Fateh-110 missiles headed for Hezbollah."
Shock claim: Israeli strike timed with Syria rebels




8. On his WABC radio program this eve, Klein stated that Israel and Turkey have agreed on allowing Israel to overfly Turkey at some future date on a 'mission' believed to be aimed at Iran.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

1. "EL AVIV – Israel’s airstrike in Syria Sunday was coordinated with Turkey, which in turn coordinated rebel attacks throughout Syria timed to coincide with the Israeli strike, according to Egyptian and Jordanian intelligence sources speaking to WND.

2. ....rebels did not know about the Israeli strike in advance, but instead were given specific instructions for when to begin today’s major assaults against the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.

3. “Almost the moment the Israel Air Force departed was the moment the rebel advance began,” added the Egyptian intelligence sourc

4. ...Egyptian and Jordanian sources described to WND how immediately after today’s Israeli air strike the jihadist rebels used access roads to advance toward Damascus...

5. Large explosions rocked Damascus earlier today with Syria blaming Israel for the strikes, which reportedly targeted a military research center in Jamraya near Damascus.

6. ...reports followed confirmations Saturday by anonymous Israeli officials that the Israel Air Force had carried out a strike against Syria on Friday targeting a shipment of advanced missiles bound for Hezbollah.

7. The New York Times quoted U.S. officials saying the strike targeted Iranian Fateh-110 missiles headed for Hezbollah."
Shock claim: Israeli strike timed with Syria rebels




8. On his WABC radio program this eve, Klein stated that Israel and Turkey have agreed on allowing Israel to overfly Turkey at some future date on a 'mission' believed to be aimed at Iran.

Well done Israel and Turkey!

 

[Sunni Man]

Turkey should never have done that.

Because when you work with the zionists.

You are in bed with the devil. ..

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Not true. People are suffering in Syria. Don't you care about that?

 

[dilloduck]

Can someone remind me why America wants to overthrow Assad ?

 

[skye]

Turkey should never have done that.

Because when you work with the zionists.

You are in bed with the devil. ..

Sunni Man

Believe it or not the Sunni nations led by Qatar and Saudi Arabia have proposed a new constructive peace plan with Israel in the last week.
However.... if all Sunnis are anything like you (which I hope they are not) there is no possibility of making any progress whatsoever.

At least Turkey realizes that the enemy of your enemy can be some sort of an ally in need.

 

[Connery]

Can someone remind me why America wants to overthrow Assad ?

Syria has attacked and downed Turkish planes. Turkey is part of NATO as is the US and Turkey has not acted at the behest of the US and it's other NATO allies. Further, "Assad’s use of the chemical weapons crosses the “red line” stated last month by President Obama. But perhaps more important is that it also violates the warnings made privately to Assad by Russia." There is more at stake than one country; stability in the area and Russia's toe hold also hang in the balance.

 

[dilloduck]

Can someone remind me why America wants to overthrow Assad ?

Syria has attacked and downed Turkish planes. Turkey is part of NATO as is the US and Turkey has not acted at the behest of the US and it's other NATO allies. Further, "Assad’s use of the chemical weapons crosses the “red line” stated last month by President Obama. But perhaps more important is that it also violates the warnings made privately to Assad by Russia." There is more at stake than one country; stability in the area and Russia's toe hold also hang in the balance.

So bottom line it's a proxy war on Russia and we're willing to arm AQ to win it.

One F-4 flying near the border with a civil war going on ? That's pretty weak imho.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Can someone remind me why America wants to overthrow Assad ?

1. Yours. dillo, is the first mention of America in this thread.

2.The implication is that the United States was in on the coordination. This is not evident.

3.But....the difficulties of US involvement, should it occur, include the question of which side to aid...Al-Qaeda allied rebels, or the Syria-Iran axis.
And....to what degree.

4. Aside from my opinion as to where this President's sentiments lie, I'd like to remind that a President with far more vision than Mr. Obama faced a similar problem, the Iran-Iraq war....who to aid.
He decided not to allow the Iranians to annihilate Iraq.






On April 5, 1984, Ronald Reagan issued presidential directive (NSDD 139), emphasizing the U.S. objective of ensuring access to military facilities in the Gulf region, and instructing the director of central intelligence and the secretary of defense to upgrade U.S. intelligence gathering capabilities. It codified U.S. determination to develop plans "to avert an Iraqi collapse."

Reagan's directive said that U.S. policy required "unambiguous" condemnation of chemical warfare (without naming Iraq), while including the caveat that the U.S. should "place equal stress on the urgent need to dissuade Iran from continuing the ruthless and inhumane tactics which have characterized recent offensives." The directive does not suggest that "condemning" chemical warfare required any hesitation about or modification of U.S. support for Iraq [Document 53].

The documents included in this briefing book reflect the realpolitik that determined this country's policies during the years when Iraq was actually employing chemical weapons. Actual rather than rhetorical opposition to such use was evidently not perceived to serve U.S. interests; instead, the Reagan administration did not deviate from its determination that Iraq was to serve as the instrument to prevent an Iranian victory.

Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein






Document 42: Department of State Cable from George P. Shultz to the United States Interests Section in Iraq. "U.S. Chemical Shipment to Iraq," March 4, 1984.
Indicates that a shipment of 22,000 pounds of phosphorous fluoride to Iraq was held back at JFK airport because of "concern over Iraq's possible intention to use the chemical in the manufacture of chemical weapons." Washington asks the U.S. interests section in Baghdad to remind Iraq's Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the U.S.'s grave concern about chemical weapons, and to inform it that the U.S. will publicly condemn their use in the near future. The interests section is to reiterate the request that Iraq not use chemical warfare, and to say that the U.S. opposes Iraq's attempts to acquire chemical weapons related material from the U.S.: "When we become aware of attempts to do so, we will act to prevent their export to Iraq."
Source: Declassified under the Freedom of Information Act



Document 43: Department of State, Bureau of Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs Memorandum from James A. Placke to James M. Ealum [et al.]. [U.S. Condemnation of Iraqi Chemical Weapons Use], March 4, 1984.
The State Department circulates for review a draft press statement and guidance for a U.S. condemnation of Iraq's use of chemical weapons. The statement says that "While condemning Iraq's chemical weapons use . . . . The United States finds the present Iranian regime's intransigent refusal to deviate from its avowed objective of eliminating the legitimate government of neighboring Iraq to be inconsistent with the accepted norms of behavior among nations and the moral and religious basis which it claims."
Source: Declassified under the Freedom of Information Act





There are at least as many questions involved at this time, so your query "....remind me why America wants to overthrow Assad ?" assumes a conclusion not in evidence.

 

[Sunni Man]

Neither Israel or Turkey would have launched an attack into Syria without the blessing of the U.S.

To think otherwise is naive. ..

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

true

I think Obama agreed with Israel about the airstrike while he was over there recently.

 

[dilloduck]

Can someone remind me why America wants to overthrow Assad ?

1. Yours. dillo, is the first mention of America in this thread.

2.The implication is that the United States was in on the coordination. This is not evident.

3.But....the difficulties of US involvement, should it occur, include the question of which side to aid...Al-Qaeda allied rebels, or the Syria-Iran axis.
And....to what degree.

4. Aside from my opinion as to where this President's sentiments lie, I'd like to remind that a President with far more vision than Mr. Obama faced a similar problem, the Iran-Iraq war....who to aid.
He decided not to allow the Iranians to annihilate Iraq.






On April 5, 1984, Ronald Reagan issued presidential directive (NSDD 139), emphasizing the U.S. objective of ensuring access to military facilities in the Gulf region, and instructing the director of central intelligence and the secretary of defense to upgrade U.S. intelligence gathering capabilities. It codified U.S. determination to develop plans "to avert an Iraqi collapse."

Reagan's directive said that U.S. policy required "unambiguous" condemnation of chemical warfare (without naming Iraq), while including the caveat that the U.S. should "place equal stress on the urgent need to dissuade Iran from continuing the ruthless and inhumane tactics which have characterized recent offensives." The directive does not suggest that "condemning" chemical warfare required any hesitation about or modification of U.S. support for Iraq [Document 53].

The documents included in this briefing book reflect the realpolitik that determined this country's policies during the years when Iraq was actually employing chemical weapons. Actual rather than rhetorical opposition to such use was evidently not perceived to serve U.S. interests; instead, the Reagan administration did not deviate from its determination that Iraq was to serve as the instrument to prevent an Iranian victory.

Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein






Document 42: Department of State Cable from George P. Shultz to the United States Interests Section in Iraq. "U.S. Chemical Shipment to Iraq," March 4, 1984.
Indicates that a shipment of 22,000 pounds of phosphorous fluoride to Iraq was held back at JFK airport because of "concern over Iraq's possible intention to use the chemical in the manufacture of chemical weapons." Washington asks the U.S. interests section in Baghdad to remind Iraq's Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the U.S.'s grave concern about chemical weapons, and to inform it that the U.S. will publicly condemn their use in the near future. The interests section is to reiterate the request that Iraq not use chemical warfare, and to say that the U.S. opposes Iraq's attempts to acquire chemical weapons related material from the U.S.: "When we become aware of attempts to do so, we will act to prevent their export to Iraq."
Source: Declassified under the Freedom of Information Act



Document 43: Department of State, Bureau of Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs Memorandum from James A. Placke to James M. Ealum [et al.]. [U.S. Condemnation of Iraqi Chemical Weapons Use], March 4, 1984.
The State Department circulates for review a draft press statement and guidance for a U.S. condemnation of Iraq's use of chemical weapons. The statement says that "While condemning Iraq's chemical weapons use . . . . The United States finds the present Iranian regime's intransigent refusal to deviate from its avowed objective of eliminating the legitimate government of neighboring Iraq to be inconsistent with the accepted norms of behavior among nations and the moral and religious basis which it claims."
Source: Declassified under the Freedom of Information Act





There are at least as many questions involved at this time, so your query "....remind me why America wants to overthrow Assad ?" assumes a conclusion not in evidence.

OK--why does the American administration side with the "rebels" ?

 

[Sunni Man]

Believe it or not the Sunni nations led by Qatar and Saudi Arabia have proposed a new constructive peace plan with Israel in the last week.

Both of these countries are sell outs to the zionist jews and are held in very low regard by most sunni muslims.

And their so called peace plan is a piece of crap. ..

 

[SFC Ollie]

I would prefer it if we did not get involved in Syria...No more than to the extent of destroying any Chemical weapons caches that might be found.... No matter which side controls them....

This should not be our war......

But good for Israel.....nice to head off more missile attacks.......

 

[skye]

Believe it or not the Sunni nations led by Qatar and Saudi Arabia have proposed a new constructive peace plan with Israel in the last week.

Both of these countries are sell outs to the zionist jews and are held in very low regard by most sunni muslims.

And their so called peace plan is a piece of crap. ..

If that's your attitude and that of all the Sunnis, then there will be turmoil in the Middle East forever, and it will be a lose/lose situation for everybody.

You have to get beyond your radicalized Islamic thinking for any progress to be made .... but it seems that in your case Sunni Man, this could be an absolute impossibility!

 

[Sunni Man]

Can someone remind me why America wants to overthrow Assad ?

Actually, it's Israel that wants Assad gone.

And has talked the U.S. into backing it's strategy of destabilizing Syria.

So that Israel will have an unobstructed safe path to attack Iran. ..

 

[dilloduck]

Believe it or not the Sunni nations led by Qatar and Saudi Arabia have proposed a new constructive peace plan with Israel in the last week.

Both of these countries are sell outs to the zionist jews and are held in very low regard by most sunni muslims.

And their so called peace plan is a piece of crap. ..

If that's your attitude and that of all the Sunnis, then there will be turmoil in the Middle East forever, and it will be a lose/lose situation for everybody.

You have to get beyond your radicalized Islamic thinking for any progress to be made .... but it seems that in your case Sunni Man, this could be an absolute impossibility!

face--there will be turmoil forever.

 

[Connery]

Can someone remind me why America wants to overthrow Assad ?

Syria has attacked and downed Turkish planes. Turkey is part of NATO as is the US and Turkey has not acted at the behest of the US and it's other NATO allies. Further, "Assad’s use of the chemical weapons crosses the “red line” stated last month by President Obama. But perhaps more important is that it also violates the warnings made privately to Assad by Russia." There is more at stake than one country; stability in the area and Russia's toe hold also hang in the balance.

So bottom line it's a proxy war on Russia and we're willing to arm AQ to win it.

One F-4 flying near the border with a civil war going on ? That's pretty weak imho.

That is your interpretation. I do not see where there is a proxy war. Should the US which to have a "proxy war" regarding Russia, Iran, not Syria would be the place for it to happen.

"Not only is Turkey supplying light arms to select battalion commanders, it is also training Syrians in Istanbul". There is more going on than one plane.

Syrian rebels say Turkey is arming and training them

 

[dilloduck]

Syria has attacked and downed Turkish planes. Turkey is part of NATO as is the US and Turkey has not acted at the behest of the US and it's other NATO allies. Further, "Assad’s use of the chemical weapons crosses the “red line” stated last month by President Obama. But perhaps more important is that it also violates the warnings made privately to Assad by Russia." There is more at stake than one country; stability in the area and Russia's toe hold also hang in the balance.

So bottom line it's a proxy war on Russia and we're willing to arm AQ to win it.

One F-4 flying near the border with a civil war going on ? That's pretty weak imho.

That is your interpretation. I do not see where there is a proxy war. Should the US which to have a "proxy war" regarding Russia, Iran, not Syria would be the place for it to happen.

"Not only is Turkey supplying light arms to select battalion commanders, it is also training Syrians in Istanbul". There is more going on than one plane.

Syrian rebels say Turkey is arming and training them

And America is providing the "rebels'" with "non-lethal" aid. The most stable thing that could happen would be an Assad victory and a return to status quo. Russia would still have what they want but so what ? What's in it for the US to have Assad ousted?

 

[Sunni Man]

You have to get beyond your radicalized Islamic thinking for any progress to be made .... but it seems that in your case Sunni Man, this could be an absolute impossibility!

So if I don't kowtow to Israel and the zionists it makes me a radical?? ..