Bharat Rakshak

Prem wrote:How does Xi feel on Mr T ? This is as much signal to PRC as much to Russia.

Many have questioned why Assad would be so strategically stupid as to order a chemical weapons attack and incite the wrath of the world given that he is closer than ever to winning the war against ISIS and jihadist rebels.

Singha wrote:map of the shayrat airbase - located SE of Homs town on edge of the quraytyn desert. so its used for strikes on the ISIS in eastern homs north and east and palmyra also.

https://www.google.co.in/maps/@34.49379 ... a=!3m1!1e3

Singha wrote:the probable reason for no reported casualties is the russians were given warning which would surely have passed down to assadists, who moved their men out of the base quietly ....

the base seems to lack any form of housing infra - a bit strange where the staff live.

tushar_m wrote:Trump launches attack on Syria with more than 50 tomahawk missiles

US strikes Syrian airfield in first direct military action against Assad
Dozens of Tomahawk missiles have been launched at a government airfield in the wake of the Syrian leader’s use of chemical weapons against civilians
Syria: US launches missile strikes near Homs – live updates
‘Assad choked out lives’: Donald Trump announces US strikes in Syria
Spencer Ackerman and Ed Pilkington in New York, Ben Jacobs and Julian Borger in Washington
Friday 7 April 2017
The US military has launched a heavy cruise missile attack on a Syrian airfield, in retaliation against Bashar al-Assad’s latest indiscriminate use of chemical weapons.

Donald Trump, who for years signaled his comfort with leaving Assad in power, abruptly switched course after seeing images of children gassed to death in Idlib province after Assad unleashed sarin gas on civilians.

Live Donald Trump launches US missile strike against Syria after chemical attack – live
US military strike hits airbase in Syria after gas attack in Idlib appears to have changed president’s view on Bashar al-Assad
Read more
The strike, which comprised 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from the guided-missile destroyers USS Ross and Porter in the eastern Mediterranean, marked the first time the US has become a direct combatant against the Syrian regime.

An airfield at al-Shayrat near Homs was targeted, signaling a limited initial engagement on a target the military said was used to launch the sarin attack.

Though the US did target some of Syria’s formidable air defenses, it did not do so largely beyond al-Shayrat or in a sustained barrage, as it would typically do before launching a concerted airpower campaign. Instead, the Pentagon said, it attacked “aircraft, hardened aircraft shelters, petroleum and logistical storage, ammunition supply bunkers, air defense systems, and radars” at the airfield.

Though Trump lacked both congressional and international authorization for the strike, prominent US politicians immediately lent him political cover.

Trump said Thursday night at his Mar-a-Lago resort that he had ordered a “targeted military strike on the airfield in Syria from where the chemical attack was launched”.

After a frantic day of consultation with his military advisers, including defense secretary James Mattis and national security adviser HR McMaster, Trump said it was a “vital national security interest” of the US to prevent “the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons” after previous efforts at changing Assad’s behavior “had failed, and failed very dramatically”.

Yet Trump also called on the international community to “join us in seeking to end the slaughter and bloodshed in Syria and also to end terrorism of all kinds and all types”, leaving it unclear whether the US objective was retaliation for the sarin gas assault, destruction of Assad’s chemical stockpiles, or a push to oust Assad from power.

For its part, the Pentagon said the strike “was intended to deter the regime from using chemical weapons again”.

On Tuesday, dozens of civilians, including 10 children, were killed, apparently by a nerve agent attack on the town of Khan Sheikhun, in a region held by the rebels who oppose Assad’s regime.

Trump had already warned that his view had been changed by the shocking television images of children. And the attack came – even while he was hosting the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home in Florida.

The attack was apparently launched at about 8.40pm eastern standard time – 4.40am in Syria.
Trump: Syria chemical attack ‘crosses many, many lines’
In 2013 Assad’s forces used chemical weapons, including sarin and chlorine, killing more than 1,000 people. Barack Obama threatened military action over Assad’s use of sarin, an illegal weapon, but the US congress balked and Russia intervened to make a deal in which Assad handed over stockpiles of weapons.

The Tomahawks used are sophisticated missiles with the ability to shift course in the air, making them analogous to drones on a one-way mission. Syria’s formidable, Russian-supplied air defenses, largely along the Mediterranean coast, have long prompted warnings from US military officials against attacking Assad.

Since Russia sent aircraft, troops and personnel to bolster Assad in late 2015, the Syrian president’s fortunes have improved dramatically, and has retaken territory from the beleaguered and fractious armed opposition. The Russian presence has raised the stakes dramatically for US military planners, as the prospect of accidentally killing Russian personnel and sparking a larger war with a nuclear power reduces the US room for maneuver.

But the military, according to Pentagon spokesman Captain Jeff Davis, notified Russian forces before the strike, using a communications channel set up to ensure US pilots who attack Islamic State targets in eastern Syria do not accidentally come into conflict with their Russian counterparts.

It is likely that Russia would have passed the warning onto their Syrian allies. The US has roughly 1,000 troops in Syria, who may be placed at risk as the result of the strike.

“We are assessing the results of the strike. Initial indications are that this strike has severely damaged or destroyed Syrian aircraft and support infrastructure and equipment at Shayrat airfield, reducing the Syrian government’s ability to deliver chemical weapons”, Davis said.

Davis said the Shayrat base had been used to store chemical weapons used by the regime until 2013, when a deal was struck with the US and Russia to remove its declared arsenal. He said it was used to deliver the chemical weapons dropped on Khan Sheikhun on Tuesday, but could not confirm whether any chemical weapons were still at the site. However, he stressed that the targets were chosen carefully to avoid the risk of hitting those weapons.

“The places we targeted were the things that made the airfield operate. It’s the petroleum facilities, it’s the aircraft radar, what they use for take-off and landing, as well as air-defence radar,” Davis said. “It’s the sites that are specific to making it operate, as well as hangars and aircraft themselves.”

US defense analysts have warned for years of attacking Assad without a plan for what it seeks to achieve or what a post-Assad Syria might look like.

Davis emphasized precautions the US military took to avoid killing Russian personnel occupying their own compound at Shayrat, citing the early-morning time of the attack and the choice of targets unlikely to have people inside. All the aircraft attacked were Syrian, Davis said, with Russian aircraft unharmed.

Neither the US Congress nor the United Nations have authorized war against Assad, who has brutalized his people but not the US. Mary Ellen O’Connell, an international-law scholar at the University of Notre Dame, said the US did not have a legal basis for military action.

“Under international law, he has zero right to attack Assad. It would be a reprisal attack. You won’t find any international law specialists who will find a legal right to carry out a reprisal”, O’Connell said.

It has been a dramatic about-face for Trump.

For years, Trump rejected any attack on Assad as a strategic folly, despite repeated chemical assaults of the sort that prompted Thursday’s missile strikes. Following Russia’s intervention in the conflict, Trump attacked rival Hillary Clinton’s openness to strikes against Assad’s forces as inviting a devastating conflict with Russia. Just days ago, his secretary of state and UN ambassador made statements indicating Trump was prepared to let Assad – who in November called Trump a “natural ally” – remain in power.

But earlier on Thursday, following Trump’s public anger at Assad for the sarin assault, secretary of state Rex Tillerson said “there is no role for [Assad] to govern the Syrian people” and called on Russia, where Tillerson will travel next week, to “consider carefully” its sponsorship of the Syrian dictator.

Tillerson suggested “steps are under way” to rally an international coalition to remove Assad diplomatically, a position long thwarted by Moscow and Beijing. Chinese president Xi Jinping is meeting with Trump at Mar-a-Lago in what

Longtime Syria hawks – and Trump critics – John McCain and Lindsey Graham rallied behind Trump in the pursuit of an attack they have urged for years.

Trump and the military “sent an important message the United States will no longer stand idly by as Assad, aided and abetted by Putin’s Russia, slaughters innocent Syrians with chemical weapons and barrel bombs”, Graham and McCain said in a joint statement.

The senior Democrat on the Senate foreign-relations committee, Ben Cardin, joined in support, but warned Trump: “any longer-term or larger military operation in Syria by the Trump Administration will need to be done in consultation with the Congress. Furthermore, it is the President’s responsibility to inform the legislative branch and the American people about his larger policy in Syria, as well as the legal basis for this action and any additional military activities in that country.”

Security concerns raised over plans to service British fighter jets in Turkey
George Kerevan says UK should have a back-up plan in case the diplomatic situation deteriorates

A F-35 fighter jet landing at RAF Fairford PA
Security concerns have been raised after it emerged that British fighter jets are to be serviced in Turkey.

SNP MP George Kerevan questioned the wisdom of the policy in light of the fraught political situation in the country following last year’s attempted coup and tensions with Nato allies over the resulting political crackdown.

Major repairs to the engine RAF F-35 jets had previously been carried out in the UK, but the Ministry of Defence says these will now happened at a site in Turkey which has been selected to provide “deep maintenance”.

Frequency of RAF interceptions of Russian planes revealed by FoI
The base will repair the engines of all F-35 jets based in Europe while other repairs will be conducted at similar bases in Australia and North America.
The F-35 project, which started in 2006, is primarily funded by the US. It is part of an international programme to bring the jets into operation for a loose collection of nine Nato members and close US allies, including the UK, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Italy, Norway, the Netherlands and Turkey.

Maintenance tasks will be shared between them.
The UK will be responsible for handling repairs to electronics and ejector seats at base in North Wales.
The Ministry said the decision to repair F-35s in Turkey was part of facilitating this global support network.
But Mr Kerevan said the UK should consider setting up back-up facilities if the situation in Turkey deteriorates.

"The UK should have options in the event of a diplomatic crisis with Turkey," he told the BBC. "I want to know what alternative arrangements are in place if it became impossible to have the the engines overhauled."

Nato to spend £2.6 billion on satellites, cyber security and drones
He said he would be writing to the Defence Select Committee to ask them to investigate.

Turkey has been moving closer to its former enemy Russia after President Recep Tayyip Erdogan felt betrayed by his Western allies respond to the coup.

The two countries nearly resorted to armed conflict after the Turkish air force shot down a Russian jet it said had violated its territory in 2015 but came together after the attempted coup last year when the West condemned Mr Erdogan’s brutal crackdown on dissent.

Mr Erdogan blamed a US-based cleric, Fethullah Gulen, for orchestrating the plot and demanded his extradition.

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has moved away from the West following the attempted coup (Reuters)
But Washington refused on the grounds no evidence for the claim had been presented against Mr Gulen who has denied any involvement in the plot.

Since the attempted coup, Mr Erdogan has fired hundreds of senior military staff serving Nato in Europe and the US.

A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said: "F-35 is an international programme, with maintenance and repair hubs in Europe, North America and Asia-Pacific and a global support network that ensures security of supply for all involved.

"The UK, along with the other F-35 partner nations, benefit from this approach and the efficiencies it delivers."

Trump’s change of heart on Syria isn’t reassuring, it’s profoundly disturbing
David Shariatmadari

The response to a horrific crime is too important to be dictated by the president’s vanity, as seems to be the case – and the consequences could spin out of control
Syria: US launches 60 missiles in strike on airbase near Homs – live

Trump with King Abdullah II of Jordan on 5 April. ‘There are ominous rumblings … Mike Pence is now insisting that ‘all options are on the table’.’
Thursday 6 April 2017
‘I will tell you that attack on children yesterday had a big impact on me – big impact.” Those were the words of Donald Trump following the use of chemical weapons in Idlib province, Syria. With them, he sent the diplomatic world into a spin: had the president changed his mind on one of the most urgent foreign policy issues of our times?

As far as it’s ever possible to discern method in his madness, Trump’s attitude towards the war in Syria has been relatively straightforward. Destroying Isis is the priority, he has stated time and again, and if that means bolstering Assad as a side-effect, so be it. This has been the logic of his benign attitude towards Russia, too: Vladimir Putin is a Christian leader willing to use hard power against jihadist Islam, so he’s one of the good guys. Also, Iraq was a mess, and no one wants to start a third world war. Or, as he memorably put it back in November, “I had to listen to [Republican Senator] Lindsey Graham talk about, you know, attacking Syria and attacking, you know, and it’s like you’re now attacking Russia, you’re attacking Iran, you’re attacking.”

Trump: Syria chemical attack ‘crosses many, many lines’
But as images of the dead and dying of Khan Sheikhun were beamed out across the internet and on TV, as Trump appointee Nikki Haley held up photos of them in the UN security council chamber in New York, the president seemed to be mulling a different approach. “My attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much … You’re now talking about a whole different level.”

This despite the fact that the Syrian civil war has been going on for six years, during which time, according to a 2016 report, there have been 161 chemical attacks. Despite the UN-documented use of sarin, mustard gas, VX and chlorine. Despite the fact that Samantha Power, Obama’s ambassador to the UN, delivered a speech notable for its similarity to Nikki Haley’s in December last year.

It remains to be seen what Trump’s response to this appalling episode will be, but there are ominous rumblings. Haley said: “There are times in the life of states that we are compelled to take our own action.” For defence secretary James Mattis, “It was a heinous act and will be treated as such.” Vice-president Mike Pence is now insisting that “all options are on the table”.

Nikki Haley’s emotive speech to the UN after Syria chemical attack
All this may just be routine strategic ambiguity. But, as ever with the Trump administration, we are in uncharted territory. No one quite knows whether Haley et al are speaking from a Trump-approved hymn-sheet, or concerned with protecting their own reputations in an administration not exactly known for its message discipline. No one quite knows whether Haley’s statement, only last week, that “Our priority is no longer to sit there and focus on getting Assad out,” will stand or be overturned. Since the latter would represent a 180-degree turn, however, it’s worth considering in more detail.

Live Donald Trump launches US missile strike against Syria after chemical attack – live
Moscow warns of ‘significant damage to US-Russia ties’ as American military strike hits airbase in Syria in retaliation for nerve gas attack in Idlib
Read more
Those celebrating the possibility of a shift should ask how it may have come about. If there’s one thing we do know, it’s that Trump wants us to see that he cares. This is a president who is obsessed with how he is perceived, griping about unflattering photos and the size of the crowd at his inauguration.

It’s not even clear that he has any ideological aims, other than to win, and to be liked. He has, after all, donated to both Republicans and Democrats. He supported the Iraq war, then didn’t, then claimed that he never had. When Americans become conscious of an atrocity – despite the fact that it might be the latest in a long line of atrocities, many of which didn’t make the morning news – he can’t help but respond.

One theory about the demotion of Steve Bannon from the National Security Council on Wednesday is that the president disliked the amount of attention his adviser was getting. The Washington Post’s columnist Paul Waldman dubbed him “the most powerful person in the Trump White House”. Time magazine put him on the cover with the headline “the Great Manipulator”. The problem is, his boss doesn’t like to be outshone.

Perhaps the instant praise won by his UN ambassador prodded him into action. Regardless, the conclusion must be that any Syria “pivot” has its roots in Trump’s approval-seeking personality, his proneness to being thrown off course by media coverage, his shallowness of purpose.


This is why, rather than being reassuring, his sudden discovery of his conscience on Syria is profoundly disturbing. Major strategic decisions should not be made like this. Of course, Trump may simply sabre-rattle for a bit, then quieten down. But he might instead want a show of force. That could involve cratering a few runways, or something far more muscular. But these are decisions with consequences that would last far longer than the president’s attention span.

Whatever you think of the merits of western intervention in Syria, the idea of Trump directing it is, frankly, terrifying. And even though you may despise the current murky detente, so is the idea of this chaotic, underqualified White House being at loggerheads with Russia. The international order may be vulnerable, and dictators emboldened. But so long as this man is in charge, we must pray that the promise of an isolationist America is fulfilled.

Santosh wrote:What needs to be seen is if this attack is followed by any large scale military build up by US or if they continue to attack Syrian assets as punishment. Given how fast it came, this could be a face saving measure from DT since he has been hammered badly at home.

President Putin “regards the strikes as aggression against a sovereign nation,” his spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, noting that the president believes the strikes were carried out “in violation of international law, and also under an invented pretext.”

Peskov also insisted that “the Syrian army doesn’t have chemical weapons,” saying this had been “observed and confirmed by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, a special UN unit.”

Putin sees the US missile strike on Syria as an attempt to distract attention from civilian casualties in Iraq, Peskov added.

“This step deals significant damage to US-Russian ties, which are already in a deplorable state,” Peskov said.

Singha wrote:Fox News‏Verified account @FoxNews 11h11 hours ago
More
Sec Tillerson: Steps are underway to form an international coalition to remove Syrian dictator. #Breaking

Now that Obama’s poll numbers are in tailspin – watch for him to launch a strike in Libya or Iran. He is desperate

2:39 PM - 9 Oct 2012

Putin Considers US Attack in Syria Aggression Against Sovereign State - Kremlin
POLITICS
07.04.2017
The United States' missile strikes on a military airfield in Syria violates international law and represents an act of aggression against a sovereign state under a far-fetched pretext, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Friday.

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — The US launched 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at the Syrian military airfield in Ash Sha'irat near Homs late Thursday. US President Donald Trump said the attack was a response to the alleged chemical weapon use in Idlib on Tuesday, which Washington blames on Damascus.

Сoincidence? Daesh Militants Attacked Syrian Army Positions Simultaneously With US Strike
"President [Vladimir] Putin regards the US attacks on Syria as an aggression against a sovereign state in violation of the norms of international law, and under a trumped-up pretext at that," Pesov told reporters.

Russian President Vladimir Putin also sees the latest US missile strikes on a military airfield in Syria as an attempt to distract from the mounting civilian casualties in Iraq, the Kremlin added.

"Putin also sees the attacks on Syria by the US as an attempt to divert the international community's attention from the numerous casualties among civilians in Iraq."

U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyer USS Ross (DDG 71) fires a tomahawk land attack missile in Mediterranean Sea which U.S. Defense Department said was a part of cruise missile strike against Syria on April 7, 2017.

US Missile Strike on Syria Airfield Violates Ties With Moscow - Senator
The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) had confirmed that Syrian armed forces do not possess chemical weapons, the Kremlin cited Russian President Vladimir Putin as saying Friday while warning of the danger of ignoring terrorist use of chemical weapons.

US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said in a statement after the US attack that there were no discussions or prior contacts between the United States and Moscow ahead of the missile strike on the Syrian base.

"The fact of the destruction of all chemical weapons stockpiles has been recorded and confirmed by the OPCW, a specialized UN unit," Peskov told reporters.

"At the same time, in Putin's opinion, total disregard for the use of chemical weapons by terrorists only drastically aggravates the situation," Peskov said.

Whatever you think of the merits of western intervention in Syria, the idea of Trump directing it is, frankly, terrifying. And even though you may despise the current murky detente, so is the idea of this chaotic, underqualified White House being at loggerheads with Russia. The international order may be vulnerable, and dictators emboldened. But so long as this man is in charge, we must pray that the promise of an isolationist America is fulfilled.

Austin wrote:Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 0904773633

Now that Obama’s poll numbers are in tailspin – watch for him to launch a strike in Libya or Iran. He is desperate

2:39 PM - 9 Oct 2012

^^ DT said this about Obama