Purify my Heart (thanks bud) gave me a heads up that the USS Bataan was steaming toward the Syrian coast.
Quite honestly, I didn't know what to make of this news. A Google search revealed two things.
First, from Debka File:
The story from Debka File (read the whole thing) has some pretty troubling info in it (if its true). The idea that we're going to open up a new front in both Syria and Libya (how they got word about a Special Forces deployment---if true---is beyond me) is beyond troubling. Its crazy.
This huge concentration of naval missile interceptor units looks like preparations by Washington for the contingency of Iran, Syria and Hizballah letting loose with surface missiles against US and Israeli targets in the event of US military intervention to stop the anti-opposition slaughter underway in Syria.
Moscow, Tehran and Damascus, in particular, are taking this exceptional spate of American military movements in and around the Mediterranean as realistically portending American intervention in Syria.
This concentration of US might also the effect of deterring the Turkish government from going through with its decision to send Turkish troops into Syria. The plan was to create a protected buffer zone where the thousands of refugees in flight from the Assad regime's military crackdown would be kept safe on Syrian side of the border and out of Turkey.
Turkish Prime Minister Tayyep Erdogan is averse to be seen working hand in glove militarily with any US interference in Syria. At the same time, Western intelligence sources in the Persian Gulf are sure Washington is coordinating its military movements with Ankara and that Erdogan quietly agreed to place Turkish bases at US disposal for an operation in Syria.
debka file's military sources also report that Monday, June 13, Hizballah began shifting the long- and medium-range rockets it had stored in northern Lebanon to locations in the center of the country. Western military sources first thought the Lebanese Shiite group was taking the precaution of keeping its arsenal safe from a spillover of violence from Syria. Tuesday, however, they learned that Iranian intelligence had advised Hizballah to remove its rockets out of range of a possible American operation in Syria.
Tuesday, Iran capped these events with three separate warnings to the Obama administration against military interference in Syria.
Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehman-Parast said Tuesday: "The Americans are not allowed to launch a military intervention in any country of the region including Syria."
He accused "Israel and the USA of standing behind the riots in Syria, Iran's closest ally in the Arab world… with particular aims…of provoking terrorist groups in Syria and in the region to carry out terrorist and sabotage operations."
Another spokesman warned: "Western attempts to set the model of Libya in Damascus are doomed to failure."
Iranian Vice President Reza Rahimi accused the United States of preparing and executing "the slaughter of Muslims" worldwide.
Iran's ground forces commander Brig. Gen. Kioumars Heidari added this threat: Any new military move by the US in the region will impose heavy costs on the country far greater than the costs it paid in Iraq and Afghanistan."
The idea that we're once again acting at the behest of another nation is (in my opinion) insane. In this case Turkey! Amazing.
Like I said, its troubling and from what I gathered in my search, Debka File has extreme credibility in some circles...less in others---so I just don't know.
I do know that the story has been picked up by alternate news sites and is spreading like wildfire on the net.
Its up to you to decide or you can do like me and watch it all unfold.
Sidenote:
One curious thing. The USS Bataan's Facebook page indicates that they've experienced problems with their e-mail system. Is this a 'civilized' way of blacking out a ship?
UPDATE:
Seems that Debka was right about at least a portion of the story. This from the Telegraph;
And to show that there is a bit of coordination going on behind the scenes we have the brave and bold UN secretary trying to flex his nonexistent muscles. This from the Washington Post.Government sources told a leading Turkish newspaper that soldiers could be sent in to Syria to set up a "safe haven" under plans being considered should the flood of those fleeing the fighting worsened."We would close the border but we cannot turn our back," a Turkish official told the newspaper, Hurriyet. "If chaos starts, then we will have to form a security zone or a buffer zone inside Syrian territory."
Speaking to journalists in Brazil, his last stop in a South America tour that included Colombia, Argentina and Uruguay, Ban called on Syria’s president to “stop killing people” and told reporters that he’d urged Assad to “engage in inclusive dialogue and to take bold measures before it’s too late.”If you've observed UN Secretary's then you'll realize that they always beg and cajole but never make definitive, almost threatening statements unless the pie is already baked and they've been given an indication of support from either or both the US and the EU...and probably with a nod from Russia and China.
Something is going on behind the scenes regarding Syria. Our administration and the wonder kids in Europe have been behind the eight ball and wrong on every count so far. No reason to expect them to get this right either.
Three current wars...Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. Two ongoing humanitarian disasters (outside the US) ...Haiti and Japan. A crushing budget deficit. Extremely high gas prices. Wild fires, flooding, drought and a heat wave within our own borders.
And these clowns appear to be plotting another military action in Syria.
AMAZING!
Whose behind this potential lame brained course of action now? Hillary Clinton, Susan Powers, Joe Biden?!
ReplyDeleteI can't believe this guy would actually be considering this...is he that stupid?
is he that stupid? rhetorical question right? of course he's that fucking stupid.
ReplyDeletei'd lay money on Powers. she loves this kind of UN backed action....Hillary seems like she's ready to leave. i really believe she's just trying to make it through this first term and she's gone.
she was once this naive but that wore off when her husband was into his second term.
i think she's tired of hanging around a bunch of kids.
Yeah, it was a rhetorical question.
ReplyDeleteI'm not as sold on Hillary. I think that despite putting on the accoutrements of hawkishness, she is still a humanitarian, interventionist, Liberal at heart.
Moreover, I think her early exit is to set herself up for a potential run against Obama or Biden.
I was all for going into Libya, mainly because I assumed (wrongly) that: a) We would go in with overwhelming force and actively support a rebel advance with coordinated CAS and interdiction strikes, not this pussy-footing PC joke of an air campaign that is now in effect, and b) Gaddafi had not meaningfully upgraded his arsenal since the 80's and would not be able to long withstand a NATO led air campaign.
ReplyDeleteWith Syria, however, it's a totally different story. Assad had way more firepower at his disposal both in men and materiel, plus he has had he benefit of being able to recently upgrade much of his arsenal through Iranian and Russian help.
Additionally, Syria has many foriegn allies that could give us trouble, while Libya was already very isolated. The Syrians could at least depend on the Iranians and Hezbollah to retaliate in the region on their behalf. And if the Iranians get involved, all bets are off. It is important not to forget that Iran has contrsucted a missile base in Venezuela, and depending on the type of missile deployed there they may be able to hit targets as far north as Washington DC. It is widely rumored that Venezuela has given the Iranians permission to fire missiles from their territory in the event of a shooting war with the U.S.
Finally, as Solomon already pointed out, we are increadibly over-burdened with our current military tempo. Going into Syria could have much more dire consequences than our little adventure in Libya right now. I hope someone in this Administration is considering the potential thrid and fourth order consequences of a Syrian intervention, since apparently no one did for Libya.
Here's a link talking about that Venezuelan missile base.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.hudson-ny.org/1714/iran-missiles-in-venezuela
there are huge issues if we go into Syria....
ReplyDeletewell said Patrick.
Hezbollah will launch missiles against Israel like we've never seen. thats the whole mistake that airpower advocates, NATO and the EU make.
they discount human factors when it comes to warfare. they expect that every civilization is as weak as the west. they hope that a few weeks of bombing will make people collapse.
they ignore the fact that despite them being enemies of 'peace' they are fighting for their homeland and will not easily surrender. we wouldn't and they won't.
problem is this.
the Obama administration is idealistic (as are there followers and fans) and they're emotional.
idealism is valuable when assembling your population to fight...not when you're waging war.
stony eyed realism is needed. cold, non-emotional mental toughness is needed.
its no where to be found now.