It appears from the very limited US missile attack,
most of which were intercepted and destroyed by Syrian air defenses, that the
US military prevailed over the crazed John Bolton and carefully avoided a
strike that would have resulted in a Russian response. No significant Syrian
site appears to have been targeted, and no Russians were endangered. https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/04/in-depth-syria-stuns-world-thwarts-us-attack/
The main effect seems to be that Trump has further
discredited himself and the US by violating the UN Charter and international
law and committing an act of aggression, which is a war crime for which Nazi
civilian and military officials were executed. Russia’s President Putin said
that the wanton and illegal use of force by Washington has had “a devastating
impact on the whole system of international relations” and called for an
emergency meeting of the UN Security Council. China also condemned the illegal
US attack. https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/04/china-says-us-led-attacks-against-syria-are-illegal-and-against-international-law/
How was the feared conflict between the US and Russia
avoided? From what I have been able to learn, the US Joint Chiefs of Staff
would not accept the risk of conflict with Russia. The reason is not that the
Joint Chiefs are more moral, more caring about the deaths and injuries that
would result, or less inclined to go to war based on lies. Their objection was
based on the lack of protection US Navy ships have from the new Russian weapons
systems. An attack that brought a Russian response could sink the US flotilla
and present the US with a humiliating defeat that would discredit American
Bolton’s position was that Putin is a pussy who, as in
every previous case, will do nothing. Bolton’s position is that the Russians are
so scared of US military might that they will not respond to any US attack on
their forces and Syrian forces. The Russians, Bolton says, will do what they
always do. They will whine about the crime to the UN, and the Western media
will ignore them as always.
The US Secretary of War, Mattis, represented the Joint
Chiefs opinion. What, Mattis asked, if the Russians have had enough and do what
they are capable of and sink the US flotilla? Is Trump prepared to accept a
defeat engineered by his National Security Adviser? Is Trump prepared for a
possible wider conflict?
The Joint Chiefs would rather use the orchestrated
“Syrian crisis” to argue for more money, not to go to war that could be
terminable of their retirement plans. The Joint Chiefs can tell Congress: “We
couldn’t risk conflict with Russia over the use of chemical weapons in Syria
because we were outgunned. We need more money.” The older American generation
will rementer the fantasy “missile gap” of the Nixon/Kennedy presidential
campaign that was used to boost US defense spending.
It would be a mistake for anyone to conclude that
common sense has prevailed and the conflict has been resolved. What has
prevailed is the Joint Chiefs’ fear of a defeat. The next crisis that
Washington orchestrates will be on terms less favorable to Russian arms.
Bolton, the neoconservatives and the Israeli interest
that they represent will go to work on Mattis and the dissenting generals.
Leaks will appear in the presstitute media that are designed to discredit
Mattis and to foment Trump’s distrust. The neoconservatives will advance
military men more in line with the neoconservatives’ aggressiveness to
positions on the Joint Chiefs.
Syria is not about any chemical weapons use. Ahmet
Uzumcu, director general of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical
Weapons, reported that all chemical weapons had been removed from Syria. “Never
before has an entire arsenal of a category of weapons of mass destruction been
removed from a country experiencing a state of internal armed conflict, and
this has been accomplished within very demanding and tight time frames.” https://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/06/24/last-of-syrias-chemical-weapons-removed.html
Syria is not about dictatorship or building democracy.
It is not about the alleged 70 victims of chemical weapons. It would take a
complete idiot to believe that Washington and its European vassals, who have
killed, maimed, orphaned, and displaced millions of Muslims in seven countries
over the last 17 years to be so upset over the deaths of 70 Muslims that they
are willing to risk war with Russia.
Syria and Iran are an issue, because Syria and Iran
supply the Lebanese milita, Hezbollah, with money and weapons. This support
from Syria and Iran gives Hezbollah the capability of preventing Israel’s
occupation and annexation of southern Lebanon, whose water resources Israel
Twice the vaunted Israel Army has been chased out of
Lebanon by Hezbollah. Israel’s military reputation cannot risk a third defeat
by a mere militia, so Israel is using its control over US foreign policy and
its rock solid alliance with the neoconservatives to use the US military to
destabilize Syria and Iran as the US did to Iraq and Libya.
Additionally, there is the crazed neoconservative
ideology of US world hegemony. The interests of Russia and China are in the way
of US hegemony. Therefore, these two countries are defined as “threats.” Russia
and China are not threats because they intend to attack the US, which neither
has shown any indication of doing. They are threats because they are in
opposition to US unilateralism which overrides their sovereignty. In other
words, to be clear, the US cannot tolerate any country that has an independent
foreign or economic policy.
That Russia and China have independent policies is the
reason that they are “threats.”
It would be a mistake to conclude that diplomacy has
prevailed and common sense has returned to Washington. Nothing could be further
from the truth. The issue is not resolved. War remains on the horizon.