Why do you think ISIS was able to retake Palmyra?
Palmyra Surprise: The US Just Moved ISIS from Iraq to Syria
Faced
with the fall of the terrorist stronghold of Aleppo, Washington and
its Salafist allies have no choice but to throw everything they have
into the battle with Assad
Eric
Zuesse
11
December, 2016
A 12
August 2012 U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency warning that
the Obama Administration’s strategy might drive ISIS from Mosul in
Iraq to Der Zor in Syria, is now being actually carried out as a plan
instead of a warning — a plan to weaken and ultimately oust Syria’s
non-sectarian President Bashar al-Assad and replace him with a Sunni
Sharia-law regime (one led by jihadists). The DIA warning had called
this scenario an “unraveling,” but Obama and the U.S. Congress
are now actually choosing it, so as to set the incoming President
Trump up with an opportunity to replace Assad’s government by one
that the Sauds and their U.S.-made weapons will control.
The
DIA warning in 2012 had said:
"C.
IF THE SITUATION UNRAVELS THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING A
DECLARED OR UNDECLARED SALAFIST [fundamentalist Sunni] PRINCIPALITY
IN EASTERN SYRIA (HASAKA AND DER ZOR), AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE
SUPPORTING POWERS [U.S., Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey] TO THE
OPPOSITION WANT, IN ORDER TO ISOLATE THE [pro-Russian and
pro-Iranian] SYRIAN REGIME.”
Whoever
wrote this assessment recognized that though the option would mean an
“unraveling” of Syria, it’s what the U.S. and its allies were
actually seeking.
On
September 17th, U.S. and UK jets bombed the compound of Syrian
government troops who were fighting to oust jihadists from Deir Ezzor
(or “Der Zor”), and killed 62 Syrian soldiers, with a hundred
more injured, in that U.S.-led bombing attack. Der Zor was being
softened-up for the coming U.S.-and-allied takeover.
The
brilliant anonymous military blogger “Moon of Alabama” then
became the first reporter to notice the possible connection that the
DIA’s warning might end up having to what is now the joint
U.S.-Turkish-Iraqi operation against ISIS in Mosul; he headlined on
20 September 2016, "Deir
Ezzor Attack Enables The 'Salafist Principality' As Foreseen In The
2012 DIA Analysis”,
and he wrote:
"Two
recent attacks against the Syrian Arab Army in east-Syria point to a
U.S. plan to eliminate all Syrian government presence east of
Palmyra. This would enable the U.S. and its allies to create a
'Sunni entity' in east-Syria and west-Iraq which would be a permanent
thorn in side of Syria and its allies [Russia and Iran]. A 2012
analysis by the Defense Intelligence Agency said” — and he
then quoted the above DIA excerpt.
Then
on October 12th, he bannered “The
’Salafist Principality’ — ISIS Paid Off To Leave Mosul And To
Take Deir Ezzor?”,
and reported that the Obama Administration had just negotiated with
Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan, and with Saudi Prince Salman (who
is the decision-maker in Saudi military matters), to provide safe
passage into the large Syrian city of Deir Es Zor, for the ISIS
jihadists who were occupying the large city of Mosul in Iraq.
He
cited also a tweet on
the morning of October 12th, from the celebrated Syrian historian and
journalist Nizar
Nayouf, reporting:
“Breaking news: Sources in #London say: #US&#Saudi_Arabia
concluded an agreement to let #ISIS leave #Mosul secretly &
safely to #Syria.”
Furthermore,
on October 15th, the Turkish government posted online a map showing
the“‘Sensitive’
Operation Plan for Mosul” including
six steps, one of which was “An escape corridor into Syria will be
left for Daesh [ISIS] so they can vacate Mosul.” Though the U.S.
government wasn’t public about this part of the plan — moving the
jihadists “into Syria” instead of killing the jihadists (as Obama
always claimed to be his intention) — the Turkish government was.
On
December 11th, Russian Television headlined “4,000
ISIS fighters regroup, make new attempt to capture Palmyra”,
and reported that:
“Over
4,000 Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) terrorists, reinforced
by tanks, have started an offensive to retake the key Syrian city of
Palmyra after regrouping themselves. … The terrorists have
received considerable reinforcement, including heavy military
hardware from the regions of Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor. …The
terrorists are receiving support from jihadists coming from Iraq. …
In October, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned that
terrorists ‘could flee from Mosul and go to Syria.’”
That’s
precisely what is now happening.
So:
the Obama Administration seems to be making considerable progress to
set up the next U.S. President, Trump, with an “unraveling”
situation in Syria, so as to enable Trump to continue Obama’s war
against Russia and all its allies (such as Syria).
Whether
President Trump will continue Obama’s policy isn’t yet clear.
Investigative
historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re
Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records,
1910-2010,
and of CHRIST’S
VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
Has The US And Its Allies Used Covert Airdrops, Drones To Supply The Islamic State?
By Ulson Gunnar
12 December, 2016
When
asking these questions, they must first be understood in the context
that:
(A.) According to WikiLeaks, within the e-mails of former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton it was acknowledged that the governments of two of America’s closest allies in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, were providing material support to the Islamic State (IS);
(B.) That according to the US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) (PDF), the US and its allies sought to use a “Salafist principality” in eastern Syria as a strategic asset against the Syrian government, precisely where the Islamic (Salafist) State (principality) eventually manifested itself and;
(C.) That the fighting capacity of the Islamic State is on such a large and sustained level, it can only be the result of immense and continuous state sponsorship, including a constant torrent of supplies by either ground or air (or both).
Within
this context, we can already partially answer these questions with
confirmed statements made by another of America’s closest allies in
the region, and a long-time NATO member, Turkey.
It
was a May 2016 Washington
Times article
titled, “Turkey
offers joint ops with U.S. forces in Syria, wants Kurds cut out,”
that quoted none other than the Turkish Foreign Minister himself
admitting (emphasis added):
Joint operations between Washington and Ankara in Manbji, a well-known waypoint for Islamic State fighters, weapons and equipment coming from Turkey bound for Raqqa, would effectively open “a second front” in the ongoing fight to drive the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, from Syria’s borders, [Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu] said.
And
clearly, by simply looking at maps of the Syrian conflict over the
past 5 years, the supply corridors used by the Islamic State, via
Turkey, to resupply its region-wide warfare were significant until
Kurdish fighters reduced them to one, now the epicenter of a
questionable Turkish military incursion into northern Syria.
With
the Islamic State’s ground routes hindered, is there another way
the US or at the very least, admittedly its Islamic State-sponsoring
allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar could deliver food, ammunition, weapons
and even small vehicles to the militant group, still held up in
Syria’s eastern city of Al Raqqa?
The
answer is yes.
Modern American Airdrop Capabilities
A
system developed years ago for the United States military called
Joint Precision Airdrop System (JPADS) allows cargo aircraft to
release airdrops of supplies from as high as 25,000 feet and as far
from a drop zone as 25-30 kilometers. A Global Positioning System
(GPS) and an airborne guidance unit automate the drop’s trajectory
to land within 100 meters of a predetermined drop zone. The system
also makes it possible to release several drops at once and have them
directed toward different drop zones.
The
US military has already received this system and it has been in use
for years. At least one Persian Gulf state has taken delivery of the
system as well, the United Arab Emirates.
Defense
Industry Daily would
report that
in 2013, the UAE would order the system for use with its C-130H and
C-17 aircraft. The same report would note that the system is used by
several other NATO allies.
The
US has admittedly used this system to drop supplies to both Kurdish
fighters and anti-government militants in Syria, including at least
one instance where supply pallets ended up “accidentally” with
the Islamic State.
In
addition to airdrops made by large, manned cargo aircraft, the US has
admittedly used drones to drop supplies across the
region, the Guardian would
admit.
The US Already Makes Airdrops to the Islamic State
The Washington
Post in
a 2014 article titled, “U.S.
accidentally delivered weapons to the Islamic State by airdrop,
militants say,”
claims:
The Islamic State has released a new video in which it brags that it recovered weapons and supplies that the U.S. military intended to deliver to Kurdish fighters, who are locked in a fight with the militants over control of the Syrian border town of Kobane.
The Washington
Post also
admits (emphasis added):
The incident highlights the difficulty in making sure all airdrops are accurate, even with GPS-guided parachutes that the Air Force commonly uses. Airdrops of food and water to religious minorities trapped on mountain cliffs in northern Iraq in August hit the mark about 80 percent of the time, Pentagon officials said at the time.
This
(and similar incidents) may represent an accident in which JPADS
performed poorly. Or it could represent an intentional airdrop meant
to resupply Islamic State terrorists with the Washington
Postarticle
attempting to explain away how GPS-guided airdrops could
“accidentally” end up in enemy territory.
Reports
from Qatari-based Al
Jazeera claim
the US has also dropped weapons to militants other than Kurdish
fighters. In an article titled, “US
drops weapons to rebels battling ISIL in Syria,” Al
Jazeeraclaims:
The US has reportedly dropped weapons to rebel fighters in Syria as the UN Security Council considers dropping food and medicine by air to civilians.
It
also claims that:
The weapons supplies were airdropped to rebels in Marea, a town in the northern province of Aleppo,on Friday, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) said.
“Coalition airplanes dropped … ammunitions, light weapons and anti-tank weapons to rebels in Marea,” Rami Abdel Rahman, the SOHR head, said.
Knowingly Dropping Supplies into Terrorist-Held Territory
And
more recently, there has been a push to drop supplies into eastern
Aleppo in an attempt to prolong the fighting and prevent the complete
collapse of a militant presence there, specifically using
JPADS, according
to the Guardian.
Another Guardian article
reveals that
US drones have previously been used to make airdrops in the region
and might be used again to create an “air bridge” to
militant-held areas of Syria.
However,
even most US and European sources have admitted to a heavy presence
of Al Qaeda’s Syrian franchise in the city, Jabhat Al Nusra, a
designated foreign terrorist organization even according to the US
State Department.
If
the US would seriously consider airdropping supplies to Al Qaeda to
prolong fighting and to continue confounding Syrian forces, why
wouldn’t they also airdrop supplies to the Islamic State to do the
same?
With
the ability to drop supplies from as high as 25,000 feet and from as
far away as 25-30 kilometers (and possibly even further as was
envisioned by future designs), the US or its allies could appear to
be resupplying what it calls “moderate rebels” on one part of the
battlefield, while diverting a percentage of its drops into Al Qaeda
or Islamic State territory. Drones could also be utilized to create
“air bridges” harder to detect than those created using larger
cargo aircraft.
With
the Islamic State’s fighting capacity still potent both in Iraq and
Syria, and with Kurdish fighters sealing off ground routes along the
Syrian border, unless Turkey within its “buffer zone” is passing
weapons onward to the Islamic State, what other means could this
terrorist organization be using to resupply its regional war effort,
if not by air?
For
those seriously committed to defeating the Islamic State and other
armed groups operating within Syrian territory, answering this
question will bring peace and security one step loser.
Ulson
Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially
for the online magazine “New
Eastern Outlook”.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.