Falsified Official Narrative. Concealing the True Targets of US-Led Aggression in Syria

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: 

stephenlendman.org 

(Home – Stephen Lendman). 

Contact at [email protected].

With rare exceptions, virtually everything reported by major Western media about Syria follows the falsified official narrative – concealing US-led aggression on a sovereign independent state threatening no one.

Yet Syria was attacked and invaded (by US-supported terrorists and Pentagon forces) as maliciously and illegally as Hitler’s aggression during WW II. The same goes for all US wars since the early 1950s.

No nation in world history has been responsible for more ruthless mass slaughter and destruction than America since its 1776 creation, none inflicting more human misery, none more lawless, none more disdainful of human life, rights and welfare, none more risking humanity’s demise by its disdain for rule of law principles – by its rage to rule the world, risking its destruction.

Big Lies unjustifiably justify all US wars of aggression. None are waged for responsibility to protect, humanitarian intervention, or any other officially stated reasons.

They’re all about advancing America’s imperium, its quest for unchallenged global dominance, its rage to replace all sovereign independent governments with pro-Western puppet regimes.

War in Syria isn’t “civil.” So-called “rebels” are US-created and supported terrorists.

The presence of US and allied forces in the country is flagrantly illegal.

Overnight Friday US-led aggression targeted Syrian military bases – foiled by its air defenses.

Tass revealed the “true targets,” aiming to inflict a major blow to Syrian military capabilities, notably by striking its airbases.

Russian Defense Ministry Spokesman General Igor Konashenkov explained the attack’s objective, far more sweeping than official reports.

“The true targets of the strike(s) delivered by the US, the UK and France on April 14 were both facilities in Barzeh and Jaramani and Syrian military facilities, including airfields,” he explained.

Most of the 103 or more cruise and air-to-surface missiles fired aimed at Syrian military facilities.

Konasenkov: After-action photos of Barzeh showed damage “caused by the missile strike does not correspond to the scale of destruction from the use of three dozen cruise missiles.”

Image result for After-action photos of Barzeh

Source: The Nation

Other military facilities targeted “revealed neither this number of ammunition fragments nor the corresponding number of craters” – meaning targets aimed at weren’t struck, incoming missiles destroyed in flight before reaching them.

Syria’s military fired 112 surface-to-air missiles to repel strikes on its facilities, Konashenkov explained, adding:

“Twenty-nine missiles were fired from the Buk system, with 24 of them hitting targets. Eleven missiles were fired from the Osa system. Five of them hit the targets.”

“Thirteen missiles were fired from the S-125 system. Five hit the targets. Five missiles were fired from the Strela-10 system. Three hit the targets.”

“Twenty-one missiles were fired from the Kvadrat system. Eleven hit the targets. Eight missiles were fired from the S-200 systems. None hit the targets.”

The S-200 was designed to strike aircraft, not missiles, the reason for its poor performance, Konashenkov explained, stressing:

Syrian military facilities protected by air defense systems suffered practically no damage.

“All…four missiles fired at the Dumayr aerodrome were shot down; 18 missiles were fired at the Blei airfield. All were shot down.”

“Twelve missiles were fired at the Shairat aerodrome. All were shot down. Two missiles were fired at the T-4 aerodrome. All were shot down.”

“Five of the nine missiles fired at the Mezze airfield were shot down; 13 out of the 16 missiles fired at the Homs aerodrome were shot down.”

Only five of 30 missiles fired at Barze and Djaramani facilities were downed.

Of 103 US, UK and French missiles fired, 71 were destroyed in flight. The Pentagon called its failed mission successful.

What lesson can be drawn from US-led aggression on multiple Syrian targets, mainly military ones?

Failure to achieve the mission’s objective virtually assures further US-led aggressive attacks to come.

Overnight Friday wasn’t a one-off. It was likely prelude for much more to come. The Pentagon put a brave face on failure – likely well into the planning stage for its next move.

Washington didn’t launch naked aggression on Syria in March 2011 to quit. Endless war continues.

Russia’s good faith diplomatic conflict resolution efforts since 2012 failed. Nothing suggests Moscow can turn failure into success ahead. Just the opposite – escalated US-led aggression, not stepping back from the brink.

Syria needs the most effective air defense systems possible – either Russia’s S-300s or preferably its S-400s to defend the nation against virtually certain further US-led aggressive attacks to come.

Delivery of these systems to Syria’s military should be expedited, getting them in place as soon as possible – ahead of more US-led aggression surely coming.

*

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the CRG, Correspondent of Global Research based in Chicago.

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at [email protected].

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”


Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research


Articles by: Stephen Lendman

About the author:

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]