• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

U.S. Had Intel on Chemical Strike Before It Was Launched: Foreign Policy

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/p...tel_on_chemical_strike_before_it_was_launched
American intelligence agencies had indications three days beforehand that the Syrian regime was poised to launch a lethal chemical attack that killed more than a thousand people and has set the stage for a possible U.S. military strike on Syria.

The disclosure -- part of a larger U.S. intelligence briefing on Syria's chemical attacks -- raises all sorts of uncomfortable questions for the American government. First and foremost: What, if anything, did it do to notify the Syrian opposition of the pending attack?

In a call with reporters Friday afternoon, senior administration officials did not address whether this information was shared with rebel groups in advance of the attack. A White House spokeswoman declined to comment on whether the information had been shared.

But at least some members of the Syrian opposition are already lashing out at the U.S. government for not acting ahead of time to prevent the worst chemical attack in a quarter-century. "If you knew, why did you take no action?" asked Dlshad Othman, a Syrian activist and secure-communications expert who has recently relocated to the United States. He added that none of his contacts had any sort of prior warning about the nerve gas assault -- although such an attack was always a constant fear.

Razan Zaitouneh, an opposition activist in the town of Douma, one of the towns hit in the Aug. 21 attack, said she had no early indication of a major chemical attack. "Even the moment [the attack hit], we thought it was as usual, limited and not strong," she told The Cable in an instant message. That only changed when "we started to hear about the number of injuries."

"It's unbelievable that they did nothing to warn people or try to stop the regime before the crime," Zaitouneh added.

The U.S. intelligence community is now all but certain that the Syrian regime used chemical weapons on rebels and civilians in the suburbs of Damascus nine days ago. And part of that certainty were the military's signs of advance preparation for an attack.

"In the three days prior to the attack, we collected streams of human, signals and geospatial intelligence that reveal regime activities that we assess were associated with preparations for a chemical weapons attack," said a U.S. intelligence report the Obama administration released Friday.

"Multiple streams of intelligence indicate that the regime executed a rocket and artillery attack against the Damascus suburbs in the early hours of August 21," the report added. Satellites detected that the weapons were launched from territories held by the regime. They landed in rebel-controlled or contested neighborhoods.

The intelligence assessment is based on "a substantial body of information," including satellite imagery, intercepted communications, and social media reports from the scene of the attack.

"Our high confidence assessment is the strongest position that the U.S. Intelligence Community can take short of confirmation," the report said. "We will continue to seek additional information to close gaps in our understanding of what took place."

There had been reports of chemical attacks before the August 21 assault in Damascus. But it provided a wealth of new intelligence picked up by U.S. spy agencies that helped make the U.S. case for Syrian government culpability.

The Cable reported Tuesday that U.S. intelligence had intercepted a panicked phone call between an official at the Syrian Ministry of Defense and a leader of a chemical weapons unit in the hours after the attack. The minister demanded answers for the strike, which used a nerve agent. Those conversations helped convince U.S. officials that the Syrian regime was responsible.

The new intelligence assessment doesn't definitively answer whether the attack was ordered by the highest ranks of the government or if it was the work of a rogue military officer. But remarks this afternoon by Secretary of State John Kerry made it clear that the Obama administration is holding Syrian President Bashar al-Assad responsible.

"Read for yourselves the verdict reached by our intelligence community about the chemical weapons attack the Assad regime inflicted," Kerry said in remarks at the State Department.

The U.S. has determined that 1,429 people were killed in the attack, including at least 426 children. That number closely matches the casualty estimates reported by a Syrian opposition group yesterday. A separate report from the British Joint Intelligence Committee put the death toll much lower, at least 350 people. The U.S. assessment said the final tally "will certainly evolve as we obtain more information."

In releasing the intelligence report, the Obama administration sought to assure Americans that its conclusions were based on multiple verifiable sources, including public accounts, and that the intelligence community had not repeated the mistakes of 2003, when it incorrectly judged that Iraq possessed chemical weapons.

"We will not repeat that moment," Kerry said, emphasizing that the intelligence about the Syrian attacks had been vetted and reviewed.

In addition to U.S. satellite and signals intelligence, the report also relies on "thousands of social media reports" in the hours after the attack, noting they were sent from "at least 12 different locations in the Damascus area." Kerry mentioned the volume of the reports, as well. Ninety minutes after the attack, "all hell broke loose in the social media," Kerry said, noting that the reports conveyed images and video of victims of the attack, showing some of them dazed, twitching, foaming at the mouth, or dead.

The report said U.S. intelligence "identified one hundred videos attributed to the attack, many of which show large numbers of bodies exhibiting physical signs consistent with, but not unique to, nerve agent exposure."

Senior administration officials acknowledged that they had not yet obtained soil samples from the site of the attack to test for evidence of chemical agents. Physical evidence also wasn't part of the new assessment, an indication that the Obama administration believes the abundance of reporting from other sources is sufficient to make its case that the Syrian regime used chemical weapons.

The intelligence report also suggests a possible motive for the attack.

"We assess that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons over the last year primarily to gain the upper hand or break a stalemate in areas where it has struggled to seize and hold strategically valuable territory. In this regard, we continue to judge that the Syrian regime views chemical weapons as one of many tools in its arsenal, including air power and ballistic missiles, which they indiscriminately use against the opposition."

Kerry couched a U.S. response to the attacks in moral and humanitarian terms. But he did not advance any legal argument to support U.S. military action.

"2 things we did not hear from Secretary Kerry. (1) What is our military objective? (2) What legal justification is the Administration using?" Rep. Buck McKeon, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, tweeted after the secretary's remarks.

Meanwhile, the world is bracing for an anticipated attack on Syria. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told the United States and the four other big U.N. powers in a closed-door briefing today that it would take up to two weeks to determine whether chemical weapons have been used in Syria, according to diplomats briefed on the meeting.

Ban said that his chief U.N. weapons inspector, the Swedish scientist Ake Sellstrom, had initially insisted he would need three to four weeks to analyze samples collected at the site of the Aug. 21 attack. But Ban told the gathering, which included Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, and representatives from Britain, China, France, and Russia, that he had convinced Sellstrom to conclude his analysis in 10 to 14 days.

Ban's spokesman, Martin Nesirky, told reporters today that the U.N. could not immediately provide the Security Council with any findings on the nature of the substance that asphyxiated large numbers of people in the attack. Once the analysis is completed, he said, Ban will provide a report to the 15-nation council.

"We have to be very clear here that before the mission can draw any conclusion about this incident, the evaluation of all available information, including the laboratory analysis of all samples, must be completed," Nesirky said. "The team is doing its utmost to expedite the process of analysis."

Despite White House assertions that the U.N. inspectors' work is "redundant," Ban told the big powers that the U.N. would return to Syria in the future to resume inspections. Ban said that the inspectors had concluded their field inspections in the Damascus suburbs and that U.N. inspectors had visited a military hospital in Damascus to examine government claims that Syrian forces had been exposed to nerve agent during three recent chemical weapons attacks launched by rebel groups. Nesirky said that the chemical weapons team's translators had already left the country and that the technical experts were packing their bags, with plans to depart Syria Saturday morning.

Ban plans to meet Saturday with Angela Kane, the U.N. high representative for disarmament affairs, who is returning from Damascus, where she had negotiated access to the attack sites with Syrian authorities. But diplomatic sources said he has no plans to brief the Security Council over the U.S. Labor Day weekend.

In the meantime, some within the Syrian opposition are worried that any delays could give Assad time to bolster his defenses.

"This is one worry that we have. Since the international community has begun talking about a response to the chemical massacre, what we have noticed is that the Assad regime has started moving different military units into different areas," Khaled Saleh, the media director of the Syrian National Coalition and a member of the Syrian National Council, told The Cable. "So they're using that time to hide their more well-armed units. And you know, when they move them to schools, the U.S. and the international community can't do a whole lot about that."

If the U.S. doesn't strike Assad hard enough or if the strike is too limited, he will likely hit back at Syrians in response. "Our worry is that Assad will turn to Syrians and kill more of them," Saleh added.

God DAMN. We all knew it wasn't a humanitarian intervention and it was all about those global interests but DAMN. Discuss.

EDIT: But this actually raises more questions! Why are you sending UN investigators and making an intelligence assesment yourself when you already knew that an attack was happening ? Is it an attempt to try to legitimize an possible intervention with the public ?

And finally then it really wasn't a damn false flag attack and it was Assad forces ! Or what ?

I swear this crap is like in some Tom Clancy book.
 
because you can never be 100% sure of anything. even if you had intelligence that it was going to happen, what's the US gonna do? launch a missile ot of nowhere?

Keep in mind, they don't trust the rebel side either as it has al quada.

so what then? personally call the civilians?
 
because you can never be 100% sure of anything. even if you had intelligence that it was going to happen, what's the US gonna do? launch a missile ot of nowhere?

Keep in mind, they don't trust the rebel side either as it has al quada.

so what then? personally call the civilians?

True thing. It would be a very sketchy claim to say: "Hey we know it's going to happen in a couple of days so we're going to strike now!"

They "had" to wait for it to happen before they could do anything about it.
 

hym

Banned
And finally then it really wasn't a damn false flag attack and it was Assad forces ! Or what ?

Israeli intelligence 'intercepted Syrian regime talk about chemical attack'

If the source wasn't the world's largest false flag factory.

chemical attack that killed more than a thousand people

355 died in 3 hospitals (MSF claim) NEUTRAL
494 killed (The Damascus Media Office claim) claims to be NEUTRAL
502 killed (SOHR claim) used to claim neutrality has since been exposed as PARTISAN
588 killed (VDC claim) PARTISAN
635 killed (SRGC claim) PARTISAN
1,222 killed (HRO East Ghouta claim) PARTISAN
1,300 killed (SNC claim) PARTISAN and admirers of al-Qaeda
1,338 killed (LCC claim) PARTISAN
1,429 killed (US Government assessment) KNOWN LIARS
1,729 killed (FSA claim) FRIENDS OF AL-QAEDA
 
Israeli intelligence 'intercepted Syrian regime talk about chemical attack'

If the source wasn't the world's largest false flag factory.



355 died in 3 hospitals (MSF claim) NEUTRAL
494 killed (The Damascus Media Office claim) claims to be NEUTRAL
502 killed (SOHR claim) used to claim NEUTRAL has been exposed as PARTISAN
588 killed (VDC claim) PARTISAN
635 killed (SRGC claim) PARTISAN
1,222 killed (HRO East Ghouta claim) PARTISAN
1,300 killed (SNC claim) PARTISAN
1,338 killed (LCC claim) PARTISAN
1,429 killed (US Government assessment) PARTISAN
1,729 killed (FSA claim) PARTISAN


Haha that was great! Blasted me with that information.

Well assesments of human lives lost vary a lot from organisation to organisation, and not only in this conflict. Every organisation has it's own way to count the deaths and so on.

And of course some have the interest in keeping them high for some motive or reason. that doesn't leave out the fact that a chemical attack happened but now with this article it seems as confirmation of also who did it!
 
Israeli intelligence 'intercepted Syrian regime talk about chemical attack'

If the source wasn't the world's largest false flag factory.

355 died in 3 hospitals (MSF claim) NEUTRAL
494 killed (The Damascus Media Office claim) claims to be NEUTRAL
502 killed (SOHR claim) used to claim neutrality has since been exposed as PARTISAN
588 killed (VDC claim) PARTISAN
635 killed (SRGC claim) PARTISAN
1,222 killed (HRO East Ghouta claim) PARTISAN
1,300 killed (SNC claim) PARTISAN
1,338 killed (LCC claim) PARTISAN
1,429 killed (US Government assessment) KNOWN LIARS
1,729 killed (FSA claim) FRIENDS OF AL-QAEDA

In the same post you seem to be implying it was done by the Israelis and trying to downplay the number of casualties. Surely if it was a false flag operation more casualties would be better?
 

hym

Banned
so you think the Israeli military launched the chemical attack, and then released intelligence to say Assad did it?

Israelis prefer not to get their hands dirty, Saudis were more than willing and capable to pull this one off so they most likely did.

Like Iraqi WMD Israel simply fabricates the supposedly corroborating evidence to strengthen the lie which is not originally theirs, they are simply piggybacking because they want US intervention in Syria.

In the same post you seem to be implying it was done by the Israelis and trying to downplay the number of casualties. Surely if it was a false flag operation more casualties would be better?

I don't think they are downplaying anything, their casualties assessment is probably close to reality, that's the best way to package a lie.

The US decided they had to go for the higher body count or the scale of the attack and the potency of the weapons would even make less sense than it already does. 1,5k is still very low given the area and population affected with allegedly military grade sarin.
 
Israelis prefer not to get their hands dirty, Saudis were more than willing and capable to pull this one off so they most likely did.

Like Iraqi WMD Israel simply fabricates the supposedly corroborating evidence to strengthen the lie which is not originally theirs, they are simply piggybacking because they want US intervention in Syria.



I don't think they are downplaying anything, their casualties assessment is probably close to reality, that's the best way to package a lie.

The US decided they had to go for the higher body count or the scale of the attack and the potency of the weapons would even make less sense than it already does. 1,5k is still very low given the area and population affected with allegedly military grade sarin.

and where is your proof for this assessment?
 

hym

Banned
and where is your proof for this assessment?

Proof? you think these people are amateurs? there is only means, motive, and opportunity for now, I myself don't particularly attach much value to what the Syrian media is pushing out to calm domestic fears, it's important to note how poorly prepared they were to react to this situation though.

I figure you are American so you probably worry about your National Security, i.e. Israel, well here are my 3 favorite of their failed false flags, the successful ones you don't tend to hear about (or well I do but not with “proof”).

Lavon Affair
Protocol of Sèvres - Shimon Peres is still proud about this despite its failure, you should check some interviews were he mentions it
USS Liberty incident
 

yarden24

Member
Proof? you think these people are amateurs? there is only means, motive, and opportunity for now, I myself don't particularly attach much value to what the Syrian media is pushing out to calm domestic fears, it's important to note how poorly prepared they were to react to this situation though.

I figure you are American so you probably worry about your National Security, i.e. Israel, well here are my 3 favorite of their failed false flags, the successful ones you don't tend to hear about (or well I do but not with “proof”).

Lavon Affair
Protocol of Sèvres - Shimon Peres is still proud about this despite its failure, you should check some interviews were he mentions it
USS Liberty incident

hmm, only the first of there is a false flag attack and that's from more then 60 years ago.

do you honestly believe a false flag attack is the most likely scenario here? seems extraordinarily unlikely to me, especially when the US so clearly would prefer to not attack syira
 
Israelis prefer not to get their hands dirty, Saudis were more than willing and capable to pull this one off so they most likely did.

Like Iraqi WMD Israel simply fabricates the supposedly corroborating evidence to strengthen the lie which is not originally theirs, they are simply piggybacking because they want US intervention in Syria.

I don't think they are downplaying anything, their casualties assessment is probably close to reality, that's the best way to package a lie.

The US decided they had to go for the higher body count or the scale of the attack and the potency of the weapons would even make less sense than it already does. 1,5k is still very low given the area and population affected with allegedly military grade sarin.

No, I meant you are downplaying the casualties by saying the lower figure is reliable ie. comes from a neutral source while the higher figure is not to be trusted (liars). I don't know who you are talking about when you say "they". If it's a false flag operation they would go for the biggest impact. As you say a small number of casualties would "make less sense".
 

DiscoJer

Member
Hmmm, doesn't that kind of contradict their previous story?

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/p...cepted_calls_prove_syrias_army_used_nerve_gas

Last Wednesday, in the hours after a horrific chemical attack east of Damascus, an official at the Syrian Ministry of Defense exchanged panicked phone calls with a leader of a chemical weapons unit, demanding answers for a nerve agent strike that killed more than 1,000 people. Those conversations were overheard by U.S. intelligence services, The Cable has learned. And that is the major reason why American officials now say they're certain that the attacks were the work of the Bashar al-Assad regime -- and why the U.S. military is likely to attack that regime in a matter of days.

And to use Occam's Razor, doesn't it make the most sense that some commander did it on his own? It doesn't make sense for Syria to do it, since it would potentially bring about an attack.

And I don't think the Israel idea makes much sense, either, since they would be trading an enemy they know well and on the decline (Hezbollah), for a new enemy (Al Qaeda)

But anyway, it's hard to reconcile this new story with the old one. If there was all this talk, then why did the Syrian Ministry of Defense official call up surprised by it?
 

hym

Banned
hmm, only the first of there is a false flag attack and that's from more then 60 years ago.

do you honestly believe a false flag attack is the most likely scenario here? seems extraordinarily unlikely to me, especially when the US so clearly would prefer to not attack syira

The US isn't involved in this attack at least I hope it isn't, if the CIA covert ops are that deeply infiltrated in al-Qaeda then we are all fucked, but it's a tailor-made invitation for war to Obama. He should be able to figure this out himself as I suspect he was not the original conceiver of the chemical red-line warning.

It's the Saudis who want the US to come deliver them a victory in Syria.

Moscow rejects Saudi offer to drop Assad for arms deal
The Saudi prince also reassured Putin that "whatever regime comes after" Assad, it will be "completely" in the Saudis' hands and will not sign any agreement allowing any Gulf country to transport its gas across Syria to Europe and compete with Russian gas exports, the diplomat said.
 
Proof? you think these people are amateurs? there is only means, motive, and opportunity for now, I myself don't particularly attach much value to what the Syrian media is pushing out to calm domestic fears, it's important to note how poorly prepared they were to react to this situation though.

I figure you are American so you probably worry about your National Security, i.e. Israel, well here are my 3 favorite of their failed false flags, the successful ones you don't tend to hear about (or well I do but not with “proof”).

Lavon Affair
Protocol of Sèvres - Shimon Peres is still proud about this despite its failure, you should check some interviews were he mentions it
USS Liberty incident

lol, so you're basing this not on any kind of evidence proof, but on your feelings.
 

pgtl_10

Member
Sorry but US intelligence as well as Israeli have proven at times to be unreliable. Even the Brits aren't buying it and they usually go with America on every issue.

Americans seem smarter than the media these days:

About 60 percent of Americans surveyed said the United States should not intervene in Syria's civil war, while just 9 percent thought President Barack Obama should act.


The Reuters/Ipsos poll, taken August 19-23, found that 25 percent of Americans would support U.S. intervention if Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's forces used chemicals to attack civilians, while 46 percent would oppose it. That represented a decline in backing for U.S. action since August 13, when Reuters/Ipsos tracking polls found that 30.2 percent of Americans supported intervention in Syria if chemicals had been used, while 41.6 percent did not.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/us-syria-crisis-usa-poll-idUSBRE97O00E20130825
 

hym

Banned
lol, so you're basing this not on any kind of evidence proof, but on your feelings.

Of course I'm basing this on evidence just not the smoking gun you're after, which by the way the US won't be able to show any of either because fabricated intelligence has a very short expiration date once it is revealed publicly, all they show now is assessments, HAH.

Read this: BAE: secret papers reveal threats from Saudi prince
And: A Veteran Saudi Power Player Works To Build Support to Topple Assad

And return to me saying that Assad's military strategy fitting exactly in Saudi plans is coincidence. To believe Kerry you need to accept Assad and his generals are not only evil and insane but self-destructive...
 
I still find it amusing though that US-Saudi relations has somehow done an 180 degree turn, making the Saudis the shot-callers in their relationship, playing the US to do their bidding, according to your theory that is.

We usually have this idea that the Saudis are the Americans lackeys and not the other way around. The relationship seems to evolve in which way that fits the better in any given context.
 

liger05

Member
Woah FSA brigades in western Damascus say they caught spy trying to plant targeting chips into Jabhat Al Nusra camp. Surprised? No. The US wants to launch missiles on the mujahaideen as well as Assad's sites.
 

PJV3

Member
The only thing that's muddied the waters is the scores of whacko fundamentalists who have invaded the country, sad, but they have fucked things up for syria.
 
I still find it amusing though that US-Saudi relations has somehow done an 180 degree turn, making the Saudis the shot-callers in their relationship, playing the US to do their bidding, according to your theory that is.

We usually have this idea that the Saudis are the Americans lackeys and not the other way around. The relationship seems to evolve in which way that fits the better in any given context.

what has the Saudi called that the US just did without questions?
 

hym

Banned
Woah FSA brigades in western Damascus say they caught spy trying to plant targeting chips into Jabhat Al Nusra camp. Surprised? No. The US wants to launch missiles on the mujahaideen as well as Assad's sites.

Are you truly this naive?

Oh well, I suppose it's a sort of prerequisite for your religious predisposition.
 

liger05

Member
Because no war was was ever based on a fabricated pretext. Maybe put down your Qur'an and read a history book for a change.

My mistake. FSA, ISIS, Jan, SIF are all controlled by the Saudi king who controls America. Yes that's what's really happening lol
 
Because no war was was ever based on a fabricated pretext. Maybe put down your Qur'an and read a history book for a change.

The examples you are probably thinking of weren't fabricated in the conspiratorial way you are implying.
 

hym

Banned
Poorly constructed strawman liger05, maybe for once you should try make an argument against what I actually said instead of debating your own imagination.

The examples you are probably thinking of weren't fabricated in the conspiratorial way you are implying.

Gulf of Tonkin incident
The outcome of these two incidents was the passage by Congress of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which granted President Lyndon B. Johnson the authority to assist any Southeast Asian country whose government was considered to be jeopardized by "communist aggression."
In 2005, an internal National Security Agency historical study was declassified; it concluded that the Maddox had engaged the North Vietnamese Navy on August 2, but that there were no North Vietnamese Naval vessels present during the incident of August 4.

It is not simply that there is a different story as to what happened; it is that no attack happened that night. [...] In truth, Hanoi's navy was engaged in nothing that night but the salvage of two of the boats damaged on August 2.

Fantasy to justify war and it took us 41 years to get confirmation on that, when practically nobody cared anymore. Because the History Channel is occupied talking about extraterrestrials and Hitler.
 

liger05

Member
Poorly constructed strawman liger05, maybe for once you should try make an argument against what I actually said instead of debating your own imagination.



Gulf of Tonkin incident



Fantasy to justify war and it took us 41 years to get confirmation on that, when practically nobody cared anymore. Because the History Channel is occupied talking about extraterrestrials and Hitler.

You really do pick and choose. When turks are protesting against the 'sultan' there is no problem and you mention no outside interference at all. But the Syrians protest against and uprise against Assad. Oh of course not that can't be be real. Egyptians protest against the MB and not a coup? No it was just the will of the people and the Egyptian army were saying no those long bearded overlords in the Gulf.
 
what has the Saudi called that the US just did without questions?

Hym is implying that the Saudis is "forcing" the US to go into this war so they can get their victory and then insert an Saudi friendly president after Assads demise.

He keeps copy/pasting the same statement that some Saudi king made about this.

Here it is:

The Saudi prince also reassured Putin that "whatever regime comes after" Assad, it will be "completely" in the Saudis' hands and will not sign any agreement allowing any Gulf country to transport its gas across Syria to Europe and compete with Russian gas exports, the diplomat said.

I think that's quite a 180 degree turn from the "typical" view we have on their relationship.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom