10 thoughts on “Blowback from Israeli Attack on Syria – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. Every ship carries a flag of a state.
    It doesn’t mean the ship belongs to the state, or that it carries supply from that state.
    For example, the Karine A had a flag of Tunga, the Francop – Antigua and Victoria – Liberia.
    Bottom line: it’s very possible that this was another Iranian supply to Hezbollah.
    You can stop taunting the IDF on twitter now.

    1. In this case the ship was Qatari & carrying the Qatari flag and Qatar is not know as a country allowing flags of convenience as Liberia & others do. Not to mention that Israeli intelligence would’ve likely known this ship was leaving Qatar & been tracking it. If they didn’t know what they should’ve known about it then maybe they’re not the vaunted intelligence service they’re made out to be.

  2. Keep the option open israel is “helping” Assad.
    Silvan Shalom had a freudian slip(in Hebrew) a few days ago,stating”Chemical weapons got into the hands of “Opposition”.
    that excludes hezbollah.
    Quantum leap;
    Israel is being thrown under the bus by their former”friends”.
    Israel has served it’s purpose for the puppetmasters,and will be sacrificed.
    US/EUROPE/NATO are pushing Israel into a war ,she doesn’t want.
    The NATO “rebels” might be planning a chemical false flag on Israel,that would set the region on fire.
    Israel is doing everything to stop this war from exploding,including pre-empting “rebels” if nessesary.
    Iran ,Syria,Lebanon,Russia and Israel don’t want war now,US/Europe do.

  3. RE: “Of course, Israel will argue the anti-aircraft missiles in the hands of Hezbollah would’ve changed the rules of the game for Israel and rendered its air power vulnerable to attack by Hezbollah from sophisticated Russian weaponry.” ~ R.S.

    FOR A DIFFERENT TAKE, SEE – “Israeli Attack: Desperate Bid to Save Failed Syrian Campaign”, by Tony Cartalucci, Land Destroyer, 1/31/13

    [EXCERPTS] . . . The Israeli “suspicions” of “weapon transfers” of course, remain unconfirmed, because the purpose of the attack was not to prevent the transfer of “chemical weapons” to Hezbollah in Lebanon, but to provoke a wider conflict aimed not at Israel’s defense, but at salvaging the West’s floundering proxy terrorist forces inside Syria attempting to subvert and overthrow the Syrian nation. . .
    . . . It must be remembered that as far back as 2007, it was admitted by US, Saudi and Lebanese officials that the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia were intentionally arming, funding, and organizing these “global jihadists” with direct ties to Al Qaeda for the explicit purpose of overthrowing the governments of Syria and Iran. . .
    . . . Indeed, Israel’s explanation as to why it struck neighboring Syria is tenuous at best considering its long, documented relationship with actually funding and arming the very “global jihaidists” it fears weapons may fall into the hands of. . .
    . . . In reality, the pressure placed on Syria’s borders by both Israel and its partner, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Turkey in the north, is part of a documented plan to relieve pressure on the Western, Israeli, Saudi-Qatari armed and funded militants operating inside Syria.
    The above mentioned, Fortune 500-funded (page 19), US foreign-policy think-tank, Brookings Institution – which has blueprinted designs for regime change in Libya as well as both Syria and Iran – stated this specifically in their report titled, “Assessing Options for Regime Change.”
    Brookings describes how Israeli efforts in the south of Syria, combined with Turkey’s aligning of vast amounts of weapons and troops along its border to the north, could help effect violent regime change in Syria . . .
    . . . Of course, airstrikes inside Syria . . . indicate perhaps a level of desperation in the West who appear to have elected their chief villain, Israel, to incrementally “intervene” just as they had planned in regards to attacking Iran – also documented by Brookings in a report titled, “Which Path to Persia?” . . .
    . . . Israel’s role is to play the “bad guy.” As a regional beachhead for Western corporate-financier interests, it provides a “foot in the door” to any of the West’s many desired conflicts. By bombing Syria, it hopes to provoke a wider conflict – an intervention the West has desired and planned for since it tipped off Syria’s violent conflict in 2011. . .
    For Syria and its allies – the goal now must be to deter further Israeli aggression and avoid wider conflict at all costs. If NATO’s proxy terrorist forces are as weak as they appear – incapable of tactical or strategic gains, and tapering off into desperate terrorist attacks, it is only a matter of time before NATO’s campaign grinds to a halt. As mentioned before, such a failure on NATO’s part will be the beginning of the end for it, and the Western interests that have been using it as a tool to achieve geopolitical hegemony.
    Israel should be expected to commit to increasingly desperate acts to provoke Syria and Iran – as its leadership represent directly corporate-financier interests abroad, not the Israeli people, or their best interests (including peace and even survival). For the people of Israel, they must realize that their leadership indeed does not represent them or their best interests and is able, willing, and even eager to spend their lives and fortunes in the service of foreign, corporate-financier interests and global hegemony.

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://landdestroyer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/israeli-attack-desperate-bid-to-save.html#more

    1. P.S. ALSO RE: “Of course, Israel will argue the anti-aircraft missiles in the hands of Hezbollah would’ve changed the rules of the game for Israel and rendered its air power vulnerable to attack by Hezbollah from sophisticated Russian weaponry.” ~ R.S.

      FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES, 1/31/13:

      . . . But if weapons were targeted, analysts said, it is not even clear that they belonged to Hezbollah. Arab and Israeli analysts said another possibility was that Syria was simply aiming to move some weapons to Lebanon for safekeeping. While there are risks for Hezbollah that accepting them could draw an Israeli attack, said Emile Hokayem, a Bahrain-based analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, there is also an upside: “If Assad goes down, they have the arms.”
      Elias Hanna, a retired Lebanese general and professor at the American University of Beirut, said that SA-17s made little sense for Hezbollah because they require large launching systems that use radar and would be easy targets for Israel. Syria, he said, needs SA-17s in case of international intervention in its civil war.
      Those suggestions comported with the account of a Syrian officer who said in a recent interview that the heavily guarded military area around the Jamraya research facility was used as a weapons transfer station to southern Lebanon and Syria’s coastal government stronghold of Tartous for safekeeping, in convoys of tractor-trailer trucks.

      SOURCE – http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/01/world/middleeast/syrias-confirmation-of-airstrike-may-undercut-israels-strategy-of-silence.html?hp

      1. The first text claims Israel is “funding and arming the very “global jihaidists” it fears”. Any good examples? Or we go on with the blood libel?

        Regarding Hezbollah use of SA-17 – I’m afraid Elias Hanna Is bluntly wrong. His claim also applies to, say, C-802 missiles but hey! Hezbollah (or Iranian troops) did fire several such missiles at the 2006 war, almost sinking INS Hanit. Specifically, such large missiles can be concealed and used as part of an ambush:
        (unfortunatly, no English translation…)

  4. Gag order makes it a bit difficult to tell if they might have released the vessel upon checking the delivery address.

    Certainly Qatar wants the rebels to be able to defend urban areas they capture, or every success will turn, somewhat literally, to ashes.

    But Qatar also wants Lebanon to be able to assert sovereignty over her own land.
    This means that Syria, Hezbollah and Israel are all equally unwelcome. I cannot see Qatar equipping Hezbollah, but I can see them equipping the Lebanese Army and generally trying to make the Lebanese state top dog in Lebanon. Qatar might do all sorts of things which Israel doesn’t like, but it’s probably got American, British and French approval for whatever it is up to. Israel and Syria have effectively imposed a non-state solution on Lebanon since the eighties, ironically, Iran is the only other country with anything to gain from this. The rest of the world wants Lebanon back as a cohesive and economically productive state.

    As for the argument over whether the Israeli air-raid struck a road convoy carrying SA17 missiles, or a research centre, the most probable explanation is that both things happened at more or less the same time: if you were going to lay on defence suppression and fighter escorts for one strike package to penetrate Syrian defences, you’d want to strike anything else that seemed urgent at the same time and send a second package through the same window of opportunity.

  5. There we go.
    Debkafila;Turkey’s foreign minister Davotuglu,suggested that there’s collaboration between israel and Assad.
    the attack was to help Assad.
    sorry,that’s what the Turkish FM said.
    Becuase of the absence of real info all options have to be kept open.
    Israel attacking the NATO-“rebels” is not that unlogical if you keep in mind the huge changes in alliances going on.
    the game has changed.

  6. Essential intelligence network,blogspot.mx.”Israel’s placebo defense policy”
    Much closer to the truth than MSM.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link