On September 18, US planes bombed the Syrian Army at Deir ez Zour, killing 80 soldiers. ISIS attacked at the same time, overrunning Syrian forces on a strategic mountain overlooking the airport.
The US bombing of Assad’s forces in Deir ez Zour was 100% intentional.
- The US does not support Assad’s forces with airstrikes. Ever. Never, ever, ever, ever, ever. If Assad and ISIS are fighting or facing off somewhere, the US will not attack. Sure it will attack ISIS sometimes (when we are not supporting ISIS), but we will never attack ISIS to support Assad’s forces. So wherever ISIS and Assad’s forces are facing off, the US will never bomb ISIS. Wherever there is a battle between Assad and ISIS, the US will never bomb ISIS. Ever. In fact, this is the second time the US did this. When the SAA was fighting a close battle with ISIS in North Syria, the US bombed the SAA in support of the ISIS fighters a few hundred yards away. A number of Syrian forces were killed. The US commented that the attack never happened and that the jet that bombed the SAA had not bombed them but had actually bombed a different target. Except that target was 25 miles away. How do you drop a bomb on a target and somehow accidentally miss and bomb a target 25 miles away? You don’t.
- The US had been flying drones over that battlefield in Deir ez Zour continuously in the several days before the attack. They had to have known whose forces where whose.
- The battle lines in that area had been static for months. Of course the US knew where the battle lines were.
- The bombing lasted for a whole hour. An accidental bombing lasting a whole hour? No way.
- The US said that they called off the strike when the Russians called them and told them that they bombed SAA forces and not ISIS. However, this is a lie. The US was actually in contact with the Russians the whole hour of the bombing. They were told they were bombing the SAA soon after the bombing started, but they kept doing it anyway.
- The US jets flew in with their transponders off. This makes them invisible to radar. The only people in the area that have antiaircraft radar is the SAA. ISIS has no radar. So in flying in with their transponders off, the US was deliberately trying to shut down Syrian radar defenses. Why would they try to shut down SAA radar if they were going to attack ISIS. They wouldn’t.
- The attack was perfectly coordinated with ISIS and ISIS launched a huge attack at exactly the same time that the US bombing started. This means that not only were we bombing in support of ISIS, but worse than that, ISIS must have been told about the bombing beforehand so they could coordinate an assault. ISIS knew full well what was going on. SAA troops said ISIS forces were laughing as they attacked.
- The SAA had just sent 3,000 fresh troops to Deir ez Zour in preparation for an assault on the city. This attack stuck a dagger in the heart of those plans.
- A sociopath named Samantha Power issued a very unprofessional non-apology after the attack on the SAA. That’s the action of a guilty party.
- There had been talk before this attack that the CIA and the Pentagon were furious at the deal Kerry cooked up which mandated that the US cooperate with Russia in attacking Al Qaeda in Syria. Ashton Carter, a crazed Russia-hater, was furious about being ordered to work with the Russians. Also the US is supporting Al Qaeda all the way in Syria. We even have advisors on the ground working closely with Al Qaeda in Syria. So no way are we going to attack our Al Qaeda buddies. By attacking the SAA, Carter stuck a stake through the heart of the US-Russia deal. It was nearly dead after that. The fact that this attack was preceded by talk of a military rebellion against the Commander in Chief implies that this attack was part of that mutiny. Apparently Ash Carter resents the fact that we have a civilian controlled military.
- After the attack, Obama issued an investigation of who ordered this attack. Obviously Obama is doing that because he thinks it was a deliberate act of mutiny and not an “accident.”
- Tenth, Pat Lang, a well-known former US military officer who often appears on TV said it was no accident and that obviously Ash Carter was behind it. A female former MI5 agent appeared on British TV and said that there was no way that attack could possibly have been accidental.
- The US made no offers to reimburse the families of the soldiers killed in this attack. That is the act of a guilty party.
- The US military conducted no investigation of this attack and further, there will be no investigation in the future. That is the act of a guilty party.
The US quickly stated that this attack had been an “accident.” Except there was no way on Earth that was an accident. Look at the 14 points above and show me that this was an accident. It is simply not possible for this to have been an accident in any way, shape or form.