The United States has carried out airstrikes in Syria targeting facilities near the Iraqi border used by Iranian-backed militia groups.
The Pentagon said the strikes were retaliation for a rocket attack in Iraq earlier this month that killed one civilian contractor and wounded a US service member and other coalition troops.
That opening line really tries to avoid saying "The US bombed Syria". Also, the rocket attack is in Iraq so we'll bomb Syria. Makes sense.
“This proportionate military response was conducted together with diplomatic measures, including consultation with coalition partners,” the Pentagon’s chief spokesperson, John Kirby, said in announcing the strikes.
“The operation sends an unambiguous message: President Biden will act to protect American and coalition personnel. At the same time, we have acted in a deliberate manner that aims to deescalate the overall situation in eastern Syria and Iraq.”
Bombing to deescalate the situation. Again, makes sense (in their upside down world).
The bullshit continues:
Kirby also said the US airstrikes “destroyed multiple facilities at a border control point used by a number of Iranian- backed militant groups”.
The airstrikes were the first military action undertaken by the Biden administration, which in its first weeks has emphasized its intent to put more focus on the challenges posed by China, even as threats in the Middle East persist.
The strikes appeared to be limited in scope, potentially lowering the risk of escalation.
The rocket attacks on US positions in Iraq were carried out as Washington and Tehran are looking for a way to return to the 2015 nuclear deal abandoned by Donald Trump.
In the attack earlier this month, rockets hit the US military base housed at Erbil international airport in the Kurdish-run region, killing one non-American contractor and injuring a number of American contractors and a US service member. Another salvo struck a base hosting US forces north of Baghdad days later hurting at least one contractor.
Biden administration officials condemned the 15 February attack, and while a little-known Shiite militia group has claimed responsibility, Kirby had said Tuesday that Iraq is in charge of investigating that attack and that “right now, we’re not able to give you a certain attribution as to who was behind these attacks”.
“Let’s let the investigations complete and conclude, and then when we have more to say, we will,” he added.
Mary Ellen O’Connell, a professor at Notre Dame Law School, criticized the US attack as a violation of international law.
“The United Nations Charter makes absolutely clear that the use of military force on the territory of a foreign sovereign state is lawful only in response to an armed attack on the defending state for which the target state is responsible,” she said. “None of those elements is met in the Syria strike.”
What evil. Yesterday I was being scanned at the local DGH by a brand new state of the art gamma camera made by GE. I said to the radiographer how strange it is that the US can produce such a marvellous machine that is helping people to stay alive yet produces weapons of war and warmongers. He, a young Polish man, looked at me as if I was mad.
But don't forget, Biden's bombs are much quieter and more gentle than the ones Trump didn't drop."The US is one of the leading terrorist states in the world" -- Noam Chomsky The BBC is in the business of propaganda
Biden takes first military action with Syria strike on Iran-backed militias Published 1 hour ago
Paul Adams* writes -
'Sending a message Analysis by Paul Adams, BBC News
The messaging around this strike is probably more important than the strike itself.
Ten days elapsed between the trigger - 15 February's rocket attack in Irbil - and retaliation.
The US defence secretary made a point of thanking the Iraqi government for its intelligence input.
The Pentagon said the air strikes had been conducted "together with diplomatic measures", including consultation with coalition partners.
Nor did the attacks take place on Iraqi soil, thus minimising any embarrassment for the government in Baghdad.
In short, Washington seems to be drawing a sharp distinction with the more intemperate, unilateral instincts of the previous administration.
But at a time when the Biden administration is exploring ways of reviving the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, the strikes also sends a message to Tehran: just because we're willing to sit down and talk doesn't mean your proxies around the region can do what they want.
The Pentagon said the strike on Friday was launched "at President Biden's direction".
It targeted facilities located at a border control point used by a number of Iran-backed militia groups, including Kataib Hezbollah and Kataib Sayyid al-Shuhada, who are allied with the Damascus government.
Kataib Hezbollah and Kataib Sayyid al-Shuhada have previously carried out or supported rocket attacks targeting US assets in the country. The US has launched retaliatory strikes.
But Kataib Hezbollah has denied involvement in recent attacks against US interests.
In its statement, the Pentagon said its latest operation "sends an unambiguous message".
"President Biden will act to protect American and Coalition personnel. At the same time, we have acted in a deliberate manner that aims to de-escalate the overall situation in both eastern Syria and Iraq," it said.
Posted by Jackie on February 26, 2021, 3:25 pm, in reply to "BBC today"
‘The messaging around this strike is probably more important than the strike itself. ‘
So they will kill people and destabilize a country and region to send a message. Surely there’s a better way.
Re: BBC today
Posted by Ed on February 26, 2021, 4:47 pm, in reply to "BBC today"
What self indulgent twaddle! "The messaging around this strike is probably more important than the strike itself"...I wonder if he would be quite so sanguine about it if he was directly under the falling bombs!
Re: BBC today
Posted by Ian M on February 26, 2021, 5:21 pm, in reply to "Re: BBC today"
'messaging' ... 'the calculated use of violence or threat of violence to attain goals that are political, religious, or ideological in nature…through intimidation, coercion, or instilling fear' from a US army manual definition of terrorism cited by Chomsky here: https://chomsky.info/200205__02/ Sounds pretty accurate to me!
On orders of President Biden, the United States has launched an airstrike on a facility in Syria. As of this writing the exact number of killed and injured is unknown, with early reports claiming “a handful” of people were killed. Rather than doing anything remotely resembling journalism, the Western mass media have opted instead to uncritically repeat what they’ve been told about the airstrike by US officials, which is the same as just publishing Pentagon press releases.
Here’s this from the Washington Post:
The Biden administration conducted an airstrike against alleged Iranian-linked fighters in Syria on Thursday, signaling its intent to push back against violence believed to be sponsored by Tehran.
Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said the attack, the first action ordered by the Biden administration to push back against alleged Iranian-linked violence in Iraq and Syria, on a border control point in eastern Syria was “authorized in response to recent attacks against American and coalition personnel in Iraq, and to ongoing threats.”
He said the facilities were used by Iranian-linked militias including Kaitib Hezbollah and Kaitib Sayyid al-Shuhada.
The operation follows the latest serious attack on U.S. locations in Iraq that American officials have attributed to Iranian-linked groups operating in Iraq and Syria. Earlier this month, a rocket attack in northern Iraq killed a contractor working with the U.S. military and injured a U.S. service member there.
So we are being told that the United States launched an airstrike on Syria, a nation it invaded and is illegally occupying, because of attacks on “US locations” in Iraq, another nation the US invaded and is illegally occupying. This attack is justified on the basis that the Iraqi fighters were “Iranian-linked,” a claim that is both entirely without evidence and irrelevant to the justification of deadly military force. And this is somehow being framed in mainstream news publications as a defensive operation.
This is Defense Department stenography. The US military is an invading force in both Syria and Iraq; it is impossible for its actions in either of those countries to be defensive. It is always necessarily the aggressor. It’s the people trying to eject them who are acting defensively. The deaths of US troops and contractors in those countries can only be blamed on the powerful people who sent them there.
The US is just taking it as a given that it has de facto jurisdiction over the nations of Syria, Iraq, and Iran, and that any attempt to interfere in its authority in the region is an unprovoked attack which must be defended against. This is completely backwards and illegitimate. Only through the most perversely warped American supremacist reality tunnels can it look valid to dictate the affairs of sovereign nations on the other side of the planet and respond with violence if anyone in those nations tries to eject them.
Tweer from Aaron Mate ...
It’s illegitimate for the US to be in the Middle East at all. It’s illegitimate for the US to claim to be acting defensively in nations it invaded. It’s illegitimate for the US to act like Iranian-backed fighters aren’t allowed to be in Syria, where they are fighting alongside the Syrian government against ISIS and other extremist militias with the permission of Damascus. It is illegitimate for the US to claim the fighters attacking US personnel in Iraq are controlled by Iran when Iraqis have every reason to want the US out of their country themselves.
Even the official narrative reveals itself as illegitimate from within its own worldview. CNN reports that the site of the airstrike “was not specifically tied to the rocket attacks” in Iraq, and a Reuters/AP report says “Biden administration officials condemned the February 15 rocket attack near the city of Irbil in Iraq’s semi-autonomous Kurdish-run region, but as recently as this week officials indicated they had not determined for certain who carried it out.”
This is all so very typical of the American supremacist worldview that is being aggressively shoved down our throats by all Western mainstream news media. The US can bomb who it likes, whenever it likes, and when it does it is only ever doing so in self-defense, because the entire planet is the property of Washington, DC. It can seize control of entire clusters of nations, and if any of those nations resist in any way, they are invading America’s sovereignty.
It’s like if you broke into your neighbor’s house to rob him, killed him when he tried to stop you, and then claimed self-defense because you consider his home your property. Only in the American exceptionalist alternate universe is this considered normal and acceptable.
on February 26, 2021, 10:52 am
