US Airstrikes Under Way in Syria

[charrob]

American airstrikes against ISIS targets are underway in Syria, according to a Pentagon official.

"I can confirm that U.S. military and partner nation forces are undertaking military action against ISIL [ISIS] terrorists in Syria using a mix of fighter, bomber and Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles," Pentagon Press Secretary Rear Admiral John Kirby said. "Given that these operations are ongoing, we are not in a position to provide additional details at this time. The decision to conduct theses strikes was made earlier today by the U.S. Central Command commander under authorization granted him by the commander in chief. We will provide more details later as operationally appropriate."

In a national address on Sept. 10, President Obama said the first part of his strategy to counter ISIS was to “conduct a systematic campaign of airstrikes against these terrorists.”

“Moreover, I have made it clear that we will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are. That means I will not hesitate to take action against ISIL [ISIS] in Syria as well as Iraq,” Obama said. “This is a core principle of my presidency: If you threaten America, you will find no safe haven.”

A self-described ISIS militant is believed to have killed two Americans on camera, journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff, as well a British aid worker. The group is suspected of holding at least two more Americans and has publicly threatened a second Briton.

As of earlier today the U.S. had launched nearly 200 strikes against ISIS in Iraq.

Sunday U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power, told ABC News’ “This Week” that America would not conduct airstrikes in Syria alone. But already Secretary of State John Kerry claimed that some 40 countries, including a number of Arab nations, have offered various levels of support to the anti-ISIS effort. France announced last week it would join in airstrikes in the battle against ISIS.

ISIS, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, is the name taken in 2013 by what was originally an al Qaeda affiliate called al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). A public fallout between ISIS, which later called itself the Islamic State (IS), and al Qaeda “core” in Pakistan over who should lead the fighting in Syria – ISIS or the al Qaeda affiliate al-Nusra Front -- led to the group being disavowed by al Qaeda’s leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ry?id=25686031

[ClydeCoulter]

Damnit!

[FindLiberty]

"Peace bombs spreading out so far and wide,
keep Manhattan and flatten their countryside..."

[charrob]

Damnit!

I agree. Without Assad's approval, this goes against international law.

[specsaregood]

The decision to conduct theses strikes was made earlier today by the U.S. Central Command commander under authorization granted him by the commander in chief who in turn got his authorization by his puppetmasters.

updated.

[phill4paul]

"$#@! it. I quit."

Have awhile back. If I can absolutely avoid it I will not give any part of my wages to Leviathan. Still, it is becoming apparent that this is not enough.

[69360]

I agree. Without Assad's approval, this goes against international law.

Assad approved. The Syrian foreign minister was on record a few days ago saying the Syrians welcome airstrikes.

I'm sure there are back channels that co ordinate the strikes so the Syrians don't use air defenses against our planes.

So WW3 is apparently averted for now.

[charrob]

Assad approved. The Syrian foreign minister was on record a few days ago saying the Syrians welcome airstrikes.

I'm sure there are back channels that co ordinate the strikes so the Syrians don't use air defenses against our planes.

So WW3 is apparently averted for now.

Thanks, that's a relief as I had not seen that. And as you mentioned (re: ww3), the biggest worry would not just be from Assad and Iran, but also Putin.

[specsaregood]

So WW3 is apparently averted for now.

Until one gets shot down by somebody and Assad's people get the blame regardless.

[Root]

[alucard13mm]

Wouldn't it be easier to call russia out to do it, since russia and assad are allies. They can coordinate easier. Plus syria is near russia and Russia has a port there.

[69360]

Wouldn't it be easier to call russia out to do it, since russia and assad are allies. They can coordinate easier. Plus syria is near russia and Russia has a port there.

What incentive is there for Russia to do it? They don't play world police.

[charrob]

69360, i'm not finding Assad's approval. Here's from Bloomberg dated today:

The U.S. conducted its first airstrikes in Syria, a major expansion of President Barack Obama’s effort to “degrade and ultimately destroy” the terrorist Islamic State.

“U.S. military and partner nation forces are undertaking military action against ISIL terrorists in Syria using a mix of fighter, bomber and Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles,” Rear Admiral John Kirby, the Pentagon press secretary, said tonight in an e-mailed statement.

The U.S. is seeking to reverse the advances of Islamic State, a Sunni extremist group that has seized a swath of territory across Iraq and Syria. The U.S. has conducted more than 190 airstrikes against Islamic State targets, all of them in Iraq until now. ISIL is an acronym for the group’s former name.

Obama said in a televised speech on Sept. 10 that he would “not hesitate to take action” against the group “in Syria as well as Iraq.”

“The decision to conduct theses strikes was made earlier today by the U.S. Central Command commander under authorization granted him by the commander in chief,” Kirby said tonight in his statement.

While Iraq’s government has invited the U.S. and other nations to help it fight Islamic State, no such request has come from Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, whose ouster the U.S. seeks.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry told a U.S. Senate hearing on Sept. 17 that in helping to defend Iraq, “you have a right of hot pursuit, you have a right to be able to attack those people who are attacking you as a matter of self-defense.”

Russia’s Opposition

Russian Ambassador to the United Nations Vitaly Churkin, whose country backs Assad, told the UN Security Council on Sept. 19 that any attacks inside Syria without Assad’s approval would be “considered illegal” under international law.

Some U.S. allies have also shown reluctance to extend the strikes beyond Iraq.

While France has joined the U.S. in airstrikes in Iraq, President Francois Hollande ruled out attacking in Syria.

“We’re very concerned with the aspects of international law,” Hollande said last week at a press conference. “We’ve been called in by the Iraqis; we’re not called on in Syria.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-0...mic-state.html

[Natural Citizen]

What incentive is there for Russia to do it? They don't play world police.

Russia pledges support to ISIS opponents, no plans to join US-led coalition

Russia will not “buy tickets” to the international coalition that is being created by the US to fight the Islamic State, but will continue its aid to Iraq, Syria and other nations that are fighting terrorists on the spot.

“The anti-ISIL coalition is not a club party – we do not expect any invitations and we are not going to buy entry tickets,” said Ilya Rogachev, the head of the Foreign Ministry’s Department for New Challenges and Threats. At the same time Russia will continue to support all states that fight against the Islamic State, the official told the Interfax news agency on Friday.

Kerry’s words were a reaction to the position expressed by Russian Foreign Ministry’s spokesman, Aleksander Lukashevich, who had earlier warned the US and its allies against launching an attack against IS on Syrian territory, saying that such actions would amount to an act of aggression and a violation of international law.

Earlier this week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov urged all nations not to show political ambitions while fighting terrorism.

“Syria and Iran are our natural allies in the fight against IS, and their participation in today’s meeting could have significantly enriched our work. Moral standards on which the anti-terrorism battle is based shouldn’t become vague,” the top Russian diplomat said.

[69360]

69360, i'm not finding Assad's approval. Here's from Bloomberg dated today:

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isi...-enemy-n201136

[brushfire]

[Crashland]

And any hope of this pic being considered seriously by anybody outside the Ron Paul camp is instantly dashed by the "WAKE UP PEOPLE" at the end

[charrob]

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isi...-enemy-n201136

I had seen where Assad originally wanted to work with the U.S. but that the U.S. flat out said 'no'. That's when Assad stated that the airstrikes would be unwelcome in his country without his approval and coordination. From the nbcnews article:

But he said cited the need for logistical coordination with the U.S. before any airstrikes so “there should be no mistakes,” and said “it is a must” for Obama to call Assad.

We can only hope the U.S. government has enough common sense and common decency to coordinate this with Assad and that the news agencies are just not aware of this, or have not reported on this coordination.

[69360]

I had seen where Assad originally wanted to work with the U.S. but that the U.S. flat out said 'no'. That's when Assad stated that the airstrikes would be unwelcome in his country without his approval and coordination. From the nbcnews article:



We can only hope the U.S. government has enough common sense and common decency to coordinate this with Assad and that the news agencies are just not aware of this, or have not reported on this coordination.

I think it's rather obvious that it is coordinated. If it wasn't, before any US planes enter Syrian airspace, they would need to take out all the Syrian air defenses with cruise missiles. There is no sign of that happening and it obviously wouldn't happen without Putin's approval or you have WW3.

[Brian4Liberty]

Just another unconstitutional action from the imperial President. Congress is impotent, the rule of law is a joke.

[Natural Citizen]

I think it's rather obvious that it is coordinated. If it wasn't, before any US planes enter Syrian airspace, they would need to take out all the Syrian air defenses with cruise missiles. There is no sign of that happening and it obviously wouldn't happen without Putin's approval or you have WW3.

How do we know that they aren't taking them out? They're pretty hush at the moment.

“I think when American lives are at stake, when we’re talking about defending our own interests, we’re not looking for the approval of the Syrian regime.” - US State Department’s spokeswoman Jen Psaki

I was just referencing this very thing that you bring up here in the Obama - “Our intelligence community has not yet detected specific ISIL plots against America" thread... http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post5655308

[69360]

How do we know that they aren't taking them out? They're pretty hush at the moment.

“I think when American lives are at stake, when we’re talking about defending our own interests, we’re not looking for the approval of the Syrian regime.” - US State Department’s spokeswoman Jen Psaki

I was just referencing this very thing that you bring up here in the Obama - “Our intelligence community has not yet detected specific ISIL plots against America" thread... http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post5655308

Putin would respond if the US knocked out Syrian air defenses. It would be bad, very bad.

This was obviously worked out behind the scenes in advance.

[DFF]

The decision to conduct theses strikes was made earlier today by the U.S. Central Command commander under authorization granted him by the commander in chief who in turn got his authorization by his puppetmasters Benjamim Netanyahu, and the Jewish neoconservatives.

Updated again.

[Natural Citizen]

Putin would respond if the US knocked out Syrian air defenses. It would be bad, very bad.

You think? I'm on the fence. I don't know.

Russia is holding a lot of cards at the moment in other areas. Crazy stuff...

And you know what else. We've been sending up a lot of secret satellite infrastructure as of late. Makes me wonder just how easy it would be. You know? They don't really have to knock them out, per se. Just put them to sleep for a hot second. Then someone has to prove it.

[Brian4Liberty]

Updated again.

The entire establishment backs this, the MIC benefits more than most. Follow the money. Neoconservatives are enabling cheerleaders. And just to be clear, not all neoconservatives are Jewish, and most Jewish people aren't neoconservatives.

[phill4paul]

So, how does this work? Under new regulation this is good until..what...60 days? Or is it 90 days until this will be brought up and approved before CONgress?

[Brian4Liberty]

Related:

Even a Top Democrat Thinks Obama's Legal Case for War Makes No Sense

Obama is trying to argue the group is the “true inheritor of bin Laden” in order to legally justify the war. Just don't tell al Qaeda, which booted ISIS in February.

The White House and senior members of the Obama administration have been trying to convince Congress all week that, legally speaking, there’s no difference between ISIS and al Qaeda. But at the same time—and, often, in the very same classified briefings—members of the U.S. intelligence community are telling lawmakers that the two Islamic radical groups aren’t in cahoots at all. In fact, they’re competitors for supremacy in the global jihadist movement.

The Senate and the House this week voted to give President Obama the authority to allow the military to begin training members of the Syrian opposition. It was a victory for a president who has chosen not to ask Congress pass a law to authorize this new war on ISIS, claiming instead that Congress supplied that authority in 2001 when it declared war on the parties responsible for 9/11.

In the last week, administration lawyers, senior officials and intelligence analysts have made the case that the 9/11 law applies to ISIS in classified and open hearings. Many lawmakers are naturally skeptical, since the two groups formally parted ways last winter. The briefings didn't exactly dispel this skepticism. In some of them, intelligence analysts conceded that both al Qaeda and ISIS operate under separate command and control structures and are indeed distinct organizations at this point.
...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...-no-sense.html

[fr33]

phew! I was beginning to feel unsafe! Now I can get back to my reality shows and stop worrying about people overseas. Afterall they aren't people like we are people.

[69360]

You think? I'm on the fence. I don't know.

Russia is holding a lot of cards at the moment in other areas. Crazy stuff...

And you know what else. We've been sending up a lot of secret satellite infrastructure as of late. Makes me wonder just how easy it would be. You know? They don't really have to knock them out, per se. Just put them to sleep for a hot second. Then someone has to prove it.

I absolutely think Putin would respond to an attack on Assad.

This was coordinated with Assad and Putin approved because he doesn't do the world police thing. He's letting the US get tied up in yet another war.

[devil21]

And so it begins, on Obama's orders. What ever happened to Congressional approval???????

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...es-over-syria/

The United States, joined by several Arab allies, launched an intense campaign of airstrikes, bombings and cruise-missile attacks against Islamic State targets in Syria Monday night – marking the first U.S. military intervention in Syria since the start of that country’s civil war.

Sources say the military operation includes fighter jets, B-1 bombers and Predator drones, as well as Tomahawk missiles launched from the Red Sea and Persian Gulf.

Officials say the coalition is targeting about 20 sites, including command-and-control centers, training camps and weapons depots.

U.S. officials told Fox News that several Arab countries – including Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates – were participating.

The operation was expected to last several hours, with the first explosions from Tomahawk missiles heard near Raqqa, the Islamic State stronghold in northern Syria

U.S. aircraft include B-1 bombers, F-16s, F-18s and Predator drones, with F-18s flying missions off the USS George H.W. Bush in the Persian Gulf. Tomahawk missiles were fired from the destroyer USS Arleigh Burke in the Red Sea.

The military strikes come less than two weeks after President Obama, on Sept. 10, authorized U.S. airstrikes inside Syria as part of a broad campaign to root out the Islamic State militant group, also known as ISIS or ISIL.

In a nod to his plans to go into Syria, Obama said then, “I have made it clear that we will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are. That means I will not hesitate to take action against ISIL in Syria, as well as Iraq.”

Until now, U.S. airstrikes have been limited to specific missions in northern Iraq. Lawmakers and military advisers, though, had stressed for weeks that any campaign against the Islamic State would have to include action in Syria, where the militant network is based.

Because the United States had stayed out of the Syria conflict for so long, the Obama administration had spent the last several weeks scrambling to gather intelligence about possible targets in Syria, launching surveillance missions over the country last month.

Pentagon Press Secretary Rear Adm. John Kirby released a statement Monday night saying, "I can confirm that U.S. military and partner nation forces are undertaking military action against ISIL terrorists in Syria using a mix of fighter, bomber and Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles.

"Given that these operations are ongoing, we are not in a position to provide additional details at this time. The decision to conduct theses strikes was made earlier today by the U.S. Central Command commander under authorization granted him by the commander in chief. "

I'm sorry Syrians. Our government no longer represents us so please don't blame us. It represents foreign bankers and globalist commies hell bent on world domination at both of our expenses.