Deir al-Zor: Was it really an accident?

(coming soon)

 "The US has expressed regret for the strikes, while Australia, which says its planes were among a number of international aircraft involved in the operation, expressed condolences to the victims' families.

Russia said Sunday that the blunder could place the delicate Syrian truce, in place for less than a week, under threat.

"We consider what happened as a natural result of the persistent refusal of the United States from the establishment of close cooperation with Russia in the fight against ISIS, Jabhat al-Nusra and other affiliated terrorist groups," the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement."  CNN

 

----------------

 

So, we and the Australians admit that we "done it."  The body count this morning is up to 83 and presumably will go higher.  Could it have been a real targeting error?  Yes.  People here on SST who have participated in air targeting know how easy it is to make a mistake.  But, there are some unusual things about this "error."  The SAA has been occupying these positions for six months or so.  Presumably US imagery and SIGINT analysts have been looking at them all that time and producing map overlays that show who is where in detail.  These documents would be widely available especially to air units and their targeteers.  US coalition led air has rarely struck in the Deir al-Zor area.  Why now?  Were they asked to strike?   The US does not talk to the Syrian government.  How would they have been asked?  Who would have designated the targets?  They struck in the presence of SAA troops without any ground liaison?  And what of the timing two days before the US-Russian deal was to be expanded into active cooperation?

 

And then there is the performance of Ambassador Samantha Power at the UN last night and today.  Last night she threw a hissy fit for the cameras outside the chamber in which the Security Council was meeting.  She seemed outraged to have had her Saturday Night interrupted for something as trivial as the Deir al-Zor attacks.  One can envisage her snuggled up with a good book in her apartment in the Waldorf Towers only to be be ripped away for this meeting.  And then, today she made a longer statement on Tee Vee in which she first expressed the regret of the US government for the devastation we had wrought, and then set forth her bill of particulars against the Syrian government, a statement so fulsome in its loaded up R2P/Borgist assertions (routine Chemical attacks on THE PEOPLE, etc.) that it is obvious that for her the SAA are as much the enemy as IS.  I conclude that she must think that bombing the evil SAA was a good thing.  She does not exist in a vacuum.  SECDEF Carter is a thoroughgoing  Russophobe.  General Votel, the US commander in Iraq and eastern Syria has expressed doubt about the wisdom of cooperating with the Russians.

 

IMO it is an open question as to whether these air strikes on the SAA were accidental.  pl

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/18/middleeast/syria-claims-coalition-airstrike-hit-regime-forces/

Comments

[Will]

Anybody that has a torts class (includes negligent and intentional act that result in damage) has heard of U.S vs. Carroll Towing. When the consequence is catastrophic, even slight risks have to be addressed.

Why no rational person should vote for Hillary, an inveterate, incorrigible, and unrepentant war-monger? think mushroom clouds
"[Learned] Hand stated:
[T]he owner's duty, as in other similar situations, to provide against resulting injuries is a function of three variables: (1) The probability that she will break away; (2) the gravity of the resulting injury, if she does; (3) the burden of adequate precautions."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calculus_of_negligence

[bolasete]

the obvious inference is that it was intentional and there is infighting within the ptb. obama wants to transit to retirement without further tarnishing his brand while hillary is intent on expanding warfare. the bankers and industrialists can't keep holding their breath staving off the crash.

i'm old and this pack of candidates is the worst in my more than half-century's observations. from my high window i can see my city's downtown. i've even used the available calcualtors and found i'm right at the edge of the fireball from a single likely russian nuke at the center. of course, i have progeny but the next few years will be unpleasant under any course of action.

[Les]

So blatant was the airstrike against the Syrian Army that even anti-Assad mainstream media in Australia have suggested that the airstrikes purposefully attacked their positions, supporting Russia's claim.

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/australian-jets-participated-massacre-syrian-soldiers-deir-ezzor/

[Anna]

If one wants to observe a perfect psychopath than here is a video of Samantha Powers speaking for the UN emergency meeting. She looks horrifyingly subhuman. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8sHzxILZMk

Russia is trying to clarify the matters by pointing to the obvious ("Russia affirms the US works with ISIS" http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/09/major-development-russia-affirms-us.html). But these RF efforts are futile because ziocons have no shame and they are not interested in truth, facts, dignity and such.

"Israel bombed the SAA earlier in the week and as a response from the SAA, had several of their crafts shot down. Of course the Obama administration is going to be pressured by its 'only democratic ally in the region' to take direct action against the SAA, diplomacy be damned. So of course the US had to do something...
Samantha Powers statements at the UN were deplorable, a real 'low point' in the history of US diplomacy...
It's the Israelification of the US diplomacy."

[Sans racines]

Colonel Lang

Thank you for your words - I was watching Churkin address the press live last night - he was appalled, and as he said in outraged disbelief, what on earth has happened to the level of American diplomacy? It is as you have implied populated with characters with no real character or life experience. All you can say is 'forgive them Lord, for they know not what they do...'

[Emad]

Subhuman? Is this what it inevitably boils down to?

[michael brenner]

Take heart, friends - enlightenment is dawning among the nation's movers & shakers. Today, The New York Times editorial board called for a "review" of whatever it is we've been doing in Afghanistan for the past 15 years. So we can look forward to a similar forthright admission of the need for a rethink about Syria in 2031.

[JMH]

What I heard out of her was panic and desperation.

[BabelFish]

The first time in my life I have seen a U.S. UN Ambassador 'spluttering' on TV. It wasn't a flattering moment, nor a professional one, either.

[Fred]

Col.,

Apparently Ambassador Power has decided to follow the example of Premier Khrushchev and let the other shoe drop. Another fine example of our collegiate bull session strategic thinking. Create a provocation and then denounce any response. That strategy worked to launch most of these politicians on the path that put them in the jobs they currently hold. Sadly they'll give us the same results that Khrushchev's actions gave his country. Luckily for everyone not a neocon the R+6 leaders understand restraint:
"Russia is exerting all possible effort to restrain (Syrian) government troops from returning fire," Senior Army General Viktor Poznikhir said." I'm sure that restraint has limits.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-18/australian-jets-involved-in-botched-air-strike-on-syrian-army/7855610

[OIFVet]

What panic and desperation?! It was a banshee wail, pure and simple. That particular banshee has wailed a lot, too...

[okanogen]

Unfortunately I just posted below on this, but it is more on topic here.

There are many ways this could have been an accident, friendly fire on known friendly positions happens. But even assuming it was a mistake, conducting any strike at this politically delicate time was extremely risky given the consequences of a mistake.

So, either this was a consequence of too loose or unclear civilian direction of military action, or it was incompetence. Either way, this is not good

But, maybe "mistakes" like this are inevitable when a country has been at war against an ever-expanding list of foes in an ever-expanding theater, for literally over a decade: civilian control of military operations breaks down.

[FB Ali]

Considering all the circumstances - especially the fact that the US does not bomb IS in support of the Syrian Army - I am fairly certain this was intentional. Most independent observers would think so, too.

I wonder what Obama will do in response to this open defiance by the Pentagon and US military.

I saw Powers on TV last night outside the Security Council chamber. One struggles for words to adequately describe one's reaction: Disgusting! Nauseating! Pathetic!

Many observers are angry that Russia doesn't take a stronger stand, and walk away from the table. But Putin doesn't act on emotion. He knows that the best way of defeating Carter and the anti-Russia faction in Washington is to go ahead and force the US to implement its part of the agreement in Syria - or undertake more degrading contortions to avoid doing so.

[turcopolier]

FB Ali

IMO the "rebellion" is bigger than DoD. Power is evidence of that. pl

[Emad]

Colonel,

IMHO, intentionality is irrelevant here. What matters is that R+6 believe that it was intentional, and there's virtually nothing in the world that could change that belief.

So the question R+6 are dealing with now is why. I don't know the Russian thinking on this, but the Iranian thinking goes along these lines: This is the U.S. telling Russia "We'll do whatever we damn well please and there ain't nothing you can do about it." Another version of Friedman's "Suck on this", if you will. The U.S. is counting on the Iranians getting back to Russians with another told-you-so (They'd a row with Russians after the Khan Tooman incident.) and Syrians fuming at the mouth, demanding a swift response i.e. escalation by R+6 leading to the collapse of the new COH, which Russians don't want. Not just yet anyway.

Basically the Iranians look at the incident as the U.S. signalling that it can't or doesn't want to abide by the COH and is looking for a way out (Whether this is deception or not is another matter). But for some reason they've convinced themselves that the new COH is good for R+6, so they've kept a low profile for now, letting Russia own the stage and play the aggrieved gentleman suckered into buying another bridge. They may also have calculated that pressing Russians to go back to beating the rebels militarily instead of wasting time on diplomatic shenanigans would make prestige-prone Russians insist even more on restraint. So they're letting Russians "come to their senses" gradually.

[BraveNewWorld]

"US coalition led air has not struck previously in the Deir al-Zor area."

That isn't correct. From Dec 2015.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/syria-accuses-us-bombing-state-forces-army-soldiers-deir-ezzor-airstrikes/

That just makes it worse since if the US military did do an investigation of the first attack they learned nothing from it. Ignorance just isn't a plausible excuse in any way, shape or form.

[b]

NYT
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/18/world/middleeast/us-airstrike-syrian-troops-isis-russia.html?_r=0
The strike began in the early evening, when planes attacked a group of vehicles that ***American surveillance aircraft had been watching for several days***, according to a Centcom official who requested anonymity because the episode was still being investigated.

The attack went on for about 20 minutes, with the planes destroying the vehicles and gunning down dozens of people in the open desert, the official said.
---

The U.S. destroyed 3 tanks, three IFVs with 23mm guns, one anti-air gun and at least 4 mortars says the SAA. That was a very significant part of the heavier weapons the SAA in Deir Ezzor still has.

The U.S. drones had seen those position for days (if not longer) and thought it was ISIS? What directions were those guns pointing? Who delivered food to those positions?

I do not believe for a moment that this was a mistake. This was an intentional hit.

The U.S. (Obama personally) wants, for propaganda reasons, ISIS out of Mosul and Raqqa. Where it is to go? Deir Ezzor lies in the middle of those but the SAA is major parts in good control. Was this attack designed to prepare the city as ISIS new home?

Think of it. The Turks don't fight ISIS. If they want to take a place they tell ISIS to move out and it moves out before Turkey "conquers" the town. What place did Turkey tell them to go?

[mike]

The Colonel is right. "Why now? Were they asked to strike? The US does not talk to the Syrian government. How would they have been asked? Who would have designated the targets?"

Those are the key questions in my mind.

[b]

As for the "rebellion". It may well be that Kerry is fully behind it. He was behind the 51 State Department folks who wanted more war. Obama obviously, doesn't care much (and never has) when the military or others acted against his orders. Has he ever really disciplined someone?

[DC]

One might well respect a proportional response from the Russians (or even the Syrians), resulting in the deaths of US servicemen. We would then be in the thick of it with Russia. For the sake of peace, it would behoove Obama to do all he can to convince them the Syrian deaths were truly a "mistake." But that may be difficult to do, especially at a time when the election doesn't seem to be going in his preferred direction.

[rjj]

"...what on earth has happened to the level of American diplomacy?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWdnK4EppDc

[ex-PFC Chuck]

More alternatives should be considered, such as intentional misdirection originating from our unicorn 'allies,' willful disobedience somewhere in the chain of command, or a combination of some or all items on the list. I'm sure it will all be sorted out when the oversight committees in Congress do their usual thorough jobs. Cough.

[rjj]

is Powers's offputtingness a bug or a feature?

[Babak Makkinejad]

I agree.

[Babak Makkinejad]

You cannot be serious; comparing Nikita Khrushchev ("the smartest man I had met" - as attested to by Nixon) and the savior of Mankind from real possibility of World War III in 1962 with Samantha Power.