By Ian Deitch | AP March 17 at 1:14 PM
JERUSALEM — Syria fired missiles at Israeli warplanes early Friday after a series of Israeli airstrikes inside Syria — a rare military exchange between the two hostile neighbors that was confirmed by both sides.
The Israeli military said its aircraft struck several targets in Syria and were back in Israeli-controlled airspace when several anti-aircraft missiles were launched from Syria toward the Israeli jets.
Israeli aerial defense systems intercepted one of the missiles, the army said, without elaborating. It would not say whether any other missiles struck Israeli-held territory, but said the safety of Israeli civilians and Israeli aircraft was “not compromised.” (Washington Post)
————————————
All sorts of wild rumors were flying about after this exchange this morning. Most of them, if not all of them, are not true. Even the U.S. is downplaying the whole affair. A DOD spokesman said this in a briefing. "I do not have any particular reaction for you. We are certainly aware of it. This is a matter between Israel and Syria and not something we were a party to.”
The best explanation I’ve seen for this is offered by Elijah J. Magnier over his twitter account.
————————————
1. What happen between Israel and Syria today in Palmyra?
Israel tried to break "redlines", attacking inside the "allowed zones & targets.
2. There are no targets for Iran or Hezbollah (weapons traveling to Lebanon or the Golan heights) in Palmyra but an attempt to push ROE.
3. The targets Israel hit today are close to the T4 and are involved in the war in Syria, a red line for Russia who approved a "warning"
4. Russia doesn't want to see an Israeli jet hit over its operational theatre (in Syria) unless Israel pushed the boundaries.
5. This explains why Syria didn't use its S-300 but limited itself to already existing anti-air missiles and a "warning to Israel".
6. As long as Israel hits targets in Damascus airport or warehouses on the way to Lebanon (not inland like today) Russia won't intervene.
7. The recent visit of Netanyahu to Moscow failed to reach its objectives in convincing Russia to switch against Iran and Hezbollah.
8. Israel tried to "test the ground" today but will "close the incident" and accept the message behind it, aware Syria is Russia’s playground. (@EjmAlrai)
————————————
I agree with Magnier. If Bibi didn’t receive the message during his pilgrimage to Moscow last week, I would think he got it loud and clear this morning. Vladimir Vladimirovich is calling the shots now in this part of the Mediterranean... and he wants a quiet, orderly neighborhood.
TTG
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201703171051691543-israeli-plane-downed-over-syria-analysis/
"Charly" - agree about the high output but in practice getting it requires industrial farming and large units. There are so many minuses to industrial forming - social, environmental, quality - that even some consumers are wary of it. Maybe that's the way it's going to have to go for non-western countries but it's still a pity to see them forced to follow us down that road.
Posted by: English Outsider | 19 March 2017 at 02:10 PM
The question is if you want to pay $4 or $1 for a liter milk. The old methods are just that much more expensive.
Posted by: charly | 19 March 2017 at 07:51 PM
All,
CNN reported that Israel is threatening Syria if their jets are fired on again. Well dammit, don't fly over Syria again. I hope they are blown to dust if they do it again.
The story was followed by an interview with an elderly victim of the Holocaust who was asked why they were hated. Please.
See my first sentence.
Historically Ziounist leadership has created hatred that put everyone in peril and that hasn't changed.
Posted by: Cee | 20 March 2017 at 04:29 AM
Yes, that's the rub. For me, I'll take the $4.
Much the same problem as the problem that never gets discussed when off-shoring is in question. Prices do have to go up as a consequence and the only way to cope with that is to reduce the income gap. Not just between the cronies and the rest of us, but between the better off and the low income groups. Since the better off have more political clout that looks like a long shot. But it's the only sensible way to go, if it can be done.
Though, just to soften the blow to the wealthier consumer, I do think that all the dairy farmers I know who've gone out of milk over the last few years could have managed to stay in business on a retail price of considerably less than $4, particularly if the distribution costs could be reduced.
Posted by: English Outsider | 20 March 2017 at 12:39 PM