Meanwhile in Ukraine

We fucked around and found out.

The State Agency of Ukraine on Exclusion Zone Management said in a statement on social media that Russian forces had destroyed the most recently established laboratory in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone.

The laboratory, which was created with the cooperation of the European Union, sought to improve the infrastructure for handling radioactive materials. According to the agency, the lab cost 6 million euros.

The facility also held "highly active samples" and "samples of radionuclides" which the agency said are now in the "hands of the enemy" as opposed to those of a "civilized world."

[...]

Earlier this week, Ukrainian nuclear operator Energoatom said that the automated radiation monitoring system in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone had stopped working.

The agency said there was no data on "the current state of radiation pollution in the Exclusion Zone, which makes it impossible to adequately respond to threats of deterioration of radiation situations in the Exclusion Zone."

  The Hill

Trump's Troops still at it

There are some goons who need to spend some time in stir.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

No more sanctions for Putin

President Donald Trump has signed an executive order imposing sanctions on Russia for its use of chemical weapons in the 2018 attack on the Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, according to two U.S. officials.

The Trump administration imposed a round of sanctions last year, as required by a 1991 law. The same law requires the president to impose a second round of sanctions if he cannot determine that the state in question has stopped using chemical weapons — and U.S. intelligence agencies were unable to make that determination with regard to Russia, which continues to deny responsibility for the attack on the Skripals.

  Politico

Damn. Ratcliffe would have made that determination for His Lardship.  Now he's got to find someone else.

En route to a rally in Cincinnati on Thursday, [Trump] continued to minimize the threat of Russian interference in U.S. elections. Asked by a reporter whether Russia is continuing to meddle in American elections, Trump responded, “You don’t really believe this. Do you believe this?”

The White House confirmed Kremlin reports that Trump and Putin spoke by phone on Wednesday. It is unclear whether they discussed the forthcoming sanctions. A White House spokesman said they discussed the wildfires blazing in Siberia and "trade between the two countries."

In other words - no talk about sanctions. Or election interference.

The State Department and the Treasury Department had the sanctions package ready in late March, Reuters reported, but they have been waiting since then for the president’s sign-off.

Impeach the motherfucker.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Did US airstrikes in Syria target Hezbollah?

I keep seeing this pop up on various Twitter accounts, but nowhere in the western news sources:

It's believable considering Israel just bombed the same place.

A suspected Israeli missile assault on a Syrian airbase in Homs province was a "historic mistake", the leader of Lebanon's Iranian-backed Hezbollah has said in a televised speech.

Hassan Nasrallah said on Friday from the Lebanese capital, Beirut, that Israel had placed itself in direct confrontation with Iran, referring to the missile attacks that targeted military sites in Syria on April 9.

Two Israeli warplanes, using Lebanese airspace, fired eight missiles at the T-4 military airbase, according to the Russian military.

The attack on the airbase, located 40km west of Palmyra, killed about 14 people, at least four of whom were Iranians from Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps - an independent force that answers only to the country's supreme leader.

Nasrallah described the attack as unprecedented in the region - something that could not be overlooked.

[...]

In his speech, Nasrallah described the suspected chemical attack, which killed at least 85 civilians, including women and children, as a "theatrical play", and appeared to clear the Syrian government of responsibility amid a chorus of Western accusations against it.

He cautioned the United States against military intervention in Syria, saying it would pit the country in a battle with "the people of the region" rather than "armies or organisations".

  alJazeera

And, in quick order, Trump did just that.

Israel is technically at war with Syria and occupies a chunk of the strategic Golan Heights, which it seized in the Six Day War of 1967 and later annexed in a move never recognised by the international community.

Israel has sought to avoid direct involvement in the Syria conflict but acknowledges carrying out dozens of air raids there to stop what it calls deliveries of advanced weaponry to Hezbollah.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu coupled praise for U.S.-led strikes on Syrian targets on Saturday with a warning that Iran’s presence there further endangers Syria.

[...]

An Israeli official said Israel was notified of the strikes ahead of time. Asked how much warning Israel had received, the official told Reuters: “Between 12 and 24 hours, I believe.”

  Reuters

Which makes it seem like a coordinated strike with Israel's April 9 strikes.

Asked whether Israel helped choose targets, the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said: “Not to my knowledge.”

A non-denial denial. Why would the Reuters reporter even think of that question?

Netanyahu said Israel would not allow Iran to establish itself in Syria, according to his office.

Israel has mounted air strikes in Syria on a regular basis, targeting suspected weapons shipments to Lebanese Hezbollah.

Gee, you don't think they'd stage a chemical attack to appear to come from Assad himself when the US president announced American troop withdrawal from Syria, do you?

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE:  We do know that the Homs area was indeed targeted. 

The targets were a Syrian centre in the greater Damascus area for the research, development, production and testing of chemical and biological weaponry; a chemical weapons storage facility near the city of Homs; and a third site, also near Homs, containing both a chemical weapons equipment storage facility and a command post.

  France24

Yes, we will not stand for the use of chemical weapons

Right.  And, if need be, we reserve the right to ourselves to use white phosphorous and cluster bombs.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

They just sat there and got bombed

Is this an indication?.....

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE:  Apparently, there was another bit from General McKenzie:



There's no way for us to know the truth.  Everybody lies.

Quick, get rid of the evidence

Less than 10 days after Trump "instructed military leaders to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria as soon as possible and told them he wants Arab allies to take over and pay for stabilizing and reconstructing areas liberated from the Islamic State," he bombed the country instead.

Two days after making that announcement, there was an alleged chemical attack by Assad on innocent civilians of Douma, presumably the reason Trump reversed course. Who wants the US to stay in Syria is, I think, a fair question, and I can think of several answers. Syrian and American citizens are not any of them.

The United States and its allies tried to walk a fine line with the airstrikes, sending a strong message to President Bashar al-Assad of Syria without provoking a military response from Russia and Iran, Mr. Assad’s two strongest allies.

The operation on Saturday was more powerful than an airstrike ordered by President Trump last year — this time there were three targets, rather than one, employing twice as many weapons. But it was limited to one night, at least for the moment; was specifically aimed at chemical weapons facilities’ and steered clear of Russian soldiers and bases.

“Right now this is a one-time shot, and I believe it has sent a very strong message to dissuade him, to deter him from doing it again,” Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said of Mr. Assad, although Mr. Trump suggested there might be more to come.

  NYT

Mattis doesn't believe that any more than you do.

The United States and its allies went ahead with the airstrikes in the face of several developments that suggested they could be delayed.

And why would that be?

Inspectors from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons were expected to arrive in Douma, Syria, on Saturday to investigate the attack last weekend.

What a coincidence that we just bombed the areas in question.

But why did it take them a week to go investigate?

Mr. Mattis was working to slow the move toward a military response, concerned that a missile strike could spark a wider conflict between Russia, Iran and the West.

You think? Well, if he lives long enough, he'll have a book to write.

And Mr. Trump sent mixed signals about timing. On Wednesday, he warned Russia on Twitter that missiles “will be coming, nice and new and ‘smart!’ ”

Smarter than he anyway.

The airstrikes sent an unambiguous message to Mr. Assad, and it was not clear that it would change his thinking. He remained firmly in power thanks to the support of Russia and Iran.

Just like after last year's airstrikes ostensibly for the same reason: chemical attacks.

Mr. Assad has essentially been under siege since the Syrian civil war began more than seven years ago. In that time, he has dealt with the war, airstrikes, sanctions, Islamic State militants, a variety of rebel groups and a crumbling economy.

And he's still there.

The reaction in Washington was divided along party lines, with the strikes bringing praise from Republicans and criticism from Democrats.

Unsurprisingly the opposite from when Obama did it.

“The Butcher of Damascus learned two lessons tonight the hard way,” Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas, said in a statement. “Weapons of mass destruction won’t create a military advantage once the United States is done with you and Russia cannot protect its clients from the United States.”

Tin pot bluster. Why didn't "The Butcher of Damascus" learn that lesson last year?

Gen. Valery V. Gerasimov, the chief of staff for the armed forces, had warned that Russia would “take retaliatory measures,” but he included an important caveat: Russia would attack missiles and the platforms from which they were launched only in the event that Russian military personnel were placed in danger.

Gee, could that be why Trump announced nice, smart missiles would be heading to Syria with enough time to move those troops?

[Britain's Teresa] May, who made an explicit connection between the airstrikes in Syria and the poisoning of the Skripals, benefited from the timing of the airstrikes, two days before lawmakers were to return from vacation. While not obligated to consult Parliament, she may have felt constrained to do so and could easily have lost a vote on a strike, as her predecessor David Cameron did in 2013.

How convenient.

 ...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

If You Really Want to Know the Dangers from Harvey...

Read Charles Pierce's article today.

If you'd rather not know how the rest of the US, and perhaps the rest of the world is teetering on disaster, do something else.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

By the way...The Huffington Post took down that article about Galveston and the bio lab.  No explanation.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/concern-over-bio-lab-caught-in-texas-storm_us_59a68bd1e4b05fa16286be5f

It may be here:  Worries About a Galveston Bio Lab

Maybe what happened to the HuffPo piece - Pierce is running a check on his previous post.

"Another"

Even after they've been outed for lying about the supposed previous attack, the White House is running with this narrative.

The White House issued an ominous warning to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on Monday night, pledging that his regime would pay a "heavy price" if it carried out another chemical attack this year.

[...]

"The United States has identified potential preparations for another chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime that would likely result in the mass murder of civilians, including innocent children," [White House press secretary Sean] Spicer said in the statement. "The activities are similar to preparations the regime made before its April 4, 2017 chemical weapons attack.

"As we have previously stated, the United States is in Syria to eliminate the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria," he continued. "If, however, Mr. Assad conducts another mass murder attack using chemical weapons, he and his military will pay a heavy price."

  WaPo

That never happened.

And our UN ambassador has already pre-assigned culpability, a nice cover for any false flag operations. A nod to our surrogates in Syria to go ahead with a gas attack.

Surprisingly, and shamefully, this Washington Post article does not mention that the allegation of a first attack has been negated, much less contested.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Our Esteemed Ambassador to the UN

WTF?

I'm guessing the lies Mr. Petree is referring to are the ones where the US claimed Assad used sarin gas "on his own people" (see here).

But what in the name of all that's holy is Haley saying? That ANY attacks on civilians will now be officially blamed on Assad by the US government? What in holy fuck?

Streamlines the whole ball of wax.  And I guess when the government is so short of State Dept and other high level employees, it conserves resources.

Jesus Harvey Christ.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Trump's "Intel" Is Fox News, Alex Jones & Brietbart

Remember MIT professor Professor Theodore Postol's conclusion that the US government was lying about a sarin attack by Assad on "his own people"?

US President Donald Trump ignored reports from US intelligence that said they had no evidence Syria had used sarin to attack a rebel-held town, Pulitzer-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh says.

[...]

In a report published by the German newspaper Die Welt on Sunday, he describes how the Trump administration mishandled the media frenzy after the Syrian bombing of the rebel-held town Khan Sheikhoun in April.

[...]

[Trump]ordered his military to prepare options for a response, which they did.

The subsequent Tomahawk attack on the Syrian Shayrat Air Base did less damage that the White House claimed, as was apparently intended by the military planners of the operation, Hersh said. The US mainstream media failed to question the government’s narrative of the situation, instead giving Trump what appears to be the pinnacle achievement of his presidency so far.

[...]

“If you’ve already decided it was a gas attack, you will then inevitably read the talk about a special weapon as involving a sarin bomb,” the adviser told Hersh. “Did the Syrians plan the attack on Khan Sheikhoun? Absolutely. Do we have intercepts to prove it? Absolutely. Did they plan to use sarin? No. But the president did not say: ‘We have a problem and let’s look into it.’ He wanted to bomb the shit out of Syria.”

  RT

A "Wag the Dog" scenario that secured media praise for Trump and exacerbated the powder keg that is Syria.

You don't suppose that's why the OPCW's request to go to the site and examine the evidence was denied do you?

The reaction to the show of force in the US media was probably everything the Trump administration could have hoped for. MSNBC anchorman Brian Williams described the sight of Tomahawks being launched at the Syrian base as “beautiful.” CNN host Fareed Zakaria reacted by saying that Trump finally “became president of the United States.”

[...]

“None of this makes any sense,” one US officer told colleagues upon learning of the White House decision to retaliate against Syria. “We KNOW that there was no chemical attack... the Russians are furious. Claiming we have the real intel and know the truth.

[...]

Hersh’s report is based on interviews with several US advisers and evidence they provided, including transcripts of real-time communications that immediately followed the Syrian attack on April 4. According to the advisers, the Syrian Air Force’s attack on Khan Sheikhoun targeted a meeting of several high-value leaders of jihadist groups.

[...]

The US was informed of the operation in detail beforehand as part of a conflict prevention arrangement with Russia.

An arrangement that Russia suspended in response to the strike.

The target of the Syrian bombing was described as a two-story cinder-block building. According to Russian intelligence, the jihadists used the second floor as a command and control center. The first floor housed a grocery store and other businesses. The basement was used as a warehouse for weapons, ammunition, and goods, including chlorine-based decontaminants and fertilizers.

[...]

According to a US assessment of the morning airstrike cited by Hersh, the 500-pound Russian bomb triggered secondary explosions. The heat could have evaporated the chemical products in the basement, producing a toxic cloud that spread over the town, pressed close to the ground by the dense morning air.

The scenario is consistent with the accounts of patients who reported a chlorine odor in interviews with Medecins Sans Frontieres. It could also explain the symptoms of nerve agent poisoning that were attributed to sarin, but may have been caused by organophosphates used in many fertilizers, Hersh said.

Pretty much exactly what the Russians said at the time.

Meanwhile, US intelligence had no evidence to indicate the presence of sarin gas at or near the Shayrat Air Base, from which the bombing mission was launched.

[...]

“No one knew the provenance of the photographs. We didn’t know who the children were or how they got hurt,” the adviser said. “Sarin actually is very easy to detect because it penetrates paint, and all one would have to do is get a paint sample. We knew there was a cloud and we knew it hurt people. But you cannot jump from there to certainty that Assad had hidden sarin from the UN because he wanted to use it in Khan Sheikhoun.”

“The president saw the photographs of poisoned little girls and said it was an Assad atrocity,” he added. “It’s typical of human nature. You jump to the conclusion you want. Intelligence analysts do not argue with a president. They’re not going to tell the president, ‘if you interpret the data this way, I quit.’”

Sadly true. And not only was the missile attack based on Fox News intel, it was bungled.

Of the 59 Tomahawk missiles fired at Shayrat, as many as 24 missed their targets because the initial strikes hit gasoline storage tanks, triggering a huge fire and a lot of smoke that interfered with the guidance systems of the following missies. Only a few actually penetrated the hangars, and these only destroyed nine aircraft that were apparently not operational and could not be moved during the window of opportunity between the US warning of the looming attack and the strike itself.

“It was a totally Trump show from beginning to end,” the senior adviser told Hersh.

[...]

“The issue is, what if there’s another false flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He’s incapable of saying he made a mistake.”

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Something to Hide?

“Yesterday [April 20], our proposal that experts from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons [OPCW] visit the sites of the suspected chemical attack in Syria was blocked by Western delegations without any explanations,” [Russian Foreign Minister Sergey] Lavrov said.

[...]

The draft proposal seen by AFP called on the OPCW “to establish whether chemical weapons were used in Khan Sheikhoun and how they were delivered to the site of the reported incident.”

[...]

In the meantime, the UK and France claim their experts have received samples from the site of the incident, Lavrov added.

“London, Paris, and the OPCW have given no answers to our questions as to where they took these samples, who took them, or when they were delivered,” Lavrov stated.

[...]

On Thursday, the OPCW’s executive council overwhelmingly rejected a proposal from Russia and Iran for a new investigation into the Idlib chemical incident.

The proposal had been amended to agree to Western demands that the investigation into the alleged attack be carried out by the existing OPCW fact-finding mission, but was defeated nonetheless.

  RT

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE 6/25: Award-winning journalist Sy Hersh investigated and found that Trump relied on TV intel even when actual intel proved there was no sarin attack.

MIT Prof Says US Syria Claims Are False

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor Theodore Postol, who wrote a preliminary review of the US government claims earlier this week and shared his findings with RT, examined photographs of the attack site and concluded that the report endorsed by the White House “could not be true.”

Senior US administration officials who briefed the media on Tuesday admitted the White House intelligence was partly “based on the pro-opposition social media reporting,” which “tells a very clear and consistent story about what we think happened.”

  RT

The US is now using social media as an intelligence agency?

Postol’s six-page addendum, made public on Thursday evening, “unambiguously shows that the assumption in the [White House report] that there was no tampering with the alleged site of the sarin release is not correct.”

That assumption was “totally unjustified,” wrote Postol, “and no competent intelligence analyst would have agreed that this assumption was valid.”

[...]

Postol’s key argument is a series of photographs of the crater where the container holding sarin was supposedly air-dropped. He pointed to a photograph of several men inspecting the site, wearing loose clothing and medical gloves.

“If there were any sarin present at this location when this photograph was taken everybody in the photograph would have received a lethal or debilitating dose of sarin,” he wrote. “The fact that these people were dressed so inadequately either suggests a complete ignorance of the basic measures needed to protect an individual from sarin poisoning, or that they knew that the site was not seriously contaminated.”

Since there were affected people in the area, it beggars belief to think they were ignorant of the need for protection.

On Thursday, CIA Director Mike Pompeo confirmed that it was his agency which concluded that the Syrian government was responsible for the chemical weapons attack in Khan Shaykhun, which persuaded Trump to fire 59 cruise missiles at a Syrian airbase last week.

“We were good, and fast,” Pompeo said at an event in Washington, DC, “and we got it right.”

Do not question our authority.

UPDATE 6/25: Award-winning journalist Sy Hersh investigated and found that Trump relied on TV intel even when actual intel proved there was no sarin attack.

Spicer's Possible Downfall

If Israel says he has to go, he has to go.

Israeli politicians and commentators have reacted with fury and incredulity to comments made by Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, in which he suggested Hitler had not used poison gas on his own people and called Nazi extermination camps “Holocaust centres”.

[...]

Spicer’s assertion during the Jewish holiday of Passover provoked instant outrage on social media and from some Holocaust memorial groups, who accused him of minimising Hitler’s crimes.

Leading the charge was Yisrael Katz, a member of Likud, the party of the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. Katz holds the intelligence and transportation portfolios in the Israeli cabinet.

[...]

“Sean Spicer’s statement that Hitler didn’t use chemical weapons is severe and outrageous. We have a moral obligation that supersedes policy considerations. We must demand that he apologise, or resign.”

  Guardian

Well, he DID apologize. Sort of.

Katz later appeared to accept Spicer’s apology. “Since he apologised and retracted his remarks, as far as [I] am concerned, the matter is over,” he said in a statement, citing the “tremendous importance of historical truth and remembrance” of Holocaust victims.

That was easy.

Nachman Shai, another Zionist Union MP, who chairs the US-Israel relations lobby in the Israeli parliament, called on Donald Trump to condemn Spicer’s remarks.

“The White House urgently needs a history teacher,” Shai said. “Ignorance is not acceptable. Hitler used chemical weapons of mass destruction in a large scale that human history hadn’t seen until then, and since then.

“This a second failure of the White House recently, regarding the biggest tragedy that occurred to the Jewish people and took place in the 20th century,” he added, referring to a White House statement on International Holocaust Remembrance Day that failed to mention directly the fate of Europe’s Jews.

Israel’s official Holocaust remembrance centre, Yad Vashem, issued a statement [...] “His statements imply a profound lack of knowledge of events of the second world war, including the Holocaust. Moreover, they are liable to strengthen the hands of those whose goal is to distort history.”

[...]

Writing in the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper, the columnist Orly Azoulay claimed Spicer’s comments reflected an “implicit anti-semitism”.

[...]

Writing in Haaretz, Ofer Aderet said Spicer’s ignorance was “miserable”.

“First, Spicer’s sweeping claim that even Hitler didn’t sink to using chemical arms is just flat out wrong. In fact, Hitler used chemical weapons – gases such as carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and Zyklon B – to kill more people than anyone in history.

“Second, Spicer’s attempt to clarify his remark by saying that, unlike Assad, Hitler didn’t gas his own people is also mistaken. Hitler killed more than 200,000 Germans – both Jews and non-Jews.”

We may not have heard the last of this.  Spicer has been on shakey ground from the get go.  Not the brightest bulb on the tree.  Maybe they'll give him back his bunny suit this weekend and retire him from the press room.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE:

UPDATE:

Spicer Clears Up His Hitler Gaffe

They need to get him back on his drugs and off the stage.

Is he ignorant of the fact that there were German jews? Or does he just not consider a jew to qualify as a German?  Is he secretly a holocaust denier?  No, he said Hitler sent the jews to "holocaust centers", so that's not it.  He's just batshit, I think,

And what in the world is he saying with that last (and, yes, stupidest) sentence?  Jesus, if he'd attack his OWN citizens, he might even go so far as to attack OURS!

WTF?

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Spicer Gaffes - Part 2

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer repeatedly told reporters that we should "stop the deterrence" of chemical weapons, while at the same time insisting we should "ensure the proliferation" of the weapons. He really has no idea what he is talking about.

  Shareblue

Or at least WE don't know what he's talking about.  Maybe that's the goal.



Yeah, that's not gaffes. That's ignorance.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Spicer: The Perfect Spokesperson for the Trump Administration

Donald Trump’s administration has had a long history of troubling winks, nods, and outright ties to anti-Semitism. And they have repeatedly offended the Jewish community: By leaving anti-Semitism out of its Holocaust Remembrance Day statement; being slow to denounce anti-Semitic attacks; attacking a Jewish reporter who asked about them; theorizing that those attacks were a false flag; and ending President Obama’s tradition of attending a Passover Seder.

And this history was just aggravated by Press Secretary Sean Spicer falsely claiming that Hitler never used chemical weapons.

[...]

Attempting to justify Donald Trump's unilateral decision to launch ineffective airstrikes on Syria, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer made just the administration's problems much worse, claiming — absurdly — that even Hitler "didn't sink to using chemical weapons." Millions of Jews slaughtered in gas chambers would beg to differ.

[...]

Hitler infamously used the chemical weapon Zyklon B to slaughter millions of Jews during the Holocaust.

[...]

Spicer tried to clean up his gaffe later in the briefing, but made things even worse [...]

VARGAS: Quote, “Hitler didn’t even sink to the level of using chemical weapons.” What did you mean by that?

SPICER: I think when you come to Sarin gas, there was no — he was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Ashad (sic) is doing. I mean, there is clearly — thank you. I appreciate that. There was not — in the — he brought them into the Holocaust centers, I understand that. But I’m saying, in the way that Assad used them, where he went into towns, dropped them down to innocent, into the middle of towns, it brought — so the use of it, I appreciate the clarification there. That was not the intent.

  Shareblue

JFC

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer delivered a complete and unqualified apology for his comments about Hitler and the Holocaust, then promptly committed yet another gaffe when he said he did not want to be a distraction from Donald Trump's actions in Syria, and attempts "to destabilize the region."

  Shareblue

Maybe that wasn't a gaffe.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Syria Situation Summary

The broader the administration’s goals in Syria, the more prone it will be to pressure to escalate there. Already, some regional allies that have long dreamed of dragging the United States into a war with Assad, such as Turkey, have described the strikes as “insufficient” and called for more forceful action. And congressional hawks, such as Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), are urging Trump to follow up on the strikes by providing Syrian opposition groups with more weapons, imposing a no-fly zone, and conducting further airstrikes to pressure Russia and Assad to agree to a political settlement. Meanwhile, the Syrian air force has already resumed bombing the northwestern town of Khan Sheikhoun — the same area the regime gassed last week. And as Assad continues to kill civilians, with or without chemical munitions, the calls for deeper U.S. involvement aimed at ousting Assad will mount.

  WaPo

May I just say here that conducting further airstrikes to pressure Russia and Assad seems like the height of folly.

And also, the "resumed" Syrian bombing of "the same area the regime gassed last week" sounds very like saying that the Syrian government's explanation for what happened - that they hit a terrorist store house that was holding chemical weapons - is in fact what happened. That is not to say that they didn't know there were chemical weapons there, but that's not the story the US government is floating. They say the Syrians have chemical weapons that they are using to bomb people. In times like these, the details are important.

If the United States goes down this road, the prospects of a military confrontation with Moscow are real. A few thousand Russian military personnel are distributed across Syria’s key military bases. Moscow has also placed some of the world’s most sophisticated air defense systems in Syria, and Russian planes police Syrian skies. So an extensive U.S. campaign aimed at coercing Assad by targeting Syrian air bases and command-and-control facilities would run big risks of killing Russian troops on the ground. The same holds for a no-fly zone, which would likely require targeting Syrian and Russian air defenses and could lead to air-to-air incidents between Russian and U.S. jets.

Particularly since, in retaliation for the US attack, Russia has discontinued the hotline connection between the two governments that was set up to avoid such incidents.

Compounding matters, in an effort to generate counter-leverage, Russia and the Assad regime are likely to respond to further U.S. strikes or a no-fly zone by reorienting their integrated air defense network toward U.S. and coalition aircraft engaged in fighting the Islamic State or by attacking opposition areas in northern Syria, where nearly 1,000 U.S. troops are on the ground. This could derail the counter-Islamic State campaign at the very moment when the militant group’s capital, Raqqa, is under assault by U.S.-backed forces.

[...]

Trump chose a limited strike package precisely because he and his advisers understood the grave risks if the United States attacked a broader set of targets.

Well, to be fair, Trump's advisers chose it.

The Syrian dictator (perhaps prodded by Russia or Iran) may attempt to test Trump again, hoping to prove the president is a “paper tiger.” And Trump, having invested his personal credibility in standing firm, may find himself psychologically or politically compelled to respond, despite the very real risks that it could result in a direct military clash with Russia.

[...]

Given Russia’s vital interests in Syria, Moscow is not likely to respond positively to U.S. ultimatums and maximalist positions.

[...]

Before Tillerson arrives in Moscow for meetings on Wednesday, the administration needs a clear plan to avoid stepping on this slippery slope.

Tillerson's reported personality makes it seem like he's not the man to perform this delicate task.

 ...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Leaked

Oh, hey...

The following document has begun to circulate outside the government. It is said to have been developed within the Administration. I have not confirmed, however, whether it is a final, approved draft, who its authors are, and/or whether it will receive a more formal distribution.

[...]

The targeted U.S. military action against the Syrian military targets directly connected to the April 4 chemical weapons attack in Idlib was justified and legitimate as a measure to deter and prevent Syria’s illegal and unacceptable use of chemical weapons. The U.S. action was only taken after careful consideration of the following:

–Severe humanitarian distress, including the suffering caused by this and other previous unconscionable chemical weapons attacks by the Syrian military;

–Widespread violations of international law by the Syrian government, in particular the repeated use of banned chemical weapons against civilians in direct violation of its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention, which it acceded to in 2013, as well as UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 2118, which was adopted by the Security Council under its Chapter VII authority, and which required Syria to cease using chemical weapons and eliminate its chemical weapons program in its entirety;

–Syria’s contempt for multiple UNSCRs including UNSCR 1540 and those seeking to give effect to UNSCR 2118, specifically UNSCRs 2209, 2235, 2314, and 2319.

The recognition in UNSCRs that the proliferation and use of chemical weapons is a serious threat to international security and a violation of international law;

–Syria’s indiscriminate use of such banned weapons to kill and inflict other horrific injuries on civilians in violation of the law of armed conflict, which tragically has been something that Syria has shown little respect for;

–Regional destabilization and international security concerns produced by the Syrian government’s actions, which include large and growing flows of refugees and the potential proliferation of chemical weapons;

–Widespread international condemnation of the Syrian government’s conduct, including its use of chemical weapons;

–A convincing body of reporting that the Syrian Government has committed widespread violations of international law during the conflict;

–The exhaustion of all reasonably available peaceful remedies before using force, including extensive and intensive diplomatic efforts both to end armed conflict in Syria and to eliminate Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile;

–The U.S. use of force is necessary and proportionate to the aim of deterring and preventing the future use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government; and

–The U.S. efforts to minimize civilian casualties in the planning and execution of the strike.

[UPDATE: Charlie Savage reports that it is press guidance that has been provided to Administration spokespeople. Not yet clear whether it is based upon any formal legal advice.]

  Just Security

Damn. Upstaged by another leak. I smell a Trump tantrum coming on.

That account does not, however, explain why the United States can (or should) lawfully respond with a use of force unilaterally, without Security Council approval or even (as in Kosovo 1999) the ex ante approval of a broad set of allies and states within the region, and to do so in apparent breach of Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter. [...] The document does not even mention the Charter, nor suggest that the United States has not violated it. [...] Instead, it sounds more in the register of an explanation of why President Trump decided to put the U.S. in breach of the Charter — although, oddly, it does not even mention that the Russian veto would preclude UNSC action, a factor that presumably would be central to any such attempted justification.

[...]

The strikes against Syria [...] were unilateral (in the sense of being done by the U.S. alone), and they violated the Charter, a treaty largely drafted and championed by the United States and to which every state in the world has agreed.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

House Elites: But, But, What About Us?

US President Donald Trump has sent a letter to the US Congress, informing them about the US missile strike against the Syrian Air Force base, and stating that the US will take additional action to further the country’s national interests, the White House said Saturday.

In a letter to the US Congress on Saturday, President Donald Trump explained his decision to launch an attack on the Shayrat Airbase in Syria, claiming he was acting to avert a “humanitarian catastrophe.”

  RT

Syria has been a humanitarian catastrophe for several years. A better response might have been to accept refugees.

"I directed this action in order to degrade the Syrian military's ability to conduct further chemical weapons attacks and to dissuade the Syrian regime from using or proliferating chemical weapons, thereby promoting the stability of the region and averting a worsening of the region's current humanitarian catastrophe."

Right. It worked so well that the Syrian army immediately deployed two bombers from the airport that Trump attacked.

The US strike came before the UN or the OPCW, the chemical weapons watchdog, could investigate the incident.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has called for a House debate on President Donald Trump’s missile strike against Syria, saying Congress has a constitutional responsibility to discuss the authorization of military force against a sovereign nation.

[...]

“The President’s action and any response demands that we immediately do our duty,” Pelosi wrote. “Congress must live up to its Constitutional responsibility to debate an Authorization of the Use of Military Force against a sovereign nation.”

  RT

Congress has a constitutional duty that entails more than discussing it. They're supposed to be the ones ordering it, not the president. They've been allowing the presidents since 9/11 to simply run endless war on the basis of an authorization in 2001 to go to war with whoever was responsible for or involved in the 9/11 attacks.

Pelosi voiced her support for Trump’s strike against the Syrian government on Thursday, calling it a “proportional response to the regime’s use of chemical weapons.”

And that's all Trump heard. The "but" after that means nothing.

The House is meant to be starting a two-week recess, but Pelosi wrote to House Speaker Paul Ryan to request a debate.

It's a hell of a time to go on vacation.

Paul Ryan has released a statement in which he called the airstrikes “appropriate and just,” but encouraged Trump to seek permission from Congress for further attacks.

“I look forward to the administration further engaging Congress in this effort,” he said.

Yeah, Ryan, Trump doesn't even like you. He's not likely to give a shit.

 ...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.