Wednesday, September 21, 2016
Blame It On the Whizzbangs
"[Defence Minister] Senator Payne echoed a Defence statement... in saying the coalition had been 'tracking' what they believed was an Islamic State fighting position 'for some time'. This could suggest there was an intelligence failure from the fusion of information from drones, satellites, signal intelligence from sources such as mobile phones and informants on the ground." (RAAF to press on with IS strikes despite fatal error, David Wroe, Heath Aston & Mark Kenny, Sydney Morning Herald, 20/9/16)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
This is why military intelligence is said to be an oxymoron...
No mention in the SMH article of the fact that, according to reports I've seen, ISIS attacked the SAA position just after the attack by US (and allied) planes - according to one report just 7 minutes later! How did they manage that if the US planes thought they were attacking ISIS positions?
Read SST - http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/ on Jack Murphy's article on US special forces in Syria. The full article is behind a subscription wall at sofrep.com, though another site has published it without permission.
Nothing of our aiding and abetting of the IS takeover of Mt. Thardah in today's Australian either.
Ditto for Radio National's PM program.
This strange comment:
"This account excludes any consideration of the role of the coalition forces. The uk, Australia, etc. I read the latter pulled out after consulting russia? What is that all about? Also uk reaper drones were involved, and an enquiry is underway, pm theresa may has stated they would not attack syrian forces, etc. So if the Pentagon and cash carter intended this from the outset they have deliberately misled their allies. Quite serious."
is from someone called "Richardposed" over on unz.com.
http://www.unz.com/mwhitney/rogue-mission-did-the-pentagon-bomb-syrian-army-to-kill-ceasefire-deal/
I don't have any more details. Does anyone, (MERC perhaps) know whether Australia pulled out? Intriguing.
Australia’s air strike on Syrian troops was an ‘intentional’ act, says President Assad.
http://www.news.com.au/world/australias-attack-on-syrian-troops-was-an-intentional-act-says-president-assad/news-story/496fa7e8f106aab93642a74b8ef93168
"Privately, US officials said their intelligence information suggested Russian aircraft had actually carried out the attack." (Russia blamed for aid attack, Eric Schmitt, New York Mimes/ Sydney Morning Herald, 22/9/16)
Or maybe the old "fusion of information from drones, satellites, signal intelligence from sources such as mobile phones..."
Why privately?
The aid attack is interesting in several ways. Several commenters have said that the damage shows that aircraft were not used. The UN first said that it was an air attack, at which point the US waded in and blamed Russia or Syria (unlikely the latter as the Syrians don't have capability to mount such an attack at night). Then the UN changed direction and said that it did not know if the attack was from the air or not. Past record suggests that it was not by the Russians. Almost certainly some "rebel" group. White helmets are now discredited as is (for a long time) the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, though the ABC still takes what Rami Abdul Rahman says as gospel.
https://www.rt.com/news/317372-nimrod-kamer-syrian-observatory/
Post a Comment