Talk:Israeli Bombing of Jamraya

Imagery
This is always a big part of what we do, but this case we're a little slow getting this stumbling start. Others will have it covered better... --Caustic Logic (talk) 11:24, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Press TV File Photos
I just did a Google image search and by that, the most prominent alleged photos of the aftermath on the ground and the scene are attached to Press TV articles: The picture, (direct link until we decide its worth re-uploading here, is captioned "Smoke rises from a building in Jamraya near Syria-Lebanon border after an Israeli air strike on a military research center. (file photo)" Doesn't "file photo" often mean it's not of the actual event? That would make the caption dishonest. This one isn't - it says just Damascus, not Jamraya. this one doesn't say file photo. --Caustic Logic (talk) 11:24, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Syria warns Israel of airstrike ‘repercussions’
 * I think I have seen a video of the same scene, with an explosion where the smoke now rises. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 15:35, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Jets Video?
On Youtube: Israeli Bombers Returning Home Over Damascus After Bombing Raid on research center in Syria There are two of them, trails only visible. Now why were these things not shot down? They weren't even manned. Did someone get the rebels to take out an AA position right before?
 * I do not think these are jet airplanes. The fiery trails looks more like from missiles. These could in fact be Syrian anti-aircraft missiles targeted at the Israeli jets. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 23:38, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Syrian TV shows 'aftermath' footage
Russia Today: ''The footage broadcast on Saturday by Al-Ikhbariya TV and Syrian state TV showed destroyed cars, trucks and military vehicles, and a damaged building with its windows broken and interior damaged. The video was allegedly shot at Jamraya, northwest of Damascus.'' - Video excerpts at the link. --CE (talk) 13:58, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

So Which is it?
SANA.sy, Jan. 30, 2013:
 * The General Command of the Army and Armed Forces said that Israeli warplanes violated Syrian airspace on Wednesday dawn and bombarded directly a scientific research center responsible for raising the levels of resistance and self-defense in Jamraya area in Damascus Countryside.
 * (Take not -SANA.sy, not a proxy, is allowed back on the internet.--Caustic Logic (talk) 23:19, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

NPR, not SANA, says this center in "northwest of Damascus." And it is, on Wikimapia.

Reuters: Israel hits Syria arms convoy to Lebanon: sources:
 * Israeli warplanes bombed a convoy near Syria's border with Lebanon, sources told Reuters, apparently targeting weapons destined for Hezbollah in what some called a warning to Damascus not to arm Israel's Lebanese enemy.

Northwest of Damascus would be near the border, but a military research center and convoy of trucks are clearly two different things. --Caustic Logic (talk) 10:52, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Someone tagged this place as the Research Center in question. 15 hours ago. Attracted some trolls already... *rolleyes* --CE (talk) 12:21, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That could well be it. In/next to Jamraya. It's as if the Israelis want the Syrians to fill in the military research part, to raise our eyebrows. Oh, what were they researching next to this missile convoy? How to gas Jews with missiles, perchance? If not assassinating Lebanese Sunni leaders, shooting missiles at Turkey or shooting down its jets, they're plannning to attack Israel, just to get one more enemy. Of course. --Caustic Logic (talk) 12:41, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Ever wonder why Luxembourg does not have a air force? No human jet pilot could take the g-forces from turning in Luxembourg's airspace. Israel is not much bigger.
 * The distance from the Lebanese border to Jamraya is some 15 kilometers. it would be possible bomb Jamraya from Lebanon without entering Syrian airspace. A air-to-surface missile could cover 20 times the distance, so would a GPS or laser-guided gravity bomb, if it had any winglets attached to it. A AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon would be more than enough, in fact you could drop one from Tel Aviv. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 02:13, 1 February 2013 (UTC)


 * From SyrPer: -- Petri Krohn (talk) 04:25, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * ANSWER: The route the Zionist jets took to avoid the S-300 is instructive.  They flew, first of all, over the Mediterranean and then used a route over the Lebanese border close to Syria's and fired inside Lebanese territory.  They are clearly afraid of the Syrian air defense system.  We must now wait to see if any reaction is forthcoming from Syria and Iran.  Let's keep following the details of this event.  Ziad


 * Brilliant. That way, if they can and do hityou, you're over Lebanese airspace, where Syria has (or at least is perceived as having) no right to shoot. <--- that's an unsigned comment by CL. --CE (talk) 17:23, 1 February 2013 (UTC)


 * A Syrian cabinet statement speaks a different language:
 * Forth: The Cabinet underlines that Israel would have never dared to launch this attack unless the armed terrorist groups, on top, Jabhat al-Nusra,, had prepared and availed the practical circumstances to this act through its organized target against the air defense systems and radar networks.
 * That's something the SyrPer guy actively denied several times: that successful sabotage of the air defense system is taking place. Which the cabinet seems to admit here. --CE (talk) 17:20, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Instead he's now claiming that Syria has a bunch of supa-sekret MIG's and one of them fired three missiles at Dimona in retaliation. Is he losing it? --CE (talk) 18:51, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * SyrPer also says Syria has S-300 missiles. I cannot find any reliable confirmation for that or Syrian Mig31s. This is the closest I could find:
 * Syria Buying $1 billion in Russian Weapons
 * On the other hand, there is no real reason why Syria could not have these advanced weapons. Russia has been blocked from selling them to Iran, but Iran would gladly pay, if Russia shipped them to Syria.
 * The Dimona story is feasible. It is also the best way of preventing this form escalating, and making everyone happy. Part of the deal is that we would never hear about is – apart from SyrPer that is. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 20:46, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure sure, it's possible, but seriously, Petri - look at what he writes in light of everybody else including the Syrian Cabinet agreeing that Israeli Jets just "sneaked in and out" of Syrian airspace - I say that smells, no, stinks of projection:
 * Needless to say, the fact that our jet penetrated Zionist airspace and returned unscathed to its base near Tartous says a lot to the Zionist settlers in Palestine about the effectiveness of their air defense system.
 * Anyway, we'll see and some of his information seems to be spot on - but Comical Ali syndrome shines through time and time again, IMHO. --CE (talk) 21:21, 2 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Over at apxwn someone claimed that Lebanese airforce confirmed that the jets entered Syrian airspace (therefore supporting the Syrian version), but I wasn't able to find a source for this. I only found them confirming (and complaining) that the jets violated their airspace. But not only in passing, but for many hours, in stints(!):
 * A Lebanese army statement said that four Israeli planes entered Lebanese air space at 4.30 p.m (1430GMT) on Tuesday. They were replaced four hours later by another group of planes which overflew southern Lebanon until 2 a.m and a third mission took over, finally leaving at 7.55 a.m on Wednesday morning.
 * The same article reports that claims of a strike were denied by media and not commented on by army spokespeople. The source(s) for the claim of the attacked convoy is unnamed, and apparently none of the articles about that version have any specifics about the location. They should have, if it was in Lebanon. There should be photos and official statements. On the other hand, why should those jets hover over the area for many hours if they were about to attack a static target like that Research Center? They seem to have been waiting for something to happen (like a convoy crossing the border edit: or word of an successful act of sabotage?). But why then do the Syrians tell us that their precious airdefense system was circumvented? None of this seems to make sense atm. --CE (talk) 18:25, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think the Israeli jets ever entered Syrian airspace. There is no need to. If these are missiles, as now claimed, Israel could have launched them from a submarine in the Mediterranean just off Cyprus.
 * The closeness of the Lebanese border to Damascus is precisely the reason why Syrian SAM batteries spent years in the Bekaa Valley. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 20:54, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Infowars has some good analysis:
 * Diplomat: Real Target of Israeli Attack Was Syrian Base
 * ...reports about a weapons convoy on its way to Lebanon being hit were merely a diversion.
 *  “the report about a strike on a convoy to Lebanon was probably meant to divert attention away from the main objective of the operation.”

That we already knew.
 * ...adding that the attack actually took place 48 hours before it was reported
 * The research facility being the real target would also correlate with reports that the facility was on fire two days before news about the air strike was released.

Is he saying the strike happened two days before everybody else saw the jets in Lebanese airspace and crossing the Syrian border? -- Petri Krohn (talk) 00:05, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Israeli material
As usually Voltaire Network has its own twist:
 * An unofficial Syrian source told Voltaire Network that a few days earlier the Syrian Arab Army had seized some sophisticated Israeli material used by the Contras, which it stored in the research center where it was to be taken apart and analyzed.
 * This is probably the material that the Israelis intended to destroy before being taken to Russia or Iran. The Center was first attacked by ground commandos of the Free Syrian Army who were pushed back. Then, the Israeli Air Force intervened directly to carry out the work that the Contras were unable to achieve.
 * Israeli planes flew in very low from Lebanon. They rose from the rear of Mount Hermon and penetrated Syrian airspace only very briefly.

If there was ground-fighting that could also explain why the planes spend so many hours above Lebanon waiting for something. But isn't that area quite tightly under government control? Doubt that the "rebels" can simply knock on the door there. --CE (talk) 21:38, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The phrase "ground commandos of the Free Syrian Army" does not refer to "rebels," but Nato or Israeli special forces. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 22:25, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * My hunch reading that - not overwhelming - is that this is not the truth. Although it is quite interesting, it's Voltaire/Meyssan. Seems they tend to get things wrong (not that I know how often, really, so maybe it is true) --Caustic Logic (talk) 00:03, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * How did the Israelis know where this material was? Maybe this sophisticated ET material was sending its coordinates to home base. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 00:10, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Look at this whore on CNN: Well, in fact you cannot, as CNN has pulled the video of the net... (mirror,2)
 * Syria: Israel bombed research facility - CNN.com Video
 * CNN's Sara Sidner reports on the Syrian government's stating that Israel bombed one of its research facilities.

This was one of worst pieces of journalism. Sara Sidner is pushing the US State Department apologist excuse, even before acknowledging the a strike had taken place. More precisely, she farted the propaganda in the same breath as stating the strike happened – as if both were the same thing and of equal factual value. The excuse was that the target was some gas / SAM convoy to Hezbollah.

From the CNN report and elsewhere I learn that the US StateDept had been aware of the strike in advance. How long was it? Several days? "Few days?" If this is true, it gives additional credibility to this theory. Most likely this "sophisticated Israeli material" contained some "sophisticated US technology," that Israel had no right to pass on their friends in Russia and China. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 22:56, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

P.S. – The US approved the strike. Now, the question that must be asked is, did the US approve the giving of this secret US technology to the FSA? -- Petri Krohn (talk) 23:44, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

US approval

 * Israel targeted multiple targets in recent attack on Syria, U.S. intelligence official tells Time
 * American official says White House gave Israel 'green light' to carry out more such attacks in the future.
 * By Haaretz | Feb.02, 2013
 * "At least one to two additional targets were hit the same night," a Western intelligence official indicated to Time, adding that Israel received a “green light” from the United States to carry out further attacks in the future.

World Reaction
Isreal remains silent. They've been silent five years over their attack on a place they said was a nuclear reactor. They'll never acknowledge this, and don't care whether or not anyone buys their reason or description of the target. That aloof confidence will leave the West believing or silently respecting the decision. --Caustic Logic (talk) 13:51, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Not quite silent. RT reports:
 * 'But on Sunday, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said that '“What happened in Syria several days ago… that's proof that when we said something we mean it. We say that we don't think it should be allowed to bring advanced weapons systems into Lebanon.
 * “Hezbollah from Lebanon and the Iranians are the only allies that [Syrian President Bashar] Assad has left,” Barak told reporters at a security conference in Munich, adding that the “imminent” fall of the Assad government “will be a major blow to the Iranians and Hezbollah.”

Russian initial response: LA Times :''Hezbollah, which is closely aligned with both Syria and Iran, condemned the airstrike as “barbaric aggression” and expressed “full solidarity with Syria’s command, army and people,” the Associated Press reported. Russia, Syria’s chief patron, said the strike would constitute “unprovoked attacks on targets on the territory of a sovereign country, which blatantly violates the U.N. Charter and is unacceptable, no matter the motives to justify it.''

Syrian Response: Reuters, Jan 31: Syria protests over Israel attack, warns of "surprise"
 * (Reuters) - Syria protested to the United Nations on Thursday over an Israeli air strike on its territory and warned of a possible "surprise" response.


 * The foreign ministry summoned the head of the U.N. force in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights to deliver the protest a day after Israel hit what Syria said was a military research centre and diplomats said was a weapons convoy heading for Lebanon.


 * "Syria holds Israel and those who protect it in the Security Council fully responsible for the results of this aggression and affirms its right to defend itself, its land and sovereignty," Syrian television quoted it as saying.


 * The ministry said it considered Wednesday's Israeli attack to be a violation of a 1974 military disengagement agreement which followed their last major war, and demanded the U.N. Security Council condemn it unequivocally.

I'll have to look into the exact threat. One imagines "surprise" is the most sinister-sounding word in it. If gas is mentioned, its fevered imaginations. Otherwise, they're making total sense. The Security Council will not be condemning Israeli aggression. They might try (and fail) to denounce Syria's "aggressive rhetoric." --Caustic Logic (talk) 23:36, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Iran adds an interesting twist: Press Tv Jan 31: Muslims will never allow Israel to attack Syria: Iran official
 * Hassoun said Israel’s recent airstrike on a military research center near Damascus clearly exposed anti-Syria bids and the direct involvement of the Israeli regime in the Syrian unrest. 


 * He also underlined the need for increased vigilance among Muslims to foil plots devised by the enemy to create a rift among Muslims. 

Direct jab at Syria's rebels. They've gotten on the same side with Israel against fellow Muslims. Next strike their Turkish/NATO controllers will have them knock out radar to help the Israeli jets. "How you guys feel about that?" But messages of unity, even against Israel, might not work on these nominal Muslims. They're more focused on hating Alawi/Shia and spinning an elaborate case for their being non-Muslim and non-human, so... they'll find a way to deal. They might imagine they're using Israel, just like they're using the West, to get the Islamism in place and then bite the hand that fed them the country to start with, as they did in Libya/North Africa at large. That's a bummer of a thought. --Caustic Logic (talk) 23:36, 31 January 2013 (UTC)