Talk:Israeli Bombing of Jamraya

From A Closer Look On Syria
(Redirected from Israeli Bombing of Jamraya)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Al-Arabiya Commentator

As suggested by the imagery (see below), the research center itself was damaged at least in part by surface-fired, truck-mounted heavy anti-aircraft gun. Fired by rebels, obviously, from fairly close, against Syrians once again, and not up at the Israeli warplanes aiming for the same Syrians. So I say we have video evidence that the rebels have wound up running missions together with Israel, against Syria.

Now, consider this piece of crap I ran across earlier today - Abdul Wahab Badrakhan, writing from Lebanon, for Saudi-owned Al-Arabiya, English section. He refers to "the Israeli enemy" as if they were an enemy of his (vague), which Syria isn't resisting to his liking, "apparently in a close to a truce with Israel" in fact. This is proven by the succesful Israeli bombing of Syria, because, like Israel I guess, Bashar Al-Assad's real goal is to kill "the Syrian people" (many of whom have been flocking there from all over the world, by the way, to grab that esteemed title). Assad is to blame for the enemy's successful and sinister strike, because he "has turned the resistance weapons to face inwards," where Saudi-funded terrorists chop off Syrian Arab heads on a daily basis now.

So, Mr. Badrakhan, with sub-human levels of either honesty or intelligence, says:

Saeed Jalili, Iran’s Supreme Leader and Ayatollah Khamenei’s envoy, went to Damascus to confirm “the Islamic Republic’s full support to the resisting Syrian people in confronting Israel.”
After a week of Israeli threats, it was not acceptable that Hezbollah did not realize that the flying of warplanes for long hours in Lebanese airspace called for vigilance and caution. If it turns out to be true that a cargo of arms was prepared to be transferred overnight to Lebanon, this should have augmented suspicion and caution.
But the Syrian regime and its allies are busier planning to kill the Syrians, the real resisting people.

WHAT? This guy deserves an Orwell Award if there is one. Wow! --Caustic Logic (talk) 10:02, 7 February 2013 (UTC) (moved and edited) --Caustic Logic (talk) 11:33, 7 February 2013 (UTC)


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)

Internal Damage / Horizontal Shelling?

Jamraya Interior 1.png

I'm finally looking at the RT video. As noted below/around, the research center interior is fairly undamaged by the air strikes. We can also glimpse a bit of its nature, with at least one damaged area looking a high-end machine shop.

The composite view at right, if I'm reading it right, is from atop the wall somehow, looking down through a vacated ceiling pane, down an exterior wall and its window, and debris/ceiling-strewn floor. The seven visible punctures in the wall don't, to me, look like the effects of an Israeli bomb. I'm no expert, but this suggests, as it did in Taldou, etc., rebel-generated "horizontal shelling," most likely by truck-mounted heavy anti-aircraft gun. These were fired at Syrians once again, and not up at the Israeli warplanes aiming for the same Syrians. So I say we have video evidence that the rebels have wound up running missions together with Israel against Syria.

Contrary thoughts, anyone? --Caustic Logic (talk) 11:36, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

As Petri suggests below, this could be from anti-armor cluster bombs. I don't know how those work, but they'd have to pop out horizontally at impact, as opposed to the usual/anti-personnel type that tend to scatter high and fall down over a wide area. Seen from the outside, the walls are holed right by the damaged vehicles; from that angle, some kind of lateral aspect of the dropped munitions is arguably evident. --Caustic Logic (talk) 09:10, 8 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)

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)

I just checked Google Earth on this. No firm decision, but it's quite consistent with Jamraya. What it's not is clearly the right day and event. The afternoon view, apparently, is to the northeast over the town itself (not 100% on that), from about here on the opposite bank. Mountains to the north/west, nice ridges that at different angles will seem sharp peaks. Even a single primate "skyscraper" seems to be there across the way (GM]. The smoke looks almost like it's in a downtown, but on this line, it would be just about on the near/north edge of the broad area wikimapia has labeled as the research place to the southeast (GM. --Caustic Logic (talk) 12:07, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh, also the title of the jpeg suggests an "Amiri" took it on Jan. 31, 2013. --Caustic Logic (talk) 12:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
So I think we have this: Location is consistent, but not a certain match yet. If the line of sight I laid out is correct,the smoke is from near the compound IDd or just inside it, not deep in it where the main buildings are. The picture suggests either a snap time or upload/transfer date of Jan. 31, and looks like afternoon. And the attack occurred, reportedly, dawn on the 30th, right? So it shows burning vehicles much later in the day and it's a day old, shows a later event and is new, or another event prior and is even older. All prior and later events would be rebel-caused, presumably, and that includes a rebel vehicle hit just outside the area as it tried to attack.--Caustic Logic (talk) 23:39, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Here is some more PressTV footage from the outside of the building: -- Petri Krohn (talk) 14:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

On January the 30th, 2013, Israeli jets attacked in the early hours of the morning a scientific research center in Jamraya in Damascus suburbs which foreign backed armed men failed, after several attempts, to destroy.

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?, 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, 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)

Retaliation: Syrian strike on Israel?

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:
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)
Here's a piece on Italian-language site of IRIB Iranian Radio (two days old), with a video allegedly showing five Syrian Jets over Haifa and Tel Aviv. Contains air footage, ground footage and some commentary (Kevin Barrett who is in Iran atm pops up), all dubbed Italian. Text says that denial is now no longer possible. I disagree. ;o) Found no equivalent articles on the English- and German-language IRIB sites. --CE (talk) 18:33, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
The Tel Aviv air raid seems like footage from the latest Gaza war. Mix in some archive footage of the Syrian air force. What are those things in the sky? Birds? Can't tell. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 20:27, 10 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:

...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 Proof: Is Really Proof?

Destroyed vehicles on Syrian video
A research center that Syria said had been hit by an Israeli air strike last week appears to have remained unscathed in the attack, according to satellite images broadcast by Israeli television on Wednesday.
Israel's Channel 2 News broadcast what it said were satellite images of the complex, taken eight months before the attack and a few days after it. The latter showed an apparently unscathed building, which Channel 2 said was the research center, next to a scorched and blackened road and parking lot, where it said the arms convoy was hit. Channel 2 said the second image had been taken by DigitalGlobe, a public company based in the United States. A spokesperson for DigitalGlobe contacted by Reuters confirmed the authenticity of the image and said it had been taken on February 4.

As Brown Moses pointed out (acurately?) rocket launching trucks (9K33 Osa/SA-8 Gecko ) had the launchers removed, perhaps to be specially fitted inside the ominous research center. But the center was un-harmed they say (the building in question? Or one near it?), so only the rocket-free vehicles were hit? Where are the rockets? Why did Israel fail? To have an excuse for another strike wherever they say the Jew-gassing rockets were moved to? Actual images if I can track them down later. --Caustic Logic (talk) 00:24, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

This is consistent with the Syrian video: minor damage inside a building, destroyed vehicles somewhere outside. I always understood the video to imply that the vehicles were at the same location as the building. I also noted, that they seemed to be parked somewhere. Where ever they were, I would not call cars in a parking lot a "convoy". -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:23, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
P.S. – Someone influential I spoke to yesterday said the yes there had been an attack on a convoy and there was video to prove it. I think this is just a misinterpretation of the Syrian video. I now had another look at it, and it seems clear the vehicles are parked outside the building shown. There is no way this could be some convoy somewhere. Besides, we would have hundreds of bodies. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:37, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Possibly just semantics, and based on someone's mistranslation or sloppiness. Where does your lap go when you stand up? What does a convoy become before it takes off? I suppose the Israeli claim here of the building not being hit is true, and it sounds like on-site video supports it. But the building hit was right next to this "convoy," and all sides agree it's a research center. So the building, vehicle just outside it ... again, semantics. Syria is not necessarily lying. It was not a moving convoy threatening to cross the border right now, as the Israelis seem to have implied. But for that matter, neither does it seem the civilian research space inside was targeted, as the Syrians seem to have implied. --Caustic Logic (talk) 09:19, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
I would not draw that conclusion ("building was not target"). The damage outside may just look more excessive because it is unprotected, and because of the burning fuel in the vehicles. The inside of the building would be more protected and less likely to suffer damage. Anyway, this looks like the result of some kind of cluster munition (not anti-personnel, but anti-armor). -- Petri Krohn (talk) 11:54, 7 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)

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

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.


Collection of links on SyrPer. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 04:02, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

SANA, Jan 30, 2013:

The statement said that Israeli warplanes snuck from the north of Al-Sheikh Mountain, flying at a low altitude and below radars, heading to Jamraya in Damascus Countryside where a branch of a scientific research center is located and bombarded the location before sneaking away.

Allegedly the facility was put on the EU list of sanctioned persons and organizations in December 2011 (first entry on page three of this pdf, several front companies follow):

Centre d’études et de recherches syrien (CERS) (a.k.a. CERS, Centre d’Etude et de Recherche Scientifique; a.k.a. SSRC, Scientific Studies and Research Center; a.k.a. Centre de Recherche de Kaboun
Barzeh Street, PO Box 4470, Damascus
Provides support to the Syrian army for the acquisition of equipment used directly for the surveillance and repression of demonstrators.

--CE (talk) 17:51, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

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)

Assassination of Iranian general?

May 5th strike

Not nuclear

Syrian tweeters like Syrian Commando are calling tonight's Israeli attack a "nuclear-type bunker buster". Not so, 15 tons of TNT corresponds to 4 on the Richter magnitude scale.

No, wait! It was nuclear after all!
Too long, did not read. Besides, it is total bullshit anyway.

Missiles to Hezbollah?

All Western sources are claiming Israel attacked a convoy of in transit to the Hezbollah in Lebanon on Friday, May 3rd. The only "proof" seems to be Israel's own admission. Naturally the press will believe not only that an attack took place, but that the target was indeed missiles on their way to Hezbollah. (Why else would Israel have attacked them.)

Is there any reason to believe this attack happened? If it did, why should we believe Israeli claims missiles were transferred to Hezbollah? -- Petri Krohn (talk) 16:22, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

What is more confusing, some sources are saying Israel attacked the Fateh-110 missiles (also) on Sunday May 5th. This is not believable, unless the missiles were hidden in some bunker. If they were in the bunker, how did Israel know they existed – or that they were planning to go to Lebanon? -- Petri Krohn (talk) 16:26, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

VerifiedNews comes to the same conclusion: WWIII Israeli Airforce Airstrike in Syria at Jamraya Rumors of War US Gov Statement on Missiles -- Petri Krohn (talk) 00:55, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Targets identified: -- Petri Krohn (talk) 20:37, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

July 5 attack on Latakia

Up to now I did not take this seriously, but now RT is reporting this based on US sources.

US officials have revealed that explosions reported at a key Syrian port on July 5 were likely the result of an Israeli airstrike.
Three officials spoke to CNN on condition of anonymity, referring to the pre-dawn explosions in the city of Latakia as an Israeli operation which allegedly targeted Russian-made Yakhont anti-ship missiles.

-- Petri Krohn (talk) 19:53, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

P.S. – Ziad Fadel (Syrian Perspective) denies. ...and here. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 23:45, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Update: -- Petri Krohn (talk) 18:42, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Israeli submarines carried out the attack on an arms depot in the Syrian port city of Latakia on July 5, according to a report published in the British Sunday Times. US media previously claimed the offensive was carried out by the Israel Air Force.
The Times cited Middle East intelligence sources as stating that the Israeli Dolphin-class submarines targeted a contingent of 50 Russian-made Yakhont P-800 anti-ship missiles that had reportedly arrived earlier this year to support Syrian President Bashar Assad's regime.

Nothing there:

Sheikh Mustapha, the Israeli spy who leaked the information about the whereabouts of the Yakhonts on the Syrian coast was carefully fed the information by the Syrians monitoring him. Qassi military base did not contain any strategic weapons, barely holding typical munition any military base would store, and the huge explosions heard by the locals were the sounds of the Tomahawks and barrels of explosives stored.

Some more US propaganda: -- Petri Krohn (talk) 18:53, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

American intelligence analysts have concluded that a recent Israeli airstrike on a warehouse in Syria did not succeed in destroying all of the Russian-made antiship cruise missiles that were its target, American officials said on Wednesday, and that further Israeli strikes are likely.
After the Israeli attack, the Assad government sought to hide the fact that the missiles had been missed by setting fire to launchers and vehicles at the site to create the impression of a devastating blow, according to American intelligence reports.
The July 5 attack near Latakia was the fourth known Israeli airstrike in Syria this year.
Providing new details, American officials said that it had been carried out by Israeli aircraft that flew over the eastern Mediterranean, fired air-to-ground missiles and never entered Syrian airspace. The route of the Israeli aircraft led to some erroneous reports that the attack had been carried out by an Israeli submarine.