More on the Syria strike

Update: Crap. I didn’t notice one of the author’s names. it’s the guy who makes crap up about Israel. Grain of salt warning is now in effect.

To review one of my posts from yesterday: Exit thought: Israel’s recent successful launch of a spy satellite may have had a lot to do with catching this.

From the U.K. Times, today:

The target was identified as a northern Syrian facility that purported to be an agricultural research centre on the Euphrates river. Israel had been monitoring it for some time, concerned that it was being used to extract uranium from phosphates.

According to an Israeli air force source, the Israeli satellite Ofek 7, launched in June, was diverted from Iran to Syria. It sent out high-quality images of a northeastern area every 90 minutes, making it easy for air force specialists to spot the facility.

Putting the pieces together, one at a time. According to the Sunday Times, there was, indeed, a ground force involved.

IT was just after midnight when the 69th Squadron of Israeli F15Is crossed the Syrian coast-line. On the ground, Syria’s formidable air defences went dead. An audacious raid on a Syrian target 50 miles from the Iraqi border was under way.

At a rendezvous point on the ground, a Shaldag air force commando team was waiting to direct their laser beams at the target for the approaching jets. The team had arrived a day earlier, taking up position near a large underground depot. Soon the bunkers were in flames.

More facts to put together regarding the mysterious Syrian silence. Besides violating the Non-Proliferation Treaty, they are deeply embarrassed on many levels. First, that their new Iranian partners, who generously supplied the funds for the Russian radar and air defense systems, wasted their money—because Israel successfully bypassed the new systems. Iran’s got to be deeply unhappy about this as well. Boots on the ground means Israel is willing to drop soldiers into enemy territory if need be, and the utter success of the mission proves once again that Russian technology is no match for the West, not even after a few years of non-Soviet Union.

Allah’s sharp eyes caught this days ago, but it’s worth mentioning again:

Also on Wednesday, the Lebanese daily Almustakbal reported that since the alleged IAF foray over Syria last week there have been severe disturbances in Lebanese communications systems and cellular frequencies.

That’s some heavy-duty jamming technology going on. Now Iran is going to know what’s coming if the IAF heads their way—but they won’t be able to do anything about it.

Here’s my exit question: Were American pilots involved? Or is Israel simply sharing all the intel?

This entry was posted in Israel, Syria. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to More on the Syria strike

  1. John M says:

    I was in the Air Force. American pilots wouldn’t be involved in the flying at all. We sometimes have exchanges with various countries and do joint exercises, but actual combat would be completely out unless it were a major war.

    That being said, intel-sharing is a distinct possibility.

  2. Jack says:

    Baby Assad’s time is coming.

  3. Mark says:

    “Were American pilots involved? Or is Israel simply sharing all the intel?”

    I will defer to John’s experience here. I am wondering how the Israelis got the ground team in place. Perhaps parachute from a bogus civillian flight. If I were IDF, I don’t think I would tell Americans what I was up to. Security had to be very tight.

  4. bvw says:

    I think this all worked as a result of the War last summer. If there really was anything to have worked as reported by all these reports. Gee, golly, it is nice that the Turks were involved. That is, if there was anything for them to have been involved in.

    By the way, was Bam ever rebuilt? What kind of country does a Bam happen in?

    Not ours! We have so much, and we use, thank G-d, far more often than not for the good.

  5. See my update. One of the authors is the guy who lies regularly about Israel.

  6. Ed Hausman says:

    Well, he has to lie. The Israelis won’t give him any stories, and his editors insist on something resembling productivity … hey, it happens at the New York Times, too.

    A good journalist doesn’t need facts! ‘False but accurate’ was good enough for Dan Rather, wasn’t it?

Comments are closed.